That’s still someone’s rent and food money you are withholding from them by not tipping. It’s a fucked up system, but they wont be compensated by their boss when you stiff them. So not giving them that tip could be the difference between choosing to pay for rent or groceries this week.
Refusing to tip does nothing but harm workers and allowing the owners to continue to profit. The whole system needs to be reworked from the top down. There is no reason that a restaurant can’t just pay their workers a fair wage. They could also just automatically give the staff X% of total sales, but then that starts to sound like a co-op, and then people might start to ask themselves what the owner actually does for the restaurant.
That’s still someone’s rent and food money the employer is withholding from them by not paying them adequately.
FTFY
Read my original comment again…slowly. We need to stop subsidizing cheap fuckers by tipping and instead bring our business to establishments that pay their employees fairly and ideally ban or discourage tipping. Tip culture is an American anomaly because our system is ridiculously exploitative.
Hey, careful. It looks like you are putting words in their mouth. The difference between eating out and not tipping and not eating out at all is that one involves you getting the product of labor from a waiter where the other does not.
That makes all the difference between those examples so it’s not fair to equivocate them.
I mean, they pushed back against someone who specifically said they avoid establishments where they are required to tip. What else can I get from that?
Did you read their comment beyond the first two words?
They explicitly said to stop tipping by deciding to instead go to places that ban tipping, price goods higher, and pay their employees fairly. None of your argument about “you need to tip people who rely on tips” applies to what they said. You jumped to your “haha gotcha” moment a bit prematurely.
their use of the conjunction “and” instead of “by” also had me confused at first but yes your interpretation is more accurate given further discussion which you can see following my reply.
BakerBagel’s position is also valid it just looks like there was misunderstanding.
I’ve never seen it either. I’ve heard of it though, but only in wealthier areas. Working class people don’t have the luxury of deciding to pay extra to alleviate human suffering - it’s the same reason walmart consumes all other choices; the average person chooses the cheapest option because they’re already scraping by. A more relatable take would be to just opt out of eating at places that demand tips – I already do that, but only because I can’t afford to eat out anyway :)
That’s still someone’s rent and food money you are withholding from them by not tipping. It’s a fucked up system, but they wont be compensated by their boss when you stiff them. So not giving them that tip could be the difference between choosing to pay for rent or groceries this week.
Refusing to tip does nothing but harm workers and allowing the owners to continue to profit. The whole system needs to be reworked from the top down. There is no reason that a restaurant can’t just pay their workers a fair wage. They could also just automatically give the staff X% of total sales, but then that starts to sound like a co-op, and then people might start to ask themselves what the owner actually does for the restaurant.
FTFY
Read my original comment again…slowly. We need to stop subsidizing cheap fuckers by tipping and instead bring our business to establishments that pay their employees fairly and ideally ban or discourage tipping. Tip culture is an American anomaly because our system is ridiculously exploitative.
Wait, are you saying that they’re withholding rent and food money from servers by avoiding establishments that expect tipping?
Are we now obligated to eat out?
Hey, careful. It looks like you are putting words in their mouth. The difference between eating out and not tipping and not eating out at all is that one involves you getting the product of labor from a waiter where the other does not.
That makes all the difference between those examples so it’s not fair to equivocate them.
I mean, they pushed back against someone who specifically said they avoid establishments where they are required to tip. What else can I get from that?
see my comment here. there was a pretty decent misunderstanding going on from what i can tell.
I think I get what you’re saying there. I was reading their comment in the context of how I read what they were replying to.
Did you read their comment beyond the first two words?
They explicitly said to stop tipping by deciding to instead go to places that ban tipping, price goods higher, and pay their employees fairly. None of your argument about “you need to tip people who rely on tips” applies to what they said. You jumped to your “haha gotcha” moment a bit prematurely.
their use of the conjunction “and” instead of “by” also had me confused at first but yes your interpretation is more accurate given further discussion which you can see following my reply.
BakerBagel’s position is also valid it just looks like there was misunderstanding.
Is this a big city thing? This is the first time I’ve ever heard of this.
I’ve never seen it either. I’ve heard of it though, but only in wealthier areas. Working class people don’t have the luxury of deciding to pay extra to alleviate human suffering - it’s the same reason walmart consumes all other choices; the average person chooses the cheapest option because they’re already scraping by. A more relatable take would be to just opt out of eating at places that demand tips – I already do that, but only because I can’t afford to eat out anyway :)
I don’t think they were saying to just stop tipping, but to go to places where tips aren’t expected