共感で繋がるSNS

人気

関連検索ワード

新着

Liam

Liam

Tipping is often defended as part of cultural tradition, particularly in North America. However, on closer inspection, tipping is not a genuine cultural practice but merely an economic arrangement that has been mischaracterised as such.

Historically, tipping emerged from a hierarchical society in which nobles would offer small amounts of money to their servants as an act of patronage. Far from being a celebration of culture, it was an expression of inequality and dependence. Its continuation in modern societies is therefore not a matter of heritage, but rather an outdated economic trick.

In contemporary practice, tipping complicates transactions and obscures the real cost of services. What appears to be a voluntary act of generosity is in fact a mechanism through which businesses shift responsibility for fair wages onto the customer. This undermines both service quality and economic transparency. Service staff are incentivised not to provide consistently high standards, but to focus selectively on customers who seem likely to offer higher tips. Employers, meanwhile, reduce their tax burden by keeping base wages artificially low and treating gratuities as external supplements. The result is a system in which workers are underpaid, customers are misled, and public revenue is diminished.

A more rational and equitable solution is to abolish tipping as a formal expectation. Instead, service charges should either be included in the price of food and drink or collected uniformly as a service fee. This approach ensures clarity, fairness, and accountability: customers know the true cost, workers receive stable pay, and the state can tax wages transparently.

In conclusion, tipping should not be mistaken for culture. It is a relic of feudal patronage that survives today only as a means of concealing costs and transferring responsibility. Modern societies should recognise it for what it is: a flawed economic practice, and one best replaced by a fairer and more transparent system.
GRAVITY6
GRAVITY11
さりえる

さりえる

英語で真行草を言うのであれば、真は「Roman style(欧文書体の基本形)」、行は「Italic style(手書き風の斜体)」、草は「Script style(筆記体)」という方が本来の意味に近くなる。

Formal・Semi-formal・Infomalというのではニュアンスが全く違う。

真書体というのは公文書にも使われる文字のこと。古くは篆書体でしたが、のちに楷書体が真になりました。

行書体は草書体をベースに読みやすくした書体。古くは隷書体が行書体でしたが、楷書体が生まれると現在の行書体に変わりました。

草書体は篆書の崩し字です。ちなみに隷書より草書の方が先に生まれています。
GRAVITY
GRAVITY16
もっとみる

おすすめのクリエーター