|
Moridin920 posted:Like no one seriously thinks doctors and line cooks should be paid the exact same and receive the exact same benefits I do.
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 00:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
Calibanibal posted:I do. Do you wanna justify that position and tell us why anyone would want to train to become a doctor under those conditions?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 00:52
|
|
|
After having basic needs met, people should get compensation proportional to the amount of energy/labor they contribute to production.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
Helsing posted:You already agreed upthread that the current American economy isn't ecologically sustainable, either globally or nationally over the long term. So you know fully well that resource scarcity is a problem we haven't overcome yet. The fact we could easily house and feed everyone in America if the political will existed doesn't change this fact. If I'm hilariously bad at understanding your arguments it is because you moon logic from one point to another. How does it follow that just because the US economy is unsustainable that there exists a limited amount of resources globally such that it is impossible to feed/house/clothe everyone? Like quote:So you know fully well that resource scarcity is a problem we haven't overcome yet. The fact we could easily house and feed everyone in America if the political will existed doesn't change this fact. What? You're saying resource scarcity is still a problem and then in the next sentence admit we could easily house and feed everyone but it's just an issue of political will. So it's not an issue of scarcity then is it; it's an issue of distribution. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 01:17 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:13
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Do you wanna justify that position and tell us why anyone would want to train to become a doctor under those conditions? Some people will do things because society needs it, they have a proclivity or skill for it, or they actually enjoy doing an activity. Also in the same way capitalism has figured out medics, nurses, nurse practitioners, medical assistants and OR techs can do some of the stuff doctors used to exclusively do. Additionally certain roles are less required than others so you could take a position because of scheduling too. Also medical school and doing your rounds is largely hell now as a way of creating artificial scarcity while making doctors feel they 'earned' their high wages.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:18
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:It's not about equality of outcome. That's a total mischaracterization of leftism imo. I do lol. And it totally is about equality of outcome. Coolness Averted posted:Some people will do things because society needs it, they have a proclivity or skill for it, or they actually enjoy doing an activity. Also in the same way capitalism has figured out medics, nurses, nurse practitioners, medical assistants and OR techs can do some of the stuff doctors used to exclusively do. Additionally certain roles are less required than others so you could take a position because of scheduling too. Also medical school and doing your rounds is largely hell now as a way of creating artificial scarcity while making doctors feel they 'earned' their high wages. Also maybe doctors shouldn't have to work really hard, maybe if we got rid of say, lawyers, and insurance providers, and marketing people, and all the other stupid jobs that do nothing, we could free up some people to work in medicine and a big pile of resources and then doctors could work less and get the same pay as other people. Like there is no reason why some jobs should be extremely difficult or dangerous, the reason they're that is because we would rather burn through people than devote resources to improving working conditions, or reconsider whether the labour should be done at all. lovely jobs are the product of someone wanting to extract profit from the labour of the person doing the lovely job by making their job lovely. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:34 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
There's skilled labor and there is unskilled labor. You can't just wave that away with "well medical practices have a lot of artificial barriers." Ideally most labor is automated away, anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:There's skilled labor and there is unskilled labor. You can't just wave that away with "well medical practices have a lot of artificial barriers." Pay people to acquire skills.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:43
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:If I'm hilariously bad at understanding your arguments it is because you moon logic from one point to another. How does it follow that just because the US economy is unsustainable that there exists a limited amount of resources globally such that it is impossible to feed/house/clothe everyone? You're not accounting for the ecological limits of the planet and the need to reduce carbon emissions. We could take the hoarded wealth of the rich and make everyone else better care off, and we'd still have to figure how to allocate scarce resources based on whatever would be most socially useful.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:44
|
|
|
Eminai posted:Pay people to acquire skills. Okay that's fine? The people who want to go acquire skills should get more than people who are content where they are.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
