I’ve definitely shared this concept or observation or whatever you want to call it before, but recent events have made me think of it again. I should clarify first that what I base this train of thought on isn’t entirely something that clicks for me, something I might not get into expressing, but it definitely makes you or at least me wonder why the implications in the train of thought aren’t considered, at least outside my occupation (since I’m in an occupation designed to work around the otherwise neglect of the concept), and I thought of running this by.

Back in the old days, it was common for business people to pay their workers more honestly, as in based on what they thought the worker seemed to deserve. Often the workers would seem underwhelmed. Organized criminals would then step in and say “you’ll get more out of us” and so that part of society grew. For some reason, the first thing within the mind of the people in charge, trying to assess everything, was “let’s invent this thing, we might call it the minimum wage”. Alrighty. So this side thinking, what do we think of it? Something happened, right?

So here is where the train of thought works into the picture. Matters of monetization are just one arena up the sleeve of bad actors. A lot of people feel abruptly socially isolated. When this happens, instinct is often to seek out companions. Social life might be dead or people might be avoidant. Someone I know is in such a situation. Along comes what might be called a bad actor. To them, they might see a potential extension of themselves with freedom of minimal effort. And voila, someone new joins the “bad crowd” or “dysfunctional crowd”.

Watching this unfold myself, I think to myself. Places have a “minimum reference point” for the topic of exchange/payment/whatever the word is, so then what does the non-thinking come from to apply this thought to the whole isolation thing mentioned? Anyone here have people they know who were absorbed into a bad part of society when everything seemed dead and thought “well, it’s not like anyone else was going to give them what they need”?

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Could you rephrase your proposed law in a few bullet points?

    I’m not sure what the objective is here. Being more mindful of sustainable business?

    • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago
      1. Current law says people must follow wage law for workers

      2. This law is based on organized criminals gaming the competition

      3. Current law does not say people should give a certain level of social investment

      4. But should this be considered since it’s another avenue

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Okay. I think I understand.

        Right now wages are taxed, and companies paying wages are also taxed, that tax money goes to the government. The government is an organization of the people. Shouldn’t the taxes count as investing back into the social structure?

        • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOPM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I don’t mean the social structure. I mean citizens. Company. Companions. Those people who this place is typically all about. Some would say comradery itself is like money.

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago
            1. Company offers a person a job for a certain amount of money.
            2. Person works the job
            3. Company pays person the amount of money agreed

            What would you add?

            • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.eeOPM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago
              1. Person is also provided for their social needs, parallel to the monetary needs.

              2. Person works the job

              3. Person goes home not feeling they need to hang out with that bad influence a few houses down because they wouldn’t need to under these circumstance

              4. Crime lowers itself because criminals hired to look for the isolated can’t find any low hanging fruit

              • onion@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                I don’t understand, do you want social services to be handled by private business instead of the government?