Which has asymmetrical effects. Ask why all of those miserable people working in the video gaming industry don't just quit? The "just go find another job" refrain is a tired one.
A canard repeated often is a refrain. A statement can be both.
I have dismissed it as a canard because this argument of "well if they don't like working there they can leave" has been done to death on HN, usually on threads about bad working conditions, at places like Amazon warehouses or on video game QA teams. And I point you to those places for my arguments against yours, because they've been repeated again and again. People often can't leave their job because of personal circumstances. They need the money. They need the health insurance. They have lack the resources to find another job quickly. They have families to feed. And sure, you'll rebut with "well they just have to suck it up and deal with it, and they must be sucking up and dealing with it if they haven't left." Which is correct to a point but is this an optimal result? Do we want a society where people are forced to stay at jobs they hate, that actively harm their mental if not physical selves, because of a resource distribution? When we produce enough to ensure that everyone can have a better standard of living? Which is the second, you could say, prescriptive, part of the argument. But the point is that the first argument has been debated before and I choose to dismiss it because we would be rebashing a very dead horse.