Helsing posted:You're not accounting for the ecological limits of the planet and the need to reduce carbon emissions. We could take the hoarded wealth of the rich and make everyone else better care off, and we'd still have to figure how to allocate scarce resources based on whatever would be most socially useful. I am not disagreeing with this. I'm just saying that some commodities aren't scarce anymore and that even so market systems aren't necessarily the best way to distribute scarce resources (for example the US govt instituted rationing during WW2 because hey with markets the richer people tend to get more to the detriment of others). Yeah, more socially useful work should get compensated more but markets don't even do that well: see the people making six figures on Patreon drawing porn.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Okay that's fine? The people who want to go acquire skills should get more than people who are content where they are. Why? You pay them for the time investment like any other work, why do they need to be paid more after that? Like if I spend five years doing something that requires no formal training, why should I be paid less than someone who spend two years doing that, one year being paid to train, and then two years doing the trained work? We've both worked five years and been paid for it?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
Because their actual work is more difficult. I was a line cook and it was rough but I never made life or death decisions that affected families in my community. Incidentally I think cooks should fairly get more than most office workers, too.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Because their work is more difficult. Why is trained work more difficult? I had to learn to drive a car but driving the car is not more difficult work than the work I do at the place I drive the car to. I learned to do it such that it became easy to do.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:56
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Why is trained work more difficult? I mean I'm on my phone so you'll have to wait for a better answer later but I'm a bit incredulous that you think there's no difference between like say brain surgery and running prep for the dinner rush. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 01:59 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:57
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:I mean I'm on my phone so you'll have to wait for a better answer later but I'm a bit incredulous that you think there's no difference between like say brain surgery and running prep for the dinner rush. I think the brain surgery takes a lot longer to learn to do at all but the point of learning to do it is so that you can do it as easily as you can other work.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:58
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I think the brain surgery takes a lot longer to learn to do at all but the point of learning to do it is so that you can do it as easily as you can other work. Even if the work itself is the same difficulty wise because you're good at it, it carries more stress and more poo poo to deal with mentally and emotionally. A certain % of people you treat will die and it'll be your fault and a cook doesn't have to deal with anything like that. I don't buy that either really by the way - a good cook can be stoned and run service no issues but a good surgeon must be focused for hours on end lest they kill someone. The office work I do is sooooooo much easier than cooking holy poo poo. I don't wake up with my feet pounding, for one thing.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 01:59
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Even if the work itself is the same difficulty wise because you're good at it, it carries more stress and more poo poo to deal with mentally and emotionally. A certain % of people you treat will die and it'll be your fault and a cook doesn't have to deal with anything like that. Gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that there are a huge number of people out there doing untrained work who are emotionally, mentally, and physically obliterated by it. If you don't want the responsibility of doing brain surgery, don't be a brain surgeon?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Because their actual work is more difficult. I was a line cook and it was rough but I never made life or death decisions that affected families in my community. Okay so now we've moved from skilled v. unskilled to high stakes v. low stakes. Should an unskilled job that consistently involves making life or death decisions pay more than a job that requires a decade of study but works on things that won't have practical applications for years?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Gonna go out on a limb here and suggest that there are a huge number of people out there doing untrained work who are emotionally, mentally, and physically obliterated by it. Yeah well like I said cooks should get more than office workers. OwlFancier posted:If you don't want the responsibility of doing brain surgery, don't be a brain surgeon? Well now you're just making a different point. There will still be any number of necessary but undesirable jobs that need incentives for people to do, if they can't be automated.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:02
|
|
|
Like if you're a surgeon sure some people you work on might die, but if you're a good surgeon we would hope that most of the ones where you have agency in the matter will live because of your work. And I would much rather someone be doing that work because they care about it rather than because they get paid a lot for it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Eminai posted:Okay so now we've moved from skilled v. unskilled to high stakes v. low stakes. Should an unskilled job that consistently involves making life or death decisions pay more than a job that requires a decade of study but works on things that won't have practical applications for years? Do you really think there's no difference in any form of labor that is done? Like do I need to quantify what exactly a future society would pay for different jobs? Why does a socialist utopia even still have these intense laborous jobs?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:03
