The side of the workers is wanting them to get fair wages while also wanting them to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless in the interim. The two aren’t mutually exclusive
Them getting fair wages is the only reliable way for them to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless.
When Gratuities, rather than being an exceptional reward for exceptional service are instead needed to allow people to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless because they’re not paid fair wages and the only thing making others give them is because it’s socially frowned upon if they do not, then they’re just another form or charity and, as we see here, charity is not reliable and can be withhold for any reason or even no reason at all.
The US is a seriously broken society when workers have to actually rely on strangers, for no stronger reason than social pressure, giving them extra money able to feed themselves and not go homeless.
While I agree with you, it doesn’t change the fact that giving some one a tip today saves them tomorrow. I don’t think the waitress that brought me my hash browns is particularly interested in labor theory, she just needs money.
I think it’s exactly the point that me and lots of other people are making that proper work laws today is what saves working people from poverty today and tomorrow and that increasingly delegating the survival of working people to the kindness of others via social pressure and goodwill contributions diguised as tips instead of making sure they’re paid fair wages for fair work actually makes the situation worse over time because salaries keep falling and higher and higher gratuities are needed to make up for it.
In fact, the trend in the US when it comes to tips shows exactly that: over the years people kept doing what you say should be done and during that time the situation kept getting worse with a higher and higher tip required for people’s survival.
The natural long term unsustainability of that economic scheme is exactly the problem.
Meanwhile proper worker legislation has proven itself all over the World as a stable solution for working poverty amongst people working is restauration: in simple terms relying on tips for income has no track record anywhere in the World of guaranteeing that workers remain outside poverty whilst good worker legislation has a broad track record of keeping workers out of poverty.
You’re literally defending the anti-solution of “let’s avoid pain today even if it leads to solving the problem”, which just so happens to be very kind of messaging that makes the modern US have horrible insecure working conditions for anybody who is not a highly specialized worker or a member of one of the dwindling unions still around.
I’m not defending the anti-solution, I’m saying that the anti-solution is the only way to meet the material needs of these people right now. Capitalism is both the system that we live under and a system that should be dismantled, and these two things are not contradictary. You’re literally defending the idea of having a service rendered to you and then denying the human being that served you the means to feed themselves. Because why? Hopefully if you and others do it enough it will turn the tide and maybe there will be some massive uprising of service workers and then people will get paid a living wage? Exactly what are they supposed to do until then?
If you fully knew that Nazi Germany was Nazi Germany and you just decided to go anyway cause you love sports so much?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936_Summer_Olympics
There really isn’t a Side Of Good to be on in the specific case of World Cup Tourists vs US Restaurants.
Sure there is. It’s the side of the workers
True.
The side of the workers is wanting them to get fair wages for fair work.
You know, the kind of idea even the US used to have.
The side of the workers is wanting them to get fair wages while also wanting them to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless in the interim. The two aren’t mutually exclusive
Them getting fair wages is the only reliable way for them to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless.
When Gratuities, rather than being an exceptional reward for exceptional service are instead needed to allow people to be able to feed themselves and not go homeless because they’re not paid fair wages and the only thing making others give them is because it’s socially frowned upon if they do not, then they’re just another form or charity and, as we see here, charity is not reliable and can be withhold for any reason or even no reason at all.
The US is a seriously broken society when workers have to actually rely on strangers, for no stronger reason than social pressure, giving them extra money able to feed themselves and not go homeless.
While I agree with you, it doesn’t change the fact that giving some one a tip today saves them tomorrow. I don’t think the waitress that brought me my hash browns is particularly interested in labor theory, she just needs money.
I think it’s exactly the point that me and lots of other people are making that proper work laws today is what saves working people from poverty today and tomorrow and that increasingly delegating the survival of working people to the kindness of others via social pressure and goodwill contributions diguised as tips instead of making sure they’re paid fair wages for fair work actually makes the situation worse over time because salaries keep falling and higher and higher gratuities are needed to make up for it.
In fact, the trend in the US when it comes to tips shows exactly that: over the years people kept doing what you say should be done and during that time the situation kept getting worse with a higher and higher tip required for people’s survival.
The natural long term unsustainability of that economic scheme is exactly the problem.
Meanwhile proper worker legislation has proven itself all over the World as a stable solution for working poverty amongst people working is restauration: in simple terms relying on tips for income has no track record anywhere in the World of guaranteeing that workers remain outside poverty whilst good worker legislation has a broad track record of keeping workers out of poverty.
You’re literally defending the anti-solution of “let’s avoid pain today even if it leads to solving the problem”, which just so happens to be very kind of messaging that makes the modern US have horrible insecure working conditions for anybody who is not a highly specialized worker or a member of one of the dwindling unions still around.
I’m not defending the anti-solution, I’m saying that the anti-solution is the only way to meet the material needs of these people right now. Capitalism is both the system that we live under and a system that should be dismantled, and these two things are not contradictary. You’re literally defending the idea of having a service rendered to you and then denying the human being that served you the means to feed themselves. Because why? Hopefully if you and others do it enough it will turn the tide and maybe there will be some massive uprising of service workers and then people will get paid a living wage? Exactly what are they supposed to do until then?