> At the end of the day, there always needs to be a (large) class of street sweepers, accountants and restaurant workers for the benefit of the rest of society.
As long as they're not you.
Furthermore the argument is't "nobody should have to be a garbageman", it's "perhaps garbagemen deserve more than 1/3500th the pay of a CEO"
But ‘deserve’ is something you can analyze to death and make no progress on except to justify violence or implied threats to make things ‘fair’.
A peaceful way to analyze problems and arrive at solutions looks at what positive actions (violence or implied threat in law) create that condition, and remove those, or devise solutions to make those actions obsolete. For instance, in most places there is a law against competition in the garbage business. There are also laws requiring a whole host of hugely expensive and complicated business operation and employee benefit costs and liabilities to running a small garbage business. There’s little natural reason why the benefits of operational scale should extend much beyond the truck, but all our efforts at social justice have somehow increased this benefit. We also have numerous policies that encourage the growth and import of a massive under-skilled lower class that all competes for these jobs for lack of options at their abilities, and discourages high-skilled labor in the middle classes by positive action, forcing the latter to pay for the former. In 1000 years, this system will not be distinguishable from serfdom, and the justifications for it will be just as peculiar as the ones we look back on today. And finally, we come to skill acquisition, the primary means of which teaches an utterly useless narrative of historical victimization and justified violence, instead of skills for useful work and peaceful technical solutions to structural problems.
As long as they're not you.
Furthermore the argument is't "nobody should have to be a garbageman", it's "perhaps garbagemen deserve more than 1/3500th the pay of a CEO"