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Well now you're just making a different point. There will still be any number of necessary but undesirable jobs that need incentives for people to do, if they can't be automated. Name some, we can talk about it.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:04
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Like if you're a surgeon sure some people you work on might die, but if you're a good surgeon we would hope that most of the ones where you have agency in the matter will live because of your work. It's not even about paid a lot. You're saying people should get 0 recognition or extra anything for doing more difficult work? What's more you dispute that such a thing as 'more difficult' work as a concept even exists?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
Moridin920, do you think that people who do your "lower risk / lower skill" jobs should be poorer than people who do "higher risk / higher skill" jobs? I'm putting both in there because it's important to make sure that you don't swap arguments here. If so, why do you think that people should be unequal in that way? If not, why do you advocate different pay scales?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:05
|
|
|
Like frankly that just baffles me. I've done back breaking lovely labor and I've done cushy office work and my dudes the latter is insanely easy compared to the former.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:06
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:It's not even about paid a lot. You're saying people should get 0 recognition or extra anything for doing more difficult work? What's more you dispute that such a think as more difficult work as a concept even exists? I am disputng that the work is objectively more difficult, yes. There are different volumes of work that people have to do, and say, it's harder for a physically weak person to do a job that involves lugging heavy objects around, or a person with no training to do a complex job, but this is why we have different people with different skill sets, and also why we have mechanization or we split the job between more people. In the world we live in we have difficult jobs, but we have difficult jobs because it's easier for capitalists to make difficult jobs than it is for them to take a profitability hit and make the jobs easier. Moridin920 posted:Like frankly that just baffles me. I've done back breaking lovely labor and I've done cushy office work and my dudes the latter is insanely easy compared to the former. Maybe then the labour should be changed so that it isn't back breaking then?? Maybe you should have more equipment or more people or the entire nature of the thing you're working on should change so that your job either doesn't exist or is easier?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:07
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Moridin920, do you think that people who do your "lower risk / lower skill" jobs should be poorer than people who do "higher risk / higher skill" jobs? I'm putting both in there because it's important to make sure that you don't swap arguments here. I'm gonna need to think about that for a bit bc it is a good question but my impulse here is that I'm not even talking about poorer but like... Who gets to live near the coast (or the top of the arcology tower or whatever)? What do you do in a situation where there is legitimately less of X than people want? Just random selection by lottery?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:09
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I am disputng that the work is objectively more difficult, yes. There are different volumes of work that people have to do, and say, it's harder for a physically weak person to do a job that involves lugging heavy objects around, or a person with no training to do a complex job, but this is why we have different people with different skill sets, and also why we have mechanization or we split the job between more people. Yeah I mean look ideally we are fully automated luxury gay space communism and no one has to do anything they don't want to ever and people just get recognition for being skilled in their chosen vocation if they want to be a doctor or an artist or whatever. Line cooks aren't working 10 hour shifts on Xmas Eve, they're just enjoying cooking for people like they are Sisko's dad. Lotta steps from here to there though.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
wateroverfire posted:No call, no show, and the interview was set up yesterday afternoon. This is the second one today. Why???? based on what i remember from interacting with you in the past its because you run either a clip joint or some sort of customer service misery farm and they googled you
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
if your Very Serious Concerns about raising america's comically low minimum wage in the past are anything to go by, its because your business needs to send out email blasts reminding employees that crying in the bathroom stalls is against company policy
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
