That’s not voluntary, that’s by necessity for survival. If they had the ability to work for themselves or live without work, then they’d be doing another job voluntarily, but that’s not what capitalist society is. Government serves as a way to make sure that a worker gets paid a fairer wage, and isn’t exploited worse than they already are, the exact same way government makes safety regulations for workplaces. Minimum wage reduces the amount of workers who could be paid unfairly, establishing a floor minimum to survive, and letting workers and employers negotiate additional wages if necessary. That’s far fairer overall
@Patriot-#1776Constitution2mos2MO
The workers work for people because they’ll starve if they don’t. That’s not voluntary, that’s by necessity for survival.
It is 100% voluntary. Survival is just what incentives workers to voluntarily make that decision – the notion that that's the motive behind the transaction does not change the fact that it is still voluntary. They can chose to shrivel up and die, if they want. That option is open to them. Or they could choose to work somewhere else. But instead, they made the smart decision by choosing to work for someone else – and they would dese… Read more
@9CJ6CB62mos2MO
Under legal circumstances, we call that economic duress, and when the job market is intentionally attacked by businesses who are far less likely to actually NEGOTIATE as much as simply demand lowering their wages, that’s considered fine, though it fits the definition perfectly. Consent requires a neutral result if you refuse something, being starved is a negative result as a response to refusing to work in an unfair work environment. The very least that can be done is a floor wage that makes sure a bare minimum to actually be guaranteed survival in the workplace is necessary, no matter… Read more
@Patriot-#1776Constitution2mos2MO
Why was the poverty rate five times higher in the USSR than the United States, then, if it worked so wonderfully? Is that what you call "poverty almost gone"?
@9CJ6CB62mos2MO
Poverty in the form of lacking basic needs had DISAPPEARED, though many jobs couldn’t supply a large amount of wants, their quality of life was high for a long time. What we call poverty is different than theirs, they had the same levels we did in the early 1900s for a long time due to their isolation from global markets, but what the UN would consider poverty didn’t EXIST in that nation. It was far from perfect, but the USSR was a hardy nation that teaches the world a lot about what’s possible, despite its revolting flaws.
