Somewhat politics-ish but it's still very Inceldom related. Lookism creates an inefficiency. In a free market, the assumption is that the optimal outcome will be brought forth via the profit system. Profit reflects value creation, your outputs minus your inputs. If you're a business and you optimize resources in a way that makes them more valuable than the sum of its parts, congratulations, you earn profit. If I buy metal, wood, hire workers, and build a house that's worth more than the cost of said inputs, I make PROFIT.
One would expect that overtime the most efficient allocator of resources (entrepreneurs) would win out in the end, but that's not always the case. One classic example of this is RACISM. Libertarian opposition to the Civil Rights act of 1964 argued that in the long term businesses that discriminate solely based on race would lose to companies with a more open minded approach. If competent blacks were not being hired for their skin color, another business would come along and swoop them up for a discounted wage, that business would win out because it's willing to utilize a resource that the other company wouldn't, hence, optimizing for PROFIT. But that didn't happen. In many States, racism persisted until State Constitutions forbid it... and in the States that didn't... until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which banned the practice nationally. Even then, companies found other reasons not to hire blacks, it wasn't really until Nixon's implementation of affirmative action that we really saw mass mobilization of blacks into the workplace and bureaucracy.
Lookism is the exact same way. Dumb hot girls getting jobs just because they're hot. Chads getting spotted by recruiters on linkedin because they have a better jaw (I literally proved this by Chadifying myself on linkedin and got way more responses). Until the government CRACKS DOWN on this practice, it will continue to exist, and the economic system will suffer accordingly.
One would expect that overtime the most efficient allocator of resources (entrepreneurs) would win out in the end, but that's not always the case. One classic example of this is RACISM. Libertarian opposition to the Civil Rights act of 1964 argued that in the long term businesses that discriminate solely based on race would lose to companies with a more open minded approach. If competent blacks were not being hired for their skin color, another business would come along and swoop them up for a discounted wage, that business would win out because it's willing to utilize a resource that the other company wouldn't, hence, optimizing for PROFIT. But that didn't happen. In many States, racism persisted until State Constitutions forbid it... and in the States that didn't... until the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which banned the practice nationally. Even then, companies found other reasons not to hire blacks, it wasn't really until Nixon's implementation of affirmative action that we really saw mass mobilization of blacks into the workplace and bureaucracy.
Lookism is the exact same way. Dumb hot girls getting jobs just because they're hot. Chads getting spotted by recruiters on linkedin because they have a better jaw (I literally proved this by Chadifying myself on linkedin and got way more responses). Until the government CRACKS DOWN on this practice, it will continue to exist, and the economic system will suffer accordingly.
