What do you think are scams?

[kphoger]

The existence of a teachers' union is fine with me.  Teaching isn't seen as a profession in jurisdictions where teachers don't have unions

Weren't unions originally 'trade unions'–that is, something for trades rather than something for professions?

[GaryV]

One problem with unions, no matter if they represent the lowest grunts or highest level professionals, is that they have to continue to justify their existence. This often means that once some goals have been achieved in contracts, they have to come up with new goals and demands. Because else, why will people continue to support the union?

The same thing happens with advocacy organizations. They have to keep changing their focus and goals, or else they will go out of existence and their leaders will be jobless. Take for example the March of Dimes. This is a very worthwhile organization, but their focus has changed over the years. They started as a fund to combat polio. Then moved on to birth defects and infant mortality. From there it was a short step to premature births. Now their rather generic goal is to improve the health of mothers and babies.

[MikieTimT]

A fast food worker in NYC can be extremely stressed out all day on the job having to flip from one customer to another extremely fast without a break, whereas a computer programmer can finish their project or whatever early and just relax in the cushy office the rest of the time.

To get his job, the computer programmer needed 4+ years of college, which he probably paid tens of thousands for. The fast food worker needed a week of training.

If the computer programmer quits his job, the pool of possible replacements is exponentially smaller than the pool of possible replacements if the fast food worker quits his job.

If the computer programmer stops working, the entire project stops for days, weeks, or perhaps permanently depending on how valuable he was to the team. To replace him, they have to hire from a much smaller pool and train that hire for much longer than in the fast food situation. If the fast food worker stops working, orders might take an extra minute or two until they hire someone else from a large pool and train him in a few days.

If the fast food worker, who needed no prior education and is fully trained within a week, is paid more than the computer programmer who needed to spend thousands on 4+ years of college, given the two options, is anyone going to choose to be a computer programmer? Nope. What happens then? With no computer programmers, we don't technologically advance as a society.

(I know we have a lot of users on here who want to go back to more basic times, but quality-of-life indexes disagree.)

The point is, supply and demand defeats feelings every time. Does the fast food worker have a harder job? Depending on how you look at it, maybe. (In my opinion, absolutely not - the average person would do far better working fast food than they would programming computers) But even if he does, the supply is higher and the demand is lower. That means less pay.


There are also a lot of jobs that require a college degree that simply don't pay enough. In my opinion, this an area where our education system falls way short. Kids are told that going to college is a good option, which in general I agree with. But what they're not told is that some college majors are, to suit the thread, scams. Art, theater, graphic design, culinary arts, fashion design, athletic training, etc. - sure, there are well-paying jobs to be had in those areas, but a large chunk of people who major in those things will end up with a job that doesn't pay enough to dig them out from under a mountain of student debt.

What you say is totally true from the programmer's perspective (who would likely to faint out in the kitchen)

Would he be likely to faint out in the kitchen though? Nah. Chances are, unless he works really slowly or poorly under pressure (traits that are not common for computer programmers), he would be just fine after a few days of training. The fast food worker would still be hopelessly lost at computer programming after the same amount of training in that field.

who failed that damn computer class in high school twice.

And whose fault is that?

Fun fact: as far as I know, McDonalds required everyone in HQ to spent some time (a day a year? every few years?)  as a regular restaurant crew. I have a picture of my friend, a high-level database designer, actually flipping burgers...

I think that's a great idea, but it doesn't refute my point.

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

We don't live in a socialist utopia yet, so according to capitalism, the laws of supply and demand dictate that computer programmers make more than fast food workers as there is a greater supply of one over the other.

Is it fair?
Yes.

What makes me think that?
I have been both.  It look a lot more education to attain the ability to program computers.  Thus, fewer people put forth the effort or have the aptitude, especially given how hard every company works computer programmers, which are not hourly workers (at least in every corporation that I've ever looked into) like fast food workers other than managers.  In fact, it is so much work, I left my Sr. Systems Programming job in the Information Systems Division at a Fortune 1 company (60-80 hour work weeks) and started my own IT consulting business, just so I could get back to being compensated on an hourly basis like the good old fast food days.  Obviously demand a much higher hourly rate than I did back in the days of punching dough, topping pizzas, and feeding the ovens at CiCi's.

[abefroman329]

Anyone who thinks they were a skilled chef after a week of training at McDonalds is fooling themselves.  If that was the case, culinary schools wouldn't exist.

[abefroman329]

I know of no non-intoxicating recreational uses for weed. You don't smoke it because you like the aroma. You smoke it to get high.

Nonsense - in fact, if you use medical cannabis as prescribed, you won't get high.

You, and one other poster who responded, missed the word in bold in my quote above. Recreational. That, by definition, excludes any medical uses.

