The ethics are complex for sure… a bit like sailing the high seas:-). I have no right to tell you or anyone else what to do, I just shared my own thought. Fuck the SOBs that started this for sure…but the WORKERS are the ones getting pinched in the middle of that clash of wills:-(.
Also I know of no better way to be generous to my fellow human - unlike some “charities”, this is no hand-out b/c there at least you can be 100% certain that they work. Also, a LOT of people do not tip (or if they do, then not much), thus necessitating a more extreme tipping from those that do if the scales were to ever to be balanced (which they ultimately never will, but still a little bit can help).
This is really a trolly problem through and through: someone puts a human on the tracks (lets say mostly innocent - possibly they were goaded rather than forced into being there but for the sake of argument let us presume they have no malice or any ill intent whatsoever, like this is no scam that they are “in” on, again just for the sake of argument), and a tiny but noticeable pile of your cash on the other, then offers to allow you to pull the lever to switch the track. Fuck the evil POS who would do that for their own amusement ofc but… given that it happened, do you play along and sacrifice your cash to help the human, or allow them to get hit? Let us also presume that you have the “right” to your cash, i.e. you would get it back rather than it being impounded for evidence or whatever.
I choose to play along, knowing full well that the system is unjust. Maybe I am contributing to the problem, but I do not know what else to do that could help in even the tiniest manner. Passing laws to enforce payment of a minimum wage that is actually a livable one seems like an entirely separate matter to me btw - b/c whether you tip or not, or whether you want to tip or not (I saw that you do the former but neither of us really do the latter, though I come closer to that in one manner of speaking), without being forced to, greedy-AF people will never (it seems) voluntarily pay the workers more on their own initiative, so simply “not tipping” in protest seems to me to be an approach doomed to failure. I do not deny that you are correct though - they will certainly take my doing so as their cue that they can continue, not that it would matter if laws were passed to literally prevent that happening - it is just that I cannot control them, I can only control me.
Thank you for this respectful conversation btw:-).
There is nothing new under the sun - technology may be creating new avenues for people to rise up through, but the reasons for their actions remain the same. In Germany, it was the rise of radio that allowed Hitler to, for the first time in human history, bypass the established rule of that nation and talk directly to the populace, which he leveraged to become the ruling authority. At some point he was even banished, but managed to return. The similarities b/t him and DT are eerily similar, and yet those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat it.
But as for our economy, on that note I think we are following more along the lines of old Rome. Surely that worked well for them, with zero problems, and therefore we will be safe from any harm, forever… right? R-r-right!? :-P
What’s odd about it is that the founding fathers directly warned us that this would happen. We simply did not care. Specifically, they warned about opening up voting to the “uneducated masses”, rather than the intelligentsia who had sufficient leisure time to think through the issues as they voted, not needing to toil in a field for long hours in the hot sun every single day. Do we have the means to now convert EVERYONE into the intelligentsia, with mechanization e.g. robots can do the vast majority of effort to farm our crops, and tools like the internet that puts information at our fingertips without even having to so much as turn the page of a physical book? In any case, there are those who do not WANT knowledge, and yet still want the privilege of being leaders nonetheless - e.g. those who showed up on January 6 to “defend the Constitution”, while at the same time admitting that they had never in fact read it, not even so much as once.:-(
I get it. I have the same exact drives inside of me, as do you, as do we all. The difference is that some of us are aware, care about that, and even attempt to fight those dark impulses - to be lazy, greedy, and the like. Sometimes anyway:-). Whereas those behind the scenes seem hardened in their resolve, to intentionally go in the opposite direction… and since most of the people seem to either want to join them or at least not oppose them, they are winning. i.e. Elon Musk and Steve Huffman both.
And as a former mod, you KNOW - it takes ENORMOUS amounts of effort to fight against that. It is SO MUCH easier to destroy than it is to create, or even to maintain.:-(
por qué no los dos? Punch him in the mouth and do whatever you want.:-P
Or just stare deeply into his eyes until he blinks, then turn around and leave the room. You’re F-ing Neo, you don’t need to play these kids games - if there’s something you want, you just materialize it, easy.
