this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2023
534 points (99.3% liked)

196

16423 readers
2908 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 56 points 1 year ago (2 children)

1980s: You could flip burgers to help pay for the college and not be thousands in debt at graduation.

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

1960s: You could flip burgers during summers to entirely pay for college.

[–] joshh 49 points 1 year ago

1770s: what the hell are you doing with that cow?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

College costs more than a house!

[–] [email protected] 47 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Also, "flip burgers" is a bad description of how hard it is to actually work in food service

You just know someone with a two-stall garage and boat who's always had things handed to them came up with that shit

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Why is it that the hardest workers are the lowest paid?

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

That’s the magic of Exploitation!

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

supply and demand. flipping burgers has no gatekeepers, natural or artificial, and lots of people are overall willing to do it, so workers are easy to replace and wages can be pushed down a lot. there are low skill jobs that are actually well-paid, but they usually involve way less savory stuff that fewer people like to do.

of course, if a strong social safety net, or heavens forbid, universal basic income happened, way fewer people would be willing to flip burgers, while the demand for burgers would likely go up slightly, so people flipping burgers would get paid better, because a lot fewer people would want to flip burgers. hence the comparisons to the good half of europe where people flipping burgers get paid better.

but the point is, when a job is easier to do, it's because it's gatekept in a way that some harder jobs aren't. sometimes that's due to skill, other times it's entirely artificial. but a gatekept job can't be a universal "hey, do that job instead" thing, specifically because it's gatekept.

ubi would be great because it would make it disproportionately more difficult to hire for hard jobs than for easy ones, but when the alternative is starving to death, a lot of people accept the hard job instead.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

The term low-skilled labor is classist propaganda

But you are correct that this is how it's perceived through the warped lens of capitalism

UBI is not the answer. It's just liberals' way of propping up an inherently exploitative system

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think its about time to train employees and the cost of mistakes while they train.

If the cost of mistakes is low, and employees can be trained relatively quickly, employers will exploit the fuck out of people.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Once you have the position to negotiate your wage you also have the ability to negotiate your workload.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

because if the poors could save enough money to own capital they might stop flipping our burgers.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago

2023: let’s roll back child labor laws so we can pay them slave wages to flip burgers.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The challenge here is the instructions were not very clear. All they said was go to college. They didn't tell you what to study, and it turns out there aren't a lot of jobs in medieval literature, gender studies, etc.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago

Sure but it doesn't explain why teachers need to flip burgers as a second job, or why doctors and lawyers are drowning under all the debt.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

(probably not that) Hot take. But I think that not having everyone study STEM or "productive" (by capitalism's standard) studies is a good thing for the world.

Sure, philosophy doesn't pay. But is the world better with, or without, people who study philosophy?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Depends on the quality of the philosophy and how dire the need is for people who learned immediately useful subjects.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How many people do you think majored in gender studies? The biggest field by far is STEM. Engineers, scientists, mathematicians/physicists, and IT still find it hard to find a job and are facing unprecedented layoffs.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Also, gender studies is obviously a field we should be supporting more, given the prevalence of sexism in society and how many people are completely ignorant about the nature of gender

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Oh, I see you've met my parents too.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Sorry, we’re now have to pay off the equilavent of a mortgage in student loan, no we don’t want $7.25 an hour

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί