| Kasz216 said:
People will only put up with stuff for so long without compensation, but monetary compensation isn't the only kind of compensation.
Jobs would never get to a place wheer people are happy not getting paid enough to live because well... people need to live. If they don't get paid enough to do so, they'll choose to instead die without working or revolt. Which is why if it ever even began to approach such a reality you'd see an expansion in social services to keep the working class placated.
As for the "Rich getting richer" effect. I'll leave that for the other thread. |
If you keep this delusion going where people end up thinking they have a chance to strike it rich, they can labor for years in an area for wages that may not be able to pay for anything, but they think they will get rich. That can happen. There is not any necessary connect between what one does and the chance of it paying sufficiently to make a living. Just get things bad, and desperate enough, and have people glorify the super successful and have them believe they can be one, if they go through this, if they are "good enough" and you could get people killing each other in an arena for glory. People can sink that low, if a society lets it and people don't have any other options to lean on to. Having an "every man for themselves" culture will help to breed this.
What you describe is part of the reasons for the desire to increase social services, to prevent a mass uprising. But, if there is a political will to gut social services, and push this fend for oneself mentality, you can get people dying as a result. I remember reading in a thread on here, "I would rather die than get a handout". Multiple that N-fold, and you get a culture of death abounding, with elites on top glorified. Only thing to counter it is cultural values that cause people to stop and think a minute.
