I mean it’s both, the corporation pushing for profits and the actual person you lost your job to. It’s not like I was saying the immigrant was malicious in their actions or anything.
You are saying that, though. By saying both of them are at fault, you are implicitly stating that the immigrant did something wrong in this scenario. By your logic, you also did something wrong by applying for the job. It is highly likely the person before you was also being paid more and you got the job for less, making you exactly the same as the immigrant in this scenario.
How exactly, and be direct, did the immigrant wrong you here by seeking employment? Again, they do not know the background that you specifically were cut. The capitalist does, however.
Malicious would mean immigrants are doing it with the inention to cause harm. I don’t think even the capitalists are in it to be malicious, they’re just (and only) thinking of prorits.
If someone is sacked in order to get you hired for the job of course you’re partly at fault. Sucks even more if you’re helping in pushing the wages down. If I was part of that problem then yeah I’d be at fault but neither is true in my case.
See now you’re all over the place. You just blamed capitalism and immigrants both for this scenario, and now you’re backtracking and saying both are neutral.
You’re avoiding my points and not answering the question. How exactly did the immigrant wrong you in the above scenario?
Being malicious and being at fault are two different things. You’re conflating them.
Capitalists are looking to push wages down, weaken unions and using immigration to do that. So if you’re sacked because of that, you are pretty justified in feeling the capitalists doing it and the tool they’re using has wronged you.
So now you’re editing your posts to try to salvage your barely coherent stance and still refusing to answer the question. I guess you really don’t have much of a stance worth debating then.
That’s just getting pedantic about the meaning of “fault”.
Take the immigrant part out.
Two, 6th generation USA homegrown workers, one from California, one from Texas.
Job is in Cali, min wage 16.50/hr, leave out living expenses.
Texas min wage is 7.25 so Texan tells employer he’ll take 10/hr because he needs money.
Is it the Texan’s “fault” a Californian job was taken, or is it the mechanism (or lack of enforcement) that allowed him to be hired in the first place, for less than state required min-wage, that’s the underlying fault?
You can try to get pedantic about the meaning of “fault” I suppose, but to me that’s just a distraction to skip the point, and enable vilification of Texans.
It’s partly the Texans fault. Outsourcing is another pickle but it is more active on the job takers part if they had come to California and then taken the job. Outsourcing, it’s more passive and harder to do anything about.
Nah, not for me. He’s just a guy who needs a job.
I don’t blame AI for simply existing when it takes our jobs either. It’s the employer who chooses to use AI instead of humans that is at fault.
I mean it’s both, the corporation pushing for profits and the actual person you lost your job to. It’s not like I was saying the immigrant was malicious in their actions or anything.
You are saying that, though. By saying both of them are at fault, you are implicitly stating that the immigrant did something wrong in this scenario. By your logic, you also did something wrong by applying for the job. It is highly likely the person before you was also being paid more and you got the job for less, making you exactly the same as the immigrant in this scenario.
How exactly, and be direct, did the immigrant wrong you here by seeking employment? Again, they do not know the background that you specifically were cut. The capitalist does, however.
Malicious would mean immigrants are doing it with the inention to cause harm. I don’t think even the capitalists are in it to be malicious, they’re just (and only) thinking of prorits.
If someone is sacked in order to get you hired for the job of course you’re partly at fault. Sucks even more if you’re helping in pushing the wages down. If I was part of that problem then yeah I’d be at fault but neither is true in my case.
See now you’re all over the place. You just blamed capitalism and immigrants both for this scenario, and now you’re backtracking and saying both are neutral.
You’re avoiding my points and not answering the question. How exactly did the immigrant wrong you in the above scenario?
Being malicious and being at fault are two different things. You’re conflating them.
Capitalists are looking to push wages down, weaken unions and using immigration to do that. So if you’re sacked because of that, you are pretty justified in feeling the capitalists doing it and the tool they’re using has wronged you.
So now you’re editing your posts to try to salvage your barely coherent stance and still refusing to answer the question. I guess you really don’t have much of a stance worth debating then.
I edit my comments because I press send before finishing my comment. Bad habit I know.
That’s just getting pedantic about the meaning of “fault”.
Take the immigrant part out.
Two, 6th generation USA homegrown workers, one from California, one from Texas.
Job is in Cali, min wage 16.50/hr, leave out living expenses.
Texas min wage is 7.25 so Texan tells employer he’ll take 10/hr because he needs money.
Is it the Texan’s “fault” a Californian job was taken, or is it the mechanism (or lack of enforcement) that allowed him to be hired in the first place, for less than state required min-wage, that’s the underlying fault?
You can try to get pedantic about the meaning of “fault” I suppose, but to me that’s just a distraction to skip the point, and enable vilification of Texans.
It’s partly the Texans fault. Outsourcing is another pickle but it is more active on the job takers part if they had come to California and then taken the job. Outsourcing, it’s more passive and harder to do anything about.
Nah, not for me. He’s just a guy who needs a job.
I don’t blame AI for simply existing when it takes our jobs either. It’s the employer who chooses to use AI instead of humans that is at fault.