> The difference is that you can't decide to fuck off (eg. go backpacking or live with your parents) whenever you feel like it if you're an indentured servant.
Do you honestly think people willingly work at McJobs that still require them to live on food stamps when they have better options available to them, like living with their parents?!
Amazon's warehouse workers are not buying organic takeout or getting luxury condominiums, they are buying the cheapest (unhealthy) food and living in the cheapest parts of town. What you asking to keep in mind sounds a lot like a rehash of Reagan's incorrect "welfare queen" characterization from the 70's. Or more recently: "Why do poor people need a smartphone for?"
> Do you honestly think people willingly work at McJobs that still require them to live on food stamps when they have better options available to them, like living with their parents?!
Just less than an hour ago I was listening to the radio and they were interviewing someone who literally fits this description: They voluntarily left their parent's house and worked at McDonalds for a bunch of years. Not going to school or anything. Living their own life.
I also personally know someone who did this. Comes from an upper middle class family. Not kicked out of the house or anything. Just didn't like the small town he was in. Moved to another state and worked at McDonald's while doing some art projects when not working.
People do this. All. The. Time.
People here on HN (and especially in the comments for this submission) are showing how way out of touch their world view is from reality. How many of you here even know any Amazon warehouse workers? I know two, and talking to them has impacted my view of Amazon.
Anti-disclaimer: I don't work for Amazon and prefer not to buy from them.
>Do you honestly think people willingly work at McJobs that still require them to live on food stamps when they have better options available to them, like living with their parents?!
Living with their parents is an alternate option, that may or may not be the better option. Maybe it is cheaper and has comparable living standards, but at the same time it might also be in the middle of nowhere. The point is that there's a choice available, which isn't the case for indentured servitude.
>Amazon's warehouse workers are not buying organic takeout or getting luxury condominiums [...]
I specifically said they're not all doing it. I brought that up not to disparage the plight of the average amazon worker, but to point out just factoring in room and board fails to account for certain cases.
Do you honestly think people willingly work at McJobs that still require them to live on food stamps when they have better options available to them, like living with their parents?!
Amazon's warehouse workers are not buying organic takeout or getting luxury condominiums, they are buying the cheapest (unhealthy) food and living in the cheapest parts of town. What you asking to keep in mind sounds a lot like a rehash of Reagan's incorrect "welfare queen" characterization from the 70's. Or more recently: "Why do poor people need a smartphone for?"