-
You can't just pay people more, because that would cause a massive movement from one underpaid job to the new newly paid job.
And I hate doing the dammit eg, but e.g. fruit pickers become truck drivers, truck drivers become ambo drivers, sex workers still suck off who ever.
Isn't the current issue also that its almost impossible for people to train and pass tests to become HGV drivers, so increasing pay doesn't really help, as there is a limited supply.
My stepdad is a HGV driver (currently works for a milk company dragging it up from the cows down here to you milk drinkers up there). From his observation there are loads of jobs around, but they aren't paying higher wages than have been paid in the past.
-
kafka like discussion of why or why not something may or may not have or have not had or had not been given a stamp or a nod through and why this may or may not reflect either a requirement to pay people more or go back in time.
Lol. I like how this all started because of a semantic issue.
Tesla better hurry up with their self-driving trucks (the ones that won’t hit bikes, people or pets, or any other object for that matter).
Also the argument that you can’t pay X underpaid job more because then underpaid people from another industry will leave their old jobs is hilarious. I expect to hear it at some point from the US republican party, who love “defending the free market” except when it’s inconvenient.
I came here for the hot take on co-op sandwiches, stayed for the sex worker benefits and the kafka like discussion of why or why not something may or may not have or have not had or had not been given a stamp or a nod through and why this may or may not reflect either a requirement to pay people more or go back in time.
You can't just pay people more, because that would cause a massive movement from one underpaid job to the new newly paid job.
And I hate doing the dammit eg, but e.g. fruit pickers become truck drivers, truck drivers become ambo drivers, sex workers still suck off who ever.