Which job(s) would you refuse to accept regardless of how good the pay is?
-
Anything public facing or anything that has me carrying around a gun. Both are absolute no-gos in my mind.
Naked Cowboy model for a sexy western themed oak furniture teleshopping service.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Anything food service. I am NOT to be trusted with food.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Chicken sexer. Sending all those cute little chicks to their deaths.
-
ICE agent.
What if they paid you enough to bankroll a political campaign for the opposition?
-
What if they paid you enough to bankroll a political campaign for the opposition?
A) they wouldn't. B) I'd still end up in jail for attacking another agent.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Everyone just saying jobs they dont like, or that they have ethical qualms about, but ignoring "regardless of pay" - and I don't believe you.
Just imagine the salary for the position is $500m per year. At a certain point, you would be able to quit the job with plenty of money for the rest of your life after working for a very short period of time, or else you would be able to use the money to make more good in the world than the harm done by your labor.
-
A) they wouldn't. B) I'd still end up in jail for attacking another agent.
A) That's not the question. The question said "regardless of pay." So we can imagine you get paid $500m. It doesn't have to be realistic. That's the point of a hypothetical.
B) If that's the case, you need to work on your impulse control. In our hypothetical scenario, you would be sacrificing the political change you could create with your salary for the short term satisfaction of hurting someone else. It's a bit of a trolley problem - but then, the point of trolly problems is to get us to grapple with our ethical assumptions.
-
Everyone just saying jobs they dont like, or that they have ethical qualms about, but ignoring "regardless of pay" - and I don't believe you.
Just imagine the salary for the position is $500m per year. At a certain point, you would be able to quit the job with plenty of money for the rest of your life after working for a very short period of time, or else you would be able to use the money to make more good in the world than the harm done by your labor.
If you have a skill set someone is offering $500k for, someone less shitty is going to be offering at least $400k. So you're not giving up $500k, you're giving up $100k or 20%. I've taken bigger pay cuts than that in exchange for increased job satisfaction.
-
If you have a skill set someone is offering $500k for, someone less shitty is going to be offering at least $400k. So you're not giving up $500k, you're giving up $100k or 20%. I've taken bigger pay cuts than that in exchange for increased job satisfaction.
Every other job will only hire you for a normal wage that you would make in the real world.
The point of the exercise is to grapple with an ethical quandry, not to sidestep it.
-
Every other job will only hire you for a normal wage that you would make in the real world.
The point of the exercise is to grapple with an ethical quandry, not to sidestep it.
I'm not particularly interested in an exercise which is completely irrelevant to real-world scenarios. In the real world your choice would look more similar to my example, so that is the more relevant hypothetical.
-
I'm not particularly interested in an exercise which is completely irrelevant to real-world scenarios. In the real world your choice would look more similar to my example, so that is the more relevant hypothetical.
If we cared about the real world, we'd be actually doing something, rather than just talking.