The reason you know of no non-intoxicating recreational uses for weed is the fact that you (proudly) know almost nothing about it.  The number of people who use cannabis, but don't get blazed, is significant higher than zero.  And there are plenty of people who drink more than one alcoholic beverage per day/week/etc.  They're called alcoholics.

[JayhawkCO]

I know of no non-intoxicating recreational uses for weed. You don't smoke it because you like the aroma. You smoke it to get high.

Nonsense - in fact, if you use medical cannabis as prescribed, you won't get high.

You, and one other poster who responded, missed the word in bold in my quote above. Recreational. That, by definition, excludes any medical uses.

As I wrote above, I like the smell and taste of weed. And I don't remember the last time I was "high". Just as you could have a beer, not be drunk, but tell that you have ingested alcohol, I can take a hit of my vape pen and pleasantly go on with my day (or more probably, night) without being dramatically intoxicated.

[thspfc]

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

I was going to let this comment go because there's obviously a lot of gray area here. But we can't just attribute everyone's successes and failures to genetics. Are some people naturally gifted? Yes. Are some people naturally at a significant disadvantage? Yes. But most people are neither. 9 times out of 10, our hypothetical fast food worker failed the computer class because he didn't work hard enough at it.

I've long believed that the political divide in the US boils down to one single issue: how much of the average person's life situation falls on their decisions, and how much of it falls on chance? The answer is obviously between the two extremes. I think it's a lot more chance than it is choices, but the people who act like it's 100% all chance are the ones who usually end up dissatisfied. (Not talking about anyone in particular here.)

[kalvado]

I know of no non-intoxicating recreational uses for weed. You don't smoke it because you like the aroma. You smoke it to get high.

Nonsense - in fact, if you use medical cannabis as prescribed, you won't get high.

You, and one other poster who responded, missed the word in bold in my quote above. Recreational. That, by definition, excludes any medical uses.

As I wrote above, I like the smell and taste of weed. And I don't remember the last time I was "high". Just as you could have a beer, not be drunk, but tell that you have ingested alcohol, I can take a hit of my vape pen and pleasantly go on with my day (or more probably, night) without being dramatically intoxicated.

certainly rings the bell with the trends which lead to Prohibition...

[kalvado]

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

I was going to let this comment go because there's obviously a lot of gray area here. But we can't just attribute everyone's successes and failures to genetics. Are some people naturally gifted? Yes. Are some people naturally at a significant disadvantage? Yes. But most people are neither. 9 times out of 10, our hypothetical fast food worker failed the computer class because he didn't work hard enough at it.

I've long believed that the political divide in the US boils down to one single issue: how much of the average person's life situation falls on their decisions, and how much of it falls on chance? The answer is obviously between the two extremes. I think it's a lot more chance than it is choices, but the people who act like it's 100% all chance are the ones who usually end up dissatisfied. (Not talking about anyone in particular here.)

From societal perspective, everyone has to push their life to achieve their best - whatever "best" would mean. It is fairly recent thing from historical perspective  that people can afford very little effort and still not find out the true meaning of words "starvation" and "poverty".

I had somewhat similar discussions in terms of disabled people support. Darwin says some nasty things, humanism says they have to be thoroughly accommodated. Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome... Was it CA or IL where 15% of drivers had "disabled" plaques?
Again, I don't know...
 

[Scott5114]

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

I was going to let this comment go because there's obviously a lot of gray area here. But we can't just attribute everyone's successes and failures to genetics. Are some people naturally gifted? Yes. Are some people naturally at a significant disadvantage? Yes. But most people are neither. 9 times out of 10, our hypothetical fast food worker failed the computer class because he didn't work hard enough at it.

Working hard is a scam.

[abefroman329]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

Was it CA or IL where 15% of drivers had "disabled" plaques?

Wasn't IL - it's difficult to get even a temporary handicapped parking permit.

And I'm sure the percentage of AZ and FL residents who have handicapped parking permits is quite high, given the number of retirees that live there, but I'm not sure what that's supposed to prove.

[triplemultiplex]

Working hard is a scam.

Work harder so the people above you can take credit for your effort!

[ethanhopkin14]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

Someone says to me, "You should do what your grandparents did to survive."  I was born without a paternal grandfather.  Should I say their advice is not applicable on a technicality due to me having an incomplete set of grandparents?  No, I get what they are saying, which the inference is to do what was done in a simpler time.....

[abefroman329]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

I do, yes.

You do realize that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is a physical impossibility and was intended to satirize people who think hard work, and hard work alone, will get you out of poverty?

[ethanhopkin14]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

I do, yes.

You do realize that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is a physical impossibility and was intended to satirize people who think hard work, and hard work alone, will get you out of poverty?

Yes I read that article about that subject that is the internet's newest fetish to try to discredit something on a technicality.  I heard it all my life.  I never cared if you can pull your bootstraps up by yourself or not or the physicaly ablitiy to do so and I still don't.  I know what my dad was saying to me when he yelled it to me.  "Stop being lazy, feeling sorry for yourself and go do something about it."

