They don’t have jobs in the traditional American sense of working for an employer for money. But I’d argue that their lifestyle is no less arduous than someone who does have a job. They still have to make arrangements for food, clothing, shelter and travel, and presumably they’re doing something of value to earn those resources. That’s work, even if it isn’t a job, as traditionally defined.
I disagree with “presumably they’re doing something of value to earn those resources”. All that we know is that they are acquiring the resources somehow. They could be doing so in various clearly-unethical ways, like theft, con artistry, or what have you.
Of course, the more likely scenario is that these people simply are good at convincing people to hand them things basically for free, or in any case in exchange for substantially less value than they’re receiving. There are some people who have this talent.
As far as the lifestyles being arduous, well, I’ll let the author of this Leftover Soup comic handle that one:
Cheryl could very well put in 110% effort and learn how to cook expertly, and very well might still be immediately fired, in much the same way that working hard in school and getting straight As does not entitle one to a six figure job. One earns paychecks in exchange for the provision of value, not the expenditure of effort.
(emphasis mine)
In other words: their lifestyle is arduous? So what? That doesn’t ethically entitle them to a damn thing.
I, for one, am glad for my job. It provides me the resources by which I carve out a tiny bubble of relative certainty in an uncertain world.
One earns paychecks in exchange for the provision of value, not the expenditure of effort.
Actually, one gets paychecks for the perception of the provision of value.
The boss (whether business, government, or non-profit) may be wrong about who’s providing what, even though there are some pressures on bosses to get things right.
Also, the organization may be going under even if some of the people in it are providing value.
I disagree with “presumably they’re doing something of value to earn those resources”. All that we know is that they are acquiring the resources somehow. They could be doing so in various clearly-unethical ways, like theft, con artistry, or what have you.
Of course, the more likely scenario is that these people simply are good at convincing people to hand them things basically for free, or in any case in exchange for substantially less value than they’re receiving. There are some people who have this talent.
As far as the lifestyles being arduous, well, I’ll let the author of this Leftover Soup comic handle that one:
(emphasis mine)
In other words: their lifestyle is arduous? So what? That doesn’t ethically entitle them to a damn thing.
Wholeheartedly agreed.
Actually, one gets paychecks for the perception of the provision of value.
The boss (whether business, government, or non-profit) may be wrong about who’s providing what, even though there are some pressures on bosses to get things right.
Also, the organization may be going under even if some of the people in it are providing value.