Bit shocked

CLAPTON

lisyloo wrote: »

Do you think someone with a choice between a £100k job in London vs unemployment has a free choice?

Do refugees who have the choice between being bombed or risking their lives in a dodgy boat have a free choice?

Do parents who want to take their kids on holiday have a free choice of when?

Choosing whether to wear a green or blue jumper is a choice free of significant pressures. The other choices have significant pressures involved. So what I mean by "free choice" is free of significant pressures.

Most people i know don't have a free choice about their work. Many have financial pressures e.g. Family which means they can't choose to take a massive pay cut or just move their wife & kids " up north" others work in very competitive careers and maybe gave dwindling choices at 50 plus, some may have caring responsibilities that restrict the hours they can work e.g. Child care.
Maybe some young and single people have entirely free choice over where they live and what they do, but most people with family, debts and some way into their career have limitations which limit their free choice.

people struck by lightning don't have free choice or those suffering from cancer :
no-one suggests that we have free choice but we do often have considerable freedoms for which we can be grateful

Mistermeaner

lisyloo wrote: »

Do you think someone with a choice between a £100k job in London vs unemployment has a free choice?

Do refugees who have the choice between being bombed or risking their lives in a dodgy boat have a free choice?

Do parents who want to take their kids on holiday have a free choice of when?

Choosing whether to wear a green or blue jumper is a choice free of significant pressures. The other choices have significant pressures involved. So what I mean by "free choice" is free of significant pressures.

Most people i know don't have a free choice about their work. Many have financial pressures e.g. Family which means they can't choose to take a massive pay cut or just move their wife & kids " up north" others work in very competitive careers and maybe gave dwindling choices at 50 plus, some may have caring responsibilities that restrict the hours they can work e.g. Child care.
Maybe some young and single people have entirely free choice over where they live and what they do, but most people with family, debts and some way into their career have limitations which limit their free choice.

Their choices are constrained by their willingness to make sacrifices, generally to money and lifestyle. There's loads of call centre jobs near me (cycle distance) at 18-20k, 3 bed houses for 100k, no crime to speak of and good schools. One of you working there, the other a 'child minder' with tax credits. Pretty good life.

lisyloo

I agree with you, we are privileged/lucky but we don't have choices that are completely free of outside pressures like current/future liabilities.
Mobilesaver DID say we had free choice and I disagree with that. Facing unemployment and losing your home means your choices aren't free, you get on your bike and make whatever compromises you have to.

It's a bit like saying those people locked in the hull of dodgy migrant boats made a free choice when they had a gun held to their head. They had a free choice to say no right?

gadgetmind

lisyloo wrote: »

Do you think someone with a choice between a £100k job in London vs unemployment has a free choice?

Yes, that is the very real choice faced by exactly no-one.

lisyloo

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Their choices are constrained by their willingness to make sacrifices, generally to money and lifestyle. There's loads of call centre jobs near me (cycle distance) at 18-20k, 3 bed houses for 100k, no crime to speak of and good schools. One of you working there, the other a 'child minder' with tax credits. Pretty good life.

Apart from having to care for disabled relatives, why on earth would we give up 2 good jobs to do what you suggest?

lisyloo

gadgetmind wrote: »

Yes, that is the very real choice faced by exactly no-one.

Can't prove it but that's the real situation.
I can't really carry on a debate very easily with someone calling me a bare faced liar.
The higher you get in your career the fewer jobs there are. People think it's easy to downgrade but no-one will employ you as a project manager or coder if you haven't done it for 20 years. Companies do not want over qualified people who in their eyes are entirely unsuitable.
Before you say there are cleaning/call center jobs, why would you do that if you wanted to be CEO, sure you'd carry on looking for as long as you could for your dream job, before you look at toilet cleaning?

The bottom line is we became economically mobile for work/career reasons.
It wasn't a free choice, we did it for the work.
That's not a complaint it's a statement of fact.
If you are denying that people make compromises for work and don't live/work in their first choice place then you are in denial.
There are loads of people making compromises in London. Some of them living away from their families, some of them doing long commutes.
They make the best choice/compromise that they can but when family/money/schools etc. Are factored in they often don't have free choice over location.

I'm not sure what the argument is actually about,
I just don't agree it's a free choice I.e free of other significant pressures.

Mistermeaner

lisyloo wrote: »

Apart from having to care for disabled relatives, why on earth would we give up 2 good jobs to do what you suggest?

Sorry you've lost me; I wasn't being specific about you (we?) Just making a general point that those who moan about long commutes and London house prices do have choice to live an easier life, much more cheaply, elsewhere.

Generali

gadgetmind wrote: »

Yes, that is the very real choice faced by exactly no-one.

When I was in investment banking and particularly in FX I could either have a highly paid job in London or no job at all.

Mistermeaner

Generali wrote: »

When I was in investment banking and particularly in FX I could either have a highly paid job in London or no job at all.

Yet somehow you have a job that is not in london

CLAPTON

Generali wrote: »

When I was in investment banking and particularly in FX I could either have a highly paid job in London or no job at all.

no, you would have made a fine bar steward