you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I mean...people voluntarily base jump, skydive, free climb, go cave diving, etc. Some people absolutely will do dangerous and uncomfortable stuff just because.

And in situations where we really cannot find people willing to do it, we can come to agreements for people to do it at random or some other voluntary arrangement, or perhaps the task can be routed around.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

    Sure there are (parts of) jobs that people enjoy doing. But how many people enjoy doing asbestos renovations, cleaning sewage pipes or repetetively operating a machine that might smash off their hand if they aren't cautious for a second?

    to do it at random or some other voluntary arrangement, or perhaps the task can be routed around

    That only works if the task doesn't require training, experience, skill etc. You absolutely don't want a newby to grab some diving equipment and inspect the inside of a full sewage tank.

    I think the concept of having jobs with compensation isn't inheritely bad. The issue is rather that capitalism went completely out of bounds and that compensation has nothing to do with how pleasant or unpleasant it is to do a job.

    In my mind, a theoretical solution could be a auctioning system where all jobs that need to be done start with the same basic compensation. A manager, a hairdresser or a construction worker would all make the same if they agree to do the job in that phase. Then everyone can pick jobs from that list. If a job cannot attract any applicants, the compensation needs to be raised (or working hours reduced or similar) step by step until someone agrees. But also in that approach it's difficult to adequately consider qualification for a job completely without discrimination.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    That bidding system is in theory why certain jobs, although crappy, pay poorly in the systems we use now. The barrier for entry is lower so you're competing with many other people which drives the wage down. You aren't paid for how hard you work, but a combination of how economically valuable your input is combined with how hard you are to replace.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Agree, that's what I meant with...

    But also in that approach it's difficult to adequately consider qualification for a job completely without discrimination.

    And unfortunately I don't really have an idea how to solve that part. If you need to staff an expert role that requires a very rare skill, the few applicants can easily abuse the system just by waiting long enough. If you add corruption to the equation, it's getting even worse (e.g. job profiles that are exactly tied to one specific person).

    Best I can think of would be to limit the maximum salary and if for example noone is willing to do it for general base salary +100%, other aspects of the job need to be tweaked to make it more appealing (higher safety, lower working hours, sharing the job etc.).

    In a bidding system with a threshold you'd still have inequality, but far from what we have today...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Who is cleaning chimney for fun?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments