Under capitalism, a lot of the time, highly dangerous jobs are also highly paid. Kind of a balance that the individual decides to engage with. Same idea behind getting an advanced degree in STEM or law. I think of my job by example, I’m a power plant operator at a large combined cycle plant. No fucking shot I’d be doing this if the pay wasn’t good. I’m around explosive and deadly hot shit all day.

    • Chippys_mittens@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      In the US around 30 people a year die from chainsaws. Because that number is small compared to other hazards, chainsaws are safe and not dangerous. This is your argument, do you see that, at all?

      • MyMindIsLikeAnOcean@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes. Chainsaws are very safe…if you get a newer chainsaw you basically have to intentionally injure yourself with it.

        Seems like this is a pointless argument about potentially dangerous vs statistically dangerous.

        I’ll concede that you’re paid well because all the training you receive to make your dangerous job safe puts a premium on labour in your sector. Better?

        I’m trying to stick to your original question, though: the most (statistically) dangerous jobs under capitalism aren’t very well paid - relatively (like resource extraction), and under communism all jobs aren’t paid the same.

          • MyMindIsLikeAnOcean@piefed.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Thanks for the bad faith exchange a la Reddit. Nostalgic. Some people just want to pick fights and be jerks, and there’s nothing I can do about it.