this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2023
126 points (97.0% liked)

Thanks! I hate it!

619 readers
1 users here now

1. Post title must start with "Thanks, I hate..." or "TIH"

2. Reposts should be avoided

3. No extreme NSFW-Posts

4. No Memes

5. No Low-Quality-Content

6. No Spam

7. Keep comments civil; no bigotry

8. No Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HeckingShepherd@lemm.ee 2 points 2 years ago (5 children)

I think for a lot of people it’s about having some place to go during the day that they don’t have to pay for. If someone is unable to work a regular minimum wage job but is able to do simple tasks it could be either be stay at home and do nothing everyday or having either the government or the family pay for care. This allows a company to provide the supervision and a place for safe social interaction. People in these programs get to feel like an actual member of society rather than just a burden on their family. They can have something to do all day and come home and talk about their day at work instead of what they watched on TV. It’s unfortunate that they can’t provide enough value to justify a company to pay minimum wage but at least this way they get to have some money to help their family with bills or spend on their hobbies.

[–] zalgotext@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It’s unfortunate that they can’t provide enough value to justify a company to pay minimum wage

What's unfortunate is when people don't understand that everyone, even mentally disabled persons, deserves a living wage at minimum.

No one is paid based on the actual "value" they provide to a company. If that were the case, CEOs would be paid a fraction of what they're currently paid, and the lowest paid workers would make multiple times more than what they currently make.

[–] HeckingShepherd@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

I agree CEO compensation is really messed up but I don’t thinks it’s really relevant. A company gets to decide how much they value labour and if someone’s work isn’t enough to justify paying them they simply won’t have a job. I know it’s awful to pay less than a living wage but it’s important to remember these people are almost universally living with their family or in group homes. The options are really only either they don’t work or they work with a company paying less than minimum wage. Obviously the government subsidizing the wages is an option but I’m not sure if that’s the best use of resources. Would it not make more sense to directly subsidize families and group homes based on economic need.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)