As an international student in Canada, some of the customs may seem unfamiliar. On my first dining experience with fellow foreign classmates; none of us left a tip. As a result, the waiter unhappily asked if there was anything wrong with the service and proceeded to explain the tradition of tipping in North America. I found myself relating to Danson Nguyen‘s blog explaining his own misunderstanding after paying a tip in a country that does not recognize it.

When an employee’s income is mostly based on uncertain “gifts” from consumers, it places them in an uncomfortable and biased situation. Consumers’ tips may vary due to the appearance, ethnicity or race of he employee, in addition to the mood of the consumer. In fact, women earn $1 more an hour in tips than men as Bourree Lam states. It sound bizarre when you say that a waiter’s income is merely based on luck, and that is exactly what happens. The whole idea of percentages is peculiar. Does the waiter work harder when I order a $200 bottle of champagne as oppose to a $30 one?

Any individual’s income is subject to tax, but how can you properly tax a non stable income? Other employees at a restaurant are paid a fixed hourly wage that is taxed after every month. However, waiters can easily report a lower income – not announcing all their earnings from tips – and get away with paying less taxes.

The concept of tips as an income allows some customers to behave in unmannerly attitudes. Research shows that waitresses tolerate sexual harassment from customers because they’re afraid they may not get paid.

With all that being said in addition to the points Nguyen mentioned, its easy to say that tips are an unfair, unstable and unethical form of income to those being tipped and to those not. As a result, I believe tips should be banned and the minimum wage for waiters and waitresses should be raised to the same level as that of any other employee. As Nguyen mentions, food prices will increase as a consequence of the wage raise, however, waiters will enjoy a more stable form of income, and the consumers remain unaffected as the rise in prices takes the place of mandatory tips. Tips are meant to be a generous offer from the customer to the employee, but it stops being a gift once it concludes the employees income.

Word Count: 401

References

“How Much Do Waiters Really Earn In Tips?”. The Atlantic. N.p., 2016. Web. 31 Oct. 2016.

“Why Tipping Is Unethical”. Talking Ethics. N.p., 2016. Web. 31 Oct. 2016.

Image:

“Banned Tips – Google Search”. Google.ca. N.p., 2016. Web. 31 Oct. 2016.

In my previous Blog post, I spoke about how Calico can strategize and Market their “immortality” product whether it may come in pills or an injection. If you haven’t read the first part of this blog post I highly suggest you do. However, there is more to it than that. How will the government allow this? And what are the determinants of who purchases eternity? This one topic arises a huge ethical dilemma yet it does not seem to be commonly discussed.

According to the bioethicist John Harris, science has the moral duty of extending humans’ lifespan to as far as it will go. He claimed that “[w]hen you save a life, you are simply postponing death to another point. Thus, we are committed to extending life indefinitely if we can, for the same reasons that we are committed to life-saving.” To an extent, this is true, but extending a few years of someone’s lifespan is clearly different than allowing them to survive for eternity.

Let’s assume Calico’s product comes in the form of an injection. Will only the rich be immortal? If we think in the same way as John Harris, then the answer will be yes. If you come to think about it, this is the case today with “life-extension.” Only those who can afford medical treatment receive it. Thus, the injustice has always been an issue and will continue to be with life expansion, but is not a valid reason to prevent this product from distribution. Harris claims that preventing a group of people from this technology will not help save the others who can’t manage to pay for it.

Let’s also assume that Calico’s injection would be one where you have to pay an annual installment, much like insurance. What happens when you can’t afford to pay anymore? Does that mean that a producer has the power to give the death sentence? And what is the role of the government in this?

“There is not love of life without despair about life.” Said Albert Camus. We’ve all heard of saying about how life would be meaningless if it had no end and to an extent it’s true. Why would anyone want to get things done if there were no deadline? Perhaps this new technology will make us look at suicide and euthanasia from a very different perspective. Perhaps Science has the right to develop this product. Perhaps this product should be marketed, and only time will truly reveal how life is meant to be.

Word Count: 418

References

“Quotes About Mortality (385 Quotes)”. Goodreads.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

Science, Live. “The Ethical Dilemmas Of Immortality”. Live Science. N.p., 2006. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

“Humans will soon be immortal,” said my high school biology teacher. “Science and technology have advanced far enough that scientists are building human organs, and it won’t be long until they replicate DNA and avoid the sequences from deteriorating.” In the 1900s humans had a lifespan of about 40 years. Nowadays the average human is said to live about 80 years, and newborns today are expected to live up to 150 years! So could these numbers just keep increasing? Will they reach infinity?

Laurie-Anne Vazquez mentions in her blog “How Science is Making Immortality a Reality,” that an enzyme telomerase is responsible for DNA capping. During the process of capping DNA, the cell loses little information on how to rebuild itself, thus aging. Scientists are working on preventing the cell from losing this information, and once they do, humans will be eternal. In fact, google claims that immortality may be reached by 2030!

Calico is a research and development company established by Google with the aim to combat aging and related diseases. But what happens if Calico does, in fact, develop an “anti-aging” cure? What could be some of their possible strategies to sell their product? This I believe is subject to one unanswered questions. Will the cure to aging come in pill form or an injection?

If the cure comes in pills, then the answer is much simpler. Calico could sell their pills to customers and the users will follow a strict dosage. In this case, Calico doesn’t need to set a ridiculous price on their product because the consumer will keep paying for eternity, thus can control the market with a differentiated and cost effective product. Calico can then own a patent, become a monopoly, and make a profit for eternity, literally.

The situation becomes increasingly complex if the cure comes in the form of an injection. Calico will still have a differentiated product, however, this is a one-time deal. You go into a lab, get an injection, and Voilá, you can live forever. Calico will have to set an absurd price for this injection and will only profit from the filthy rich in the short term and will eventually run out of business. They could also set a decent price on their injection with a contract stating that the consumer must pay an annual fee, much like insurance. However, the consequence of not paying may be to receive an antidote to the injection or possibly be deprived of life, almost completely diminishing the market for the cure, that is if the government even allows a producer to give the “death sentence.”

Word Count: 436

References

“Calico”. Calicolabs.com. N.p., 2016. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

“Calico (Company)”. Wikipedia. N.p., 2016. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

“Google Ventures And The Search For Immortality”. Bloomberg.com. N.p., 2015. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

“How Science Is Making Immortality A Reality | Fiat Physica Blog”. Fiatphysica. N.p., 2016. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

Joslin, Jeffrey and Jeffrey Joslin. “Immortality Is Achievable, Says Google’s Biotech Firm Calico”. Tech Gen Mag. N.p., 2015. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

“Could Your Child Live To Be 150 Years Old?”. Mail Online. N.p., 2016. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.