This is a standard cop-out that bears challenging every time it's used.
By refusing the job, you narrow the number of people who can do the job, making it more expensive, both because there are fewer candidates to do the job and because it makes the hunt for employees take longer. It also gives cover for others who aren't confident to stand against the job by themselves when they see others refuse it.
There's a non-zero chance that refusing such a job means it becomes too expensive to be feasible, especially if it requires expertise held by a limited set of individuals.
> By refusing the job, you narrow the number of people who can do the job
By refusing a job, I only narrow my employment opportunities.
The bank won't take my goodwill as payment before they take the house for not paying the mortgage. This is essentially where the discussion ends.
The world is cursed. I have to engage with systems that were not of my creation, and that will devour me if I am complacent. But we keep moving forward anyway.
I would like these companies to not exist. For the billionaires that direct them to create immeasurable damage to society to pay for their misdeeds. I even vote for whichever party that promises to limit the reach of those companies.
What I won't do is damage the lives of those that depend on me in an empty gesture of moral grandstanding.
By refusing the job, you narrow the number of people who can do the job, making it more expensive, both because there are fewer candidates to do the job and because it makes the hunt for employees take longer. It also gives cover for others who aren't confident to stand against the job by themselves when they see others refuse it.
There's a non-zero chance that refusing such a job means it becomes too expensive to be feasible, especially if it requires expertise held by a limited set of individuals.