It's a false dichotomy anyway. There's no law of nature that says an employee being able to quit at a moment's notice means the company should be allowed to, for example, fire someone with no cause on the spot.
Asymmetrical relationships are baked into employment. Indeed, that’s the very basis of the idea. Labour laws, unions etc came into existence to change that balance of power. Without them, no paid holiday, no proper weekend, no pension. All of these things reduce productivity.
The purpose of our lives is not productivity. (I have no idea what it might be, but that’s a different thread)
Look, I lead very comfortable life compared to most. Many of the people here are like me, and I dare say, you. But we’re a blip in history. And most of that history hasn’t been particularly kind to people who weren’t born to wealth. I wish more folks internalised that lesson.
> Asymmetrical relationships are baked into employment.
If you have ever employed people (I have), it'd be clear that isn't true. You have no actual power over them. You cannot make them come to work. You cannot make them do anything at all. They can get up and leave at any moment, and you can do nothing.
You know who can do that? The military. If you don't follow orders, into the brig you go. They can even execute you.
> The purpose of our lives is not productivity.
Productivity gives us the amazing high standard of living we enjoy today.
> most of that history hasn’t been particularly kind to people who weren’t born to wealth
Freedom produced prosperity which changed all that for the better. Freedom is the greatest human invention ever.
An employer is not the parent of the employees. It's a transaction - trading labor for money. Just like you buying donuts at the store. If you buy donuts from them daily, should you be forced to continue buying donuts from them? Of course not.
Have you ever hired a service to mow your lawn? When you're unhappy with them, do you cease the relationship? Or do you now owe them your continuing business?
