>>12487638right, so as a common worker, I am doomed to be offering a service that most consumerists also give, so more supply, less remuneration for me
it doesn't matter if I need the money for health issues or whatever, others want it for consumerism, so they drag the value of my labor down
>inb4 improve yourselfif I have different stats (I'm stupid) then I can't, the point of the thread
it gets to the point that if I'm actually smart, I could actually profit of the labor of someone else, making the problem even worse
>>12487643and what if the standards don't go down? meaning what if I now don't need to pay drivers for my product, so I fire them, and because of free market, now my product has a lower price because of competition and it becomes stable without the need of drivers in the equation
the drivers need to find jobs for surviving, driving the value of their labor down (more supply of the same), and now they and other workers can't find a living wage
we're talking about a huge unemployment rate that might be fixed if working hours go down while keeping relatively high salaries for that (instead of trying to beat the competitors by lowering prices, which is what will likely happen)
so the other path is just letting the unemployed people die on the streets because they didn't have good enough stats
so yeah, to me, diversity is good, what is happening with it is not
