There is some labor out there that doesn’t really contribute to the reported GDP numbers. Water and wastewater workers don’t directly contribute to GDP numbers but do allow other people and businesses to contribute to GDP. The amount of treated water a city creates isn’t counted towards GDP.
Actually, wait. Wouldn’t that mean that the earned income from labor that doesn’t contribute to GDP should be excluded (perhaps not in its entirety, because that labor indirectly contributes)? Which means that the difference between GDP and the compensation to labor to create it is larger?
I will try rephrasing it: its a nonsensical, fucking stupid proposal that gdp should equal earned income, and that somehow if the two are not equal then the difference amounts to slavery.
Do you care to elaborate, why do you even think these two should be the same, and what the difference has to do with slavery, as it relates to the actual meaning of that expression, not random things you don’t like.
I go to work for money (in the job I chose), and I get money, i call that a fair deal. If I was owned by someone, was forced to work, and would not get paid in return, I would be a slave.
I mean what do you think it should be like? I don’t go to work and I get paid anyways? Who makes the shit I buy with the money then?
Would make more sense if post was talking about slavery, not labor. Labor is compensated.
Compare the GDP of your country to earned income, do a tiny bit of math, discover what portion of the workforce are slaves.
There is some labor out there that doesn’t really contribute to the reported GDP numbers. Water and wastewater workers don’t directly contribute to GDP numbers but do allow other people and businesses to contribute to GDP. The amount of treated water a city creates isn’t counted towards GDP.
Thank you, that is a totally fair criticism.
Actually, wait. Wouldn’t that mean that the earned income from labor that doesn’t contribute to GDP should be excluded (perhaps not in its entirety, because that labor indirectly contributes)? Which means that the difference between GDP and the compensation to labor to create it is larger?
Mm, so if a worker creates added value, that makes the worker a slave? Interesting theory.
When GDP is three times earned income, labor is being undercompensated so much that approximately two-thirds of the workforce is enslaved, yes.
They could be slave part time though
I will try rephrasing it: its a nonsensical, fucking stupid proposal that gdp should equal earned income, and that somehow if the two are not equal then the difference amounts to slavery.
Do you care to elaborate, why do you even think these two should be the same, and what the difference has to do with slavery, as it relates to the actual meaning of that expression, not random things you don’t like.
yeah but do you go to work voluntarily? would you still do it if you didn’t need the money? if so, then yes, it is vegan.
I go to work for money (in the job I chose), and I get money, i call that a fair deal. If I was owned by someone, was forced to work, and would not get paid in return, I would be a slave. I mean what do you think it should be like? I don’t go to work and I get paid anyways? Who makes the shit I buy with the money then?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but if your work’s payment feels like a fair deal, you’re very privileged when compared to the average human
Edit: even being able to choose your job is a privilege…
i mean, i only asked whether you go to work voluntarily, and whether it could therefore be considered vegan.
The only way someone can work voluntarily is if they have the option to not work and still live with some semblance of comfort and security.
This means that almost all people are obliged to work.
Yes
deleted by creator