Ofc… if this were a more irl scenario, I don’t think I’d be taking pills from some random dude offering me to either “get rich quick” or turn me into a 6-yr-old, pudding or no. Maybe this is how he gets rich, by selling my organs or some such.:-P
The above is what I probably should have said. Interestingly (to me at least:-D), historically “Millenial” used to refer to what is now called “Z”, it once having been the term used to describe the generation that came after “Y”, but has shifted all the way over to now having absorbed Y and then replacing it entirely.:-P But yes, in 2018 (according to Pew) that situation finished switching and the old Z is now the new Y - though if you google search these terms, most results are how to market to these groups, and that likely confuses things further.
What I mean is that imho it is best to take these terms extremely loosely - e.g. an elder Millenial may share more in common with a late-stage Gen-Xer (“righteous dude!”, e.g. having watched similar TV programs even if as re-runs) than with the later half of what is now called “Millenial”, and similarly late Millenials with earlier Gen-Zs (no cap no skibidi, def no Ohio), and so on.
Though whether someone has rich parents or not seems to override all other factors such as generation or responsibility to work hard and save money for the future, when talking about owning a home:-(.
I don’t think it’s about stupidity per se - and I am a working-class person myself, thus have to spend many hours of every day doing my work activities, with less time leftover to devote to such things, so possibly I might be recusing myself even from this? - and rather I think it is about people who are educated vs. not. e.g. those who can spot logical fallacies vs. not, and if some subject is about to be voted on, someone who can understand at least the bare minimum of what is being talked about (is trickle down good? bad? neutral?). Anyway, that ship has sailed… I was just saying that the founders DID warn us, and we DID ignore them, and there ARE alternatives other than restricting voting, i.e. making a liberal arts style of education free for anyone who wants it.
About hospitalizing people without a moral compass, I have a better idea: why don’t we put them in charge of literally everything, everywhere? :-P Unfortunately this is no joke, b/c that seems to be what tends to happen.:-( Shareholders vote with their dollars, and more often than not they seem to choose to invest into people who rise up and do WHATEVER IT TAKES to make profits.
“Stupid”, “immoral”, “evil”, these are not just words, but in another sense they are, b/c what matters is how the world truly works - one principle of that being survival of the fittest. If we killed off the top half of all people in the world after sorting them by IQ, the remaining people might be more “stupid”, but they would be alive, in comparison to the alternative. Conversely, people such as Robert Iger the current CEO of Disney who has run the company for almost two decades, tend to remain in power at the behest of the shareholders, who could vote to expunge him at any time if they wanted. You might say “evil” or “greedy”, but they say “me likey, and want to keep”.
What you are missing though it that it is not just those INDIVIDUAL PEOPLE who are “greedy” or “evil” or whatever, it is the entire SYSTEM - e.g. if Robert Iger ever were to die (he is getting older now…), he would be immediately replaced, by someone who similarly meets the expectations, nay the DEMANDS, of the stockholders. So no, I don’t think it is anywhere remotely close to as easy as you describe. The people who own stock in that company may not be okay with owning a slave personally, but they are quite happy to benefit/profit from the misery of the workers who are forced to churn out that assembly-line whimsey, under what you and I might call “evil” working conditions, but which they call “cost-effective”.
So be careful with what you wish for. You might want those people prevented from taking office, but in turn it is THEY who are likely to abuse their power in order to prevent US from holding office. Might makes right. I mean… it ABSOLUTELY does NOT, and yet if you are not willing to fight for what you believe, those who are willing to take action will win the day. In one sense “they” even have a semi-admirable trait then that you and I lack: humility, to bow before the rules of the universe and work according to its precepts, rather than attempting to impose their own particular brand of morality onto it.