I tend not to begrudge folks the right to be bitter or feel disenfranchised at the world. We all get the butt end of things in our own time, and it's never fun losing it.
The market shifting, leaving one high and dry, while inevitable, should not obligate someone to be chipper and happy-go-lucky about it.
What else do you call a fluid market change in reaction to a obstruction in the form of collective action undertaken by the State? The State doesn't exist separate from the Market, nor does the Market exist separate from the State. Both underpin the others existence. To see it any other way is folly, or at least the least conceivably useful way of trying to forecast probable outcomes on any scale appreciably large.
You see a market failure, I reject your perception of a particular vein of economic activity remaining worthwhile in perpetuity as an accurate understanding of a Market to fail, and instead accept that all economic activity is fluid and necessarily reactive to physical and political constraints.
Just look at Turnips or Onions to break yourself of a mistaken belief that Markets don't inherently rely on the State to price in what's practical; and hell, half the point of a State is to make the effective price of something so high, people don't do it.
Sure thing, but wouldn't it be better to then just say "I feel sad, angry or bitter about the job I thought I could have for an indeterminate amount of time"?
Using words like 'robbed' just hides both facts (no the job was not robbed, yes you are sad/angry about the situation). And by hiding facts like that we end up with populism and lies.
