Hacker News Reader

Comment by DistressedDrone | Hacker News Reader

> If you need the money desperately then do what you need to do, but if you can afford to take a role somewhere else you should.

I would never work for Google or Facebook (and they wouldn't hire me), but it's not fair to expect normal people to choose between their financial needs and an abstract notion of the greater good.

I find this idea puts the pressure on the individual for systemic problems. I am not responsible for what my employer does outside of my own output, and if I had a family to feed I would say: all my financial needs are desperate, fix your own damn world.

View on HN

> but it's not fair to expect normal people to choose between their financial needs and an abstract notion of the greater good.

Truly, I have a more optimistic view of normal people.

And we're not talking about choosing to work for Google, or, sorry, no food on the table tonight.

Upper middle class people from high GDP countries do have the choice. There are many opportunities where a talented individual will make more than enough.

But what about people from countries like India? Talented people will jump in in a heartbeat. And I have never ever known any person who has turned down Google or Facebook's offer with US/EU posting. Even people coming from _very_ privileged families.

Knowing India, this is justified to me.

Anything you do contributes to what your employer does, other wise what are you doing at work. Especially in a tech company. We absolutely should put pressure on these employees of companies. People working at google, facebook etc are not barely getting by. Theyre people fought over, being paid enormous amount of money.

We're not talking about people who have no other choice here, we're talking about software engineers. We are the most in-demand, remote friendly profession on the planet right now. The choice isn't between Facebook and starvation for us, the choice is between netting $250,000/yr at a very questionable company or $100,000/yr anywhere else.

If working for Facebook or Google is an option for you, you are not at risk of not meeting your financial needs.

> I find this idea puts the pressure on the individual for systemic problems.

Systemic problems don’t exist: they are the problems of individuals and their interactions observed at scale. Your next sentence highlights why systemic problems exist at all: deferral of responsibility.

With this attitude, why would anyone look to better the world?

I expect normal people with ethics to reject employers that lack them.

I for one would sooner give up on technology and be a poor farmer than work for Facebook or Google.

They are undoubtedly a net negative in the world and I don't see how any ethical person could die with pride having made them bigger for money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com