[abefroman329]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

I do, yes.

You do realize that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is a physical impossibility and was intended to satirize people who think hard work, and hard work alone, will get you out of poverty?

Yes I read that article about that subject that is the internet's newest fetish to try to discredit something on a technicality.  I heard it all my life.  I never cared if you can pull your bootstraps up by yourself or not or the physicaly ablitiy to do so and I still don't.  I know what my dad was saying to me when he yelled it to me.  "Stop being lazy, feeling sorry for yourself and go do something about it."

So...quadriplegics just need to stop being lazy and feeling sorry for themselves, and they need to go do something about it?

[MultiMillionMiler]

I think a huge factor in all of this that's not being acknowledged is a big fat dose of luck. No matter how skilled or well-off someone may start out, it always requires some level of luck to be able to become successful or make huge money. Even many rich singers/social media influencers/CEOs probably didn't expect for their company/talent/social media channel to explode the way it did. Sometimes it's just like hitting the lottery, just with easier odds than mega millions.

[Scott5114]

And of course you can work hard and apply yourself and not give up for years and get exactly jack squat out of it.

[ethanhopkin14]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

I do, yes.

You do realize that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is a physical impossibility and was intended to satirize people who think hard work, and hard work alone, will get you out of poverty?

Yes I read that article about that subject that is the internet's newest fetish to try to discredit something on a technicality.  I heard it all my life.  I never cared if you can pull your bootstraps up by yourself or not or the physicaly ablitiy to do so and I still don't.  I know what my dad was saying to me when he yelled it to me.  "Stop being lazy, feeling sorry for yourself and go do something about it."

So...quadriplegics just need to stop being lazy and feeling sorry for themselves, and they need to go do something about it?

I don't know.  My dad was yelling at me, not a quadriplegic.  I do not know about their situation. Half of the time I barely know my situation. 

[abefroman329]

Strong accommodation removes incentives to push hard for better outcome

You believe that quadriplegics need to pull themselves up by their bootstraps?

You do realize that's an expression and never meant to be taken verbatim literally?

I do, yes.

You do realize that "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" is a physical impossibility and was intended to satirize people who think hard work, and hard work alone, will get you out of poverty?

Yes I read that article about that subject that is the internet's newest fetish to try to discredit something on a technicality.  I heard it all my life.  I never cared if you can pull your bootstraps up by yourself or not or the physicaly ablitiy to do so and I still don't.  I know what my dad was saying to me when he yelled it to me.  "Stop being lazy, feeling sorry for yourself and go do something about it."

So...quadriplegics just need to stop being lazy and feeling sorry for themselves, and they need to go do something about it?

I don't know.  My dad was yelling at me, not a quadriplegic.  I do not know about their situation. Half of the time I barely know my situation.

Ah, ok.  My question was really directed at kalvado, who appeared to be arguing that disabled people need to get off their asses and be productive.

[abefroman329]

And of course you can work hard and apply yourself and not give up for years and get exactly jack squat out of it.

Yeah.

Also, banging on a keyboard isn't "hard work."

[Scott5114]

And of course you can work hard and apply yourself and not give up for years and get exactly jack squat out of it.

Yeah.

Also, banging on a keyboard isn't "hard work."

You're even less likely to be successful doing hard physical work than you are banging on a keyboard.

[thspfc]

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

I was going to let this comment go because there's obviously a lot of gray area here. But we can't just attribute everyone's successes and failures to genetics. Are some people naturally gifted? Yes. Are some people naturally at a significant disadvantage? Yes. But most people are neither. 9 times out of 10, our hypothetical fast food worker failed the computer class because he didn't work hard enough at it.

Working hard is a scam.

And the better option is?

[Scott5114]

Who's fault is that John has IQ of 140 and Jim is only 90?  That Jay suffers from muscular degradation and Jack can win heavy lifting competition with little training? That Bob struggles with hand-eye coordination, and Tom can thread the needle with his eyes closed?
I don't know how to answer those questions. I don't know how ideal society would look like. 
I am very willing to provoke others to express their thought though

I was going to let this comment go because there's obviously a lot of gray area here. But we can't just attribute everyone's successes and failures to genetics. Are some people naturally gifted? Yes. Are some people naturally at a significant disadvantage? Yes. But most people are neither. 9 times out of 10, our hypothetical fast food worker failed the computer class because he didn't work hard enough at it.

Working hard is a scam.

And the better option is?

arson

[Rothman]

And of course you can work hard and apply yourself and not give up for years and get exactly jack squat out of it.

Yeah.

Also, banging on a keyboard isn't "hard work."

You're even less likely to be successful doing hard physical work than you are banging on a keyboard.

Trades seem quite profitable nowadays.