Why would a profit maximizer care about the feelings or actions of a powerless person?
It's almost as if workers and employers are both consenting adults, capable of entering into or rejecting a transaction if it isn't mutually agreeable.
that's if you insist on painting it black and white. reality is, unfortunately, somewhat complex.
anyway, your question is already answered in the post above. you do know what a strike is?
furthermore, many workers are theoretically capable of exiting such an agreement at will, but in reality they have little choice. work in one lousy job or another, or starve. which would you choose?
If the strike is harmful to the employer, then employees are not powerless. Which is the point I'm making.
work in one lousy job or another, or starve.
If we are discussing the US, the choices are enjoy consumption of $20k/year funded by the government or enjoy consumption of $20k/year funded by earned income.
there is a big space between powerful and powerless, which is the point i am making. in your trolling you are grossly oversimplifying things, i can only presume in order to further some personal goals of yours, but reality is that life in these situations is not such a walk in the park as your condescending tone would have us believe. organizing strikes, negotiating some form of collective bargain, these are hard battles, which in the past have known even to cost people lives. this is, i suspect, exactly why the new right-wing, corporate-funded flavor of libertarianism advocates this approach.
It's almost as if workers and employers are both consenting adults, capable of entering into or rejecting a transaction if it isn't mutually agreeable.