As someone who is currently still in education for their degree looking at the current (and likely future) economic and societal outlook, it seems like employment in fields that cause/perpetuate negative issues in the world (Big Tech/Military-Industrial Complex, industries contributing to climate change, predatory sales/financial firms) continue to maintain strong employment availability and salaries as time goes on.
However, fields that have a neutral or beneficial impact on society and the world (Medical care, Food service, public infrastructure, humanitarian aid work, environmental research), either don’t have enough available positions that people are able to transition into, have worsening working conditions due to poor management or limited resources, or just don’t pay a living wage to most who work there.
I’ve read about the broken window fallacy, and I understand how focusing on personal gain without considering the impacts on the wider picture doesn’t make for a better world. But can someone feel justified contributing to the “broken windows” of the world knowing that they weren’t presented functional alternative pathways, and try to contribute towards the solution in other ways?
I can’t. One of my job requirements is that I need to work someplace I think is at least neutral, or is good. So far it’s only been neutral and I am ok with that.
I do think some people can be a force for good in a bad place but I am not strong enough to do that.
Edit to add an example - I heard a story about a guy working in corrections - a prison warden - who was working to change the system from punitive to remedial, and had reduced recidivism by a huge amount, like it’s 5%, compared to 50% in most of the nation. I think he is a good person in an evil industry (the American prison industry). Randy Liberty. Not kidding, that is his real name.