It's not even magical future utopia just like, maybe increase the loving wage budget for the supermaket, pay everyone better and cut their hours some so they're not loving knackered all the time. Maybe build toilets so they can just get hosed out with a pressure washer. Maybe slow down the pace of construction work so people can work slower so they aren't exhausted. Maybe build some loving renewable energy so people don't have to mine coal and poo poo. So many lovely jobs are lovely because it's cheaper to make you work a lovely job than it is to make the job not lovely. It's not some fantastical suggestion that we could make jobs a lot less lovely if we were concerned about people's labour conditions rather than maximising profit for the shithead who spends all his day on the loving golf course. What is leftism if not the rejection of the notion of maximum productivity for the sake of it? We don't need as much work as we do, we create loving jobs to accelerate the rate of consumption and production because consumption and production are what benefit the owners of the means of production. If we took a people focused approach the good and necessary, given the state of the environment, goal would be to reduce production. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 02:18 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:15
|
|
|
I don't disagree with any of that either, when I say "less" and "more" I just mean in an abstract sense. I agree that we don't do stuff because it is necessary but because it is 'profitable.' E: I think I've said people should be well taken care of as a baseline regardless Like no one has to do X but nonetheless X is difficult and people who do it should get some credit for that I guess? Even if that just means they get the best seats on opening night for the new Avengers 30 movie? Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 02:23 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:16
|
|
|
Its kind of odd to me that you'd discuss work methodology while ignoring that people have their basic needs met the entire philosophy of your job is your identity most likely falls apart. In socialist utopia there are professional dungeon masters.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Like no one has to do X but nonetheless X is difficult and people who do it should get some credit for that I guess? Even if that just means they get the best seats on opening night for the new Avengers 30 movie? I would prefer we work to make X not difficult. Also if the "reward" is that petty I can't help but feel like there's something else at play than necessary incentives to get people to do the job.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:What do you do in a situation where there is legitimately less of X than people want? Just random selection by lottery? Ideally the benefit of X is drawn out of the same pool that their benefits from Y and Z are, so folks who get lucky and nab the place at the top of the arcology pay for it out of their pool and therefore don't have quite as much discretionary resource leftover as the folks at the bottom, but preferably still get enough to get themselves some nice stuff from time to time (because come on even in fully automated gay luxury space communism we're not monsters). The main problem I have with the modern wage system is that I don't want anyone to be poor. Being poor is suffering and pain and I wouldn't wish it on anyone except as karmic punishment for their hatred for the poor. I don't care about people being rich, I just don't want anyone to be poor, and the folks who are currently ultra rich are using their wealth to make and keep other people poor. Folks who are working "poor people jobs" are paid poor people wages and therefore do not have a way to get out of being poor, and the people who allow those wages to be "poor people wages" are themselves not being paid poor people wages. If the slippery slope of that is that surgeons, professors, burger flippers and janitors are paid the same and none of them is poor, I'm happy with that.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
Let me ask you this; say it's the future and everyone is living in nice environmentally balanced arcologies etc. and no one does any work because machines just do it all, and everyone is free to pursue their passions otherwise. However, there is still a fusion plant in every arcology that for whatever reason just needs some human labor, about 20 people for 4 hours a day. You don't have enough volunteers because it is otherwise just kind of stupid and boring when they could be doing other poo poo instead. What do you do? See I just mean like, everyone has awesome luxury mansions and is free from material want like it is Star Trek but: who gets the best seats on opening night for the hot new movie that was lovingly crafted by people who just like making movies? It is a bit petty, as OwlFancier says, but what I'm more getting at is there are still going to be scarcities of some kind for quite a long time. Moridin920 fucked around with this message at 02:32 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
Run because clearly you have created such an antisocial society that it's gonna implode into an orgy of hedonistic violence within the week. I don't think you can get a stable society where absolutely nobody can be bothered to spare any of their time to do anything for anyone else. E: Alternatively, gamify running the fusion reactor. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 02:32 on May 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:30
|
|
|
I mean yeah alright that's fair.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 20:27 |
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Let me ask you this; say it's the future and everyone is living in nice environmentally balanced arcologies etc. and no one does any work because machines just do it all, and everyone is free to pursue their passions otherwise. However, there is still a fusion plant in every arcology that for whatever reason just needs some human labor, about 20 people for 4 hours a day. You don't have enough volunteers because it is otherwise just kind of stupid and boring when they could be doing other poo poo instead. What do you do? Shift work, enough people to run it, regular enough that people can structure their lives to handle it, and putting in a shift on the reactor is part of living at the arcology. How brutally selfish do you think people will be when they no longer have any other pain in their lives?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2019 02:32
|
|