This is the classic argument used to justify exploiting people in developing nations. In reality the incentive is to keep them living in poverty, so they can keep paying a pittance. Businesses will go to extreme lengths to maintain these conditions.
…there are more people than there are jobs…
no job = no money
all land is accounted for too, no place left to “strike out on your own”
so, if there are no jobs and you have no land/property…you have only what others are willing/able to give you, same as anyone else in that same position anywhere else.
and just like everywhere else, they arent cared for not because they can’t afford to, but because keeping miserable homeless people around is a nice reminder of just how much worse you could have it…so don’t test your luck.
This is the classic argument used to justify exploiting people in developing nations. In reality the incentive is to keep them living in poverty, so they can keep paying a pittance. Businesses will go to extreme lengths to maintain these conditions.
I’m not saying it’s ok, I’m in no way in support of it. You guys are reading me wrong.
I’m saying I genuinely don’t understand the math here.
…there are more people than there are jobs… no job = no money
all land is accounted for too, no place left to “strike out on your own”
so, if there are no jobs and you have no land/property…you have only what others are willing/able to give you, same as anyone else in that same position anywhere else.
and just like everywhere else, they arent cared for not because they can’t afford to, but because keeping miserable homeless people around is a nice reminder of just how much worse you could have it…so don’t test your luck.