jellybeanforest-a-go-go:70slesbian:raging-fan-human:70slesbian:i do care if someone hires someone to
jellybeanforest-a-go-go:70slesbian:raging-fan-human:70slesbian:i do care if someone hires someone to clean though like you can’t just throw that out there as if it isn’t well known that those people that are hired to clean your home exist because they’re poor. wash your own dirty dishes I understand what you’re saying, but you also seem to be ignoring the fact that people who are hiring these poor people to clean their houses are giving those people jobs. If they weren’t hiring them to clean their houses, these people may not have a job at all.i don’t agree with this logic. i don’t think we need to settle for a job or nothing, is the same to be said for women who work under slavery like conditions in clothing factories in poor countries? why can’t we fight for change instead of accepting that some people just have to be maids Before she moved in to take care of her, my aunt hired a maid to come to my disabled grandmother’s house once a week to clean for like 2-3 hours and paid her $80 every time she came over. There’s no way my grandmother, who had a bum hip from a car accident and hobbled around with her walker (back when she could even walk), could clean her own house. Maids provide an invaluable service, especially for the elderly and disabled, and they shouldn’t be eliminated just because you think their jobs are somehow not good enough for anyone to be doing. Many jobs like housecleaners, gardeners, etc., are great for people who may not speak the local language, who may have had a limited education, or who came here as adults with limited opportunities. My grandfather, who could speak four languages fluently but his English sucked, became a janitor at the age of 58 to support his family when they first came to America, and his kids always advocated that you should treat blue-collar and traditionally low-paid workers with respect because those jobs are valuable and even someone who cleans toilets is a person who is trying their best. Basically, we shouldn’t try to eliminate these jobs; they should just be better compensated.Okay a) if I hire someone to come clean my house once a week I am their client, their customer, not their boss. Either they’re self-employed or their boss is the person who owns the cleaning company.and b) bosses profit from the difference between the actual value of your labor and what they pay you. For a business owner who literally profits, that profit and growth is unbounded – a small business could theoretically grow into wal-mart, and the profit extracted from a worker can be really high if business is booming. Someone who hires an employee for personal services (actually personal, your “personal assistant” who helps you with work is the other kind of employee) is extracting the difference between what they’re paying the employee and what their own time is worth to them. What it’s worth to not do it themselves. This is still profit extraction, but it’s bounded. No one hires a literal million people to cook, drive, and clean for them. In fact, it’s bounded by the amount of money the employer makes. And how do you get enough money to hire a full-time personal employee? You own a business, are a business executive, work in finance directly making investment money which comes from other people’s labor, or inherited wealth that you can keep making money off of through investment which also, stealing the profits from other people’s labor, or maybe you’re one of a small number of workers like pro athletes or actors who happen to be highly compensated. So some people who hire personal staff are lucky workers, most are capitalists, but it’s the money that pays for the employees where the problem starts. -- source link