this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2022
17 points (94.7% liked)

Antiwork

8560 readers
53 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
17
I guess this should set the minimum wage, right? (feddit.de)
submitted 3 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Fucking rich kids

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

By the same logic, why shouldn’t people be able to sell themselves into indentured servitude, right?

As I understand "indentured servitude", I'm pretty sure they already can. Certainly not slavery, the terms of such a contract are unconscionable, but the idea that you'd be contracted to labor for some temporary period for food, lodging, and passage doesn't seem to violate contract law as I understand it.

Though, that said, how does your rhetorical question follow from my logic? I'm not seeing the connection here. My logic is that minimum wage laws have an effect contrary towards that which you're trying to achieve. Or at least, towards that which most people believe you're trying to achieve.

Clearly, you want small businesses to die, and for gigantic corporations to flourish, while some large fraction of the population starves because now they're out of jobs. I don't know why I didn't pick up on it before.