Quite the opposite. Work that’s “fun and interesting” tends to pay less because there’s a surplus of demand and limited supply (artists, cooks, etc).
Comment on How in the hell
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
It’s less of a pain when the work you do is fun and interesting, but ironically when that’s the case you’re usually making even more money for someone else.
helenslunch@feddit.nl 1 year ago
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Are you sure? Whenever I feel gloomy, I seek a band of corporate lawyers. It is hard not to be lifted quickly by their distinctive spectacles of mirth and cheer.
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Walking barefoot on gravel is less painful than walking barefoot on nails.
The greater difference is in being free.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
yes but a factotum is a person who does general, menial jobs, and Bukowski was writing about his (assumed true) experience finding work after being rejected for thr WW1 draft.
12345678@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It was WWII, and I don’t know if he actually got rejected, the end of Ham on Rye implies he just didn’t register.
funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
typo, I meant 2.
MxM111@kbin.social 1 year ago
Nothing wrong in making money for someone else, IF you get yourself decent salary and have interesting work.
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I dunno, working in construction contracting has taught me that time in man hours is the ultimate pricing value point. Someone who gives up their time should reap the most benefits. Someone who owns a business and pays others to work should be heavily taxed.
Earning a bit more does help make it more palatable, but it still isn’t fair.
MxM111@kbin.social 1 year ago
What is fair? How to define fair?
TWeaK@lemm.ee 1 year ago
A common saying is that a fair deal is one that neither party feels happy with, because neither one is taking advantage of the other.
MyNameIsIgglePiggle@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
You make money for someone else in exchange for the safety of a consistent paycheck. Its like the old feudal system, in theory you are being protected in exchange for your labour.
If course in practise you are at the mercy of the company, and in the feudal system the protection you were afforded meant you needed to pay for your own armour and fight to the death to protect your owner.
Scrof@sopuli.xyz 1 year ago
If you’re one of the lucky few sure. But you’re kinda part of the problem. The vast, overwhelming majority of people on the planet work jobs they don’t really like just to keep a roof above their heads.
MxM111@kbin.social 1 year ago
That’s the issue, not if someone else makes profit or not. If nobody makes profit from your work, but you still work job you really do not like just to keep roof above your head, then what’s the difference?
unfreeradical@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Why would someone need to work a degrading job simply to remain housed, other than because such impositions support the profit motive for landlords, lenders, and employers?
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
Eh, I’d argue that can make it more palatable, but honestly I do think, at least in most cases (I can think of outliers), it’s generally pretty exploitative to profit off of someone else’s labor that they themselves are not actually wanting to do themselves, like it’s not really fair in the grand scheme of things.
A simple way to fix that I guess would be if every company was a co-op. Since then everyone is profiting equally, and no one’s labor is being exploited for the exclusive benefit of another.