4 ms·

Because most work sucks, and 99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long. If you remove the artificial incentives to work, no

by hodwik 11y ago

Because most work sucks, and 99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long. If you remove the artificial incentives to work, no one will work.

TeMPOraL 11y ago
> Because most work sucks, and 99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long. That's bullshit view of humanity and frankly, insulting to me as a human being. If you really take a look at "99% of people" you'll see individuals with dreams and passions, most of whom never get to realize them. That nice girl who served you burger and fries in a drive-thru? She wanted to be a pianist, but she had to enter the job market early. She is knitting over the weekend and cares about local problems. That taxi driver who drove you to work probably builds RC planes in the little free time he has, or maybe serves in HOA. If you really, really look at general population, you'll see people with energy to build, create and experiment. Some of them get lucky and find a fulfilling job. Most of them have to try and cram their real work into weekends, if they even have them. And yes, a lot of them come back from work and go straight to drinking and watching TV - because that's the only thing you can do to relax after you spend all your energy on a 8+ hour job and commute. It's a symptom. Yes, if you remove artificial incentives to work, some people will stop working. Maybe a lot. They'll go drinking, spending time with friends, and trying to figure out what they really care about in life, now that they have time. And most will likely get bored after at most a month of drinking and start doing something productive. Because humans in general have the need to build, create and improve. Things will have to be rearranged; some jobs automated, others maybe taken in short shifts out of the sense of social responsibility. But they will get done. Reality is not WALL-E.
- copperx 11y ago
  This. If I became a millionaire overnight I would probably take a month off to be supremely lazy. Then I would get back to work in whatever strikes my fancy, probably for VERY long hours.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - hodwik 11y ago
    "whatever strikes my fancy" is very likely not something we need to survive on this planet as a species. Do you have any idea how much mindless, painful, miserable work the people of Earth do to allow you to have a computer connected to the internet, with food in your belly, streets to your house, a house to live in, with electricity to turn on? Only on a site for programming could so many people honestly believe such a white-collar-centric hypothesis.
    - s73v3r 11y ago
      ""whatever strikes my fancy" is very likely not something we need to survive on this planet as a species." So? Neither is what 99% of companies are doing.
    - TeMPOraL 11y ago
      > Do you have any idea how much mindless, painful, miserable work the people of Earth do to allow you to have a computer connected to the internet, with food in your belly, streets to your house, a house to live in, with electricity to turn on? That's why Basic Income is a topic now and not 100 or 1000 year ago. We know we could automate most of that survival-level task, at least in principle; at minimum reduce it to small amount of maintenance job while we push for development of self-healing materials. Also, UBI seems inevitable now - because the market starts to incentivize automation of everything, and that means most people will be out of jobs soon anyway. You prefer them to starve and/or rebel and trash all our progress, or shall we just skip that bullshit and go straight to something better? > Only on a site for programming could so many people honestly believe such a white-collar-centric hypothesis. Or maybe this "site for programming" is acutely aware of our current level of technological development.
      - hodwik 11y ago
        >"You prefer them to starve and/or rebel and trash all our progress, or shall we just skip that bullshit and go straight to something better?" Irrelevant. Technological progress does not erase work, it merely changes what work the market will pay for people to do: -People will hire teams of people to play video games with them. -They will hire teams of costume designers to create wild, highly personalized clothing for them. -They will pay for live musicians in their living rooms. -They will pay young beautiful people to lounge around in their living rooms. -They will pay large teams to plan and cater elaborate parties in their homes. -They will purchase expensive hand-thrown dishes, because they'll think it shows their authenticity and good taste. -Homes will be decorated to a degree which we have little conception of today. -Teams of well-paid cinematographers will produce their home movies. -People will buy social media teams to write funny twitter posts for them. To us this all seems very frivolous, but the general populace of the 1600's would have thought the same of most of what we do: Our insistence on buying numerous outfits, that we would pay someone else to paint our house, that we buy new shoes when our old ones look worn, that people are hired just to decorate coffee shops and concert venues, sign spinners, travel agents, ballet instructors, and so on. If you can't imagine what they will hire people to do, that just says that you're not "frivolous" enough to understand the whims of the people of the future. You'd hate them if you met them, but their system will actually work, unlike UBI.
- hodwik 11y ago
  >"wanted to be a pianist" >"builds RC planes" Like I said. People don't want to work. You just changed the examples of not working to be more elitist. Who tars the roof? Who wades through clogged sewer lines? Who mines the rare metals in your cellphone? Who farms the maggots for industrial fisheries? Who makes the textiles? Who slaughters the cattle? Proctologist? Who embalms our dead? Who does QA for your phone's RAM? Who cleans up the remains at violent crime scenes? Who solders together your alarm clock? Who tears out asbestos?
  - clock_tower 11y ago
    Who does this sort of work? People who want to make more money than the basic income, were I to guess. These jobs (insofar as they need to be done, and some certainly do) will always be difficult, dangerous, and/or repulsive; but with basic income, they'd have to offer enough money and prestige to attract people who are now free to walk away.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    > Like I said. People don't want to work. No. You said, I quote, "99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long". My examples are all kinds of things you can get paid for if you are lucky and that use skills important for providing value to society. > Who tars the roof? Who wades through clogged sewer lines? Initially people, for additional money. Later, machines. > Who mines the rare metals in your cellphone? Who farms the maggots for industrial fisheries? Who makes the textiles? Who slaughters the cattle? Machines. > Proctologist? Who embalms our dead? People, for additional money. > Who does QA for your phone's RAM? Machines. > Who cleans up the remains at violent crime scenes? People, for additional money. > Who solders together your alarm clock? Machines. > Who tears out asbestos? We don't use it anymore. There's a spectrum between "no one working anymore" and "UBI giving you other choice than work or starve".
  - littletimmy 11y ago
    Pay up. If it is important enough to you that you want it done, pay above basic minimum wage and someone will do it for you. Must we keep people in wage slavery because you want your roof tarred? We've heard this sort of argument before, of course. Back before the emancipation, some white landlord would say "If we let these negroes go, who is going to pick the cotton?" --- We ended slavery, and we should end wage slavery.
- lmm 11y ago
  I used to think that, but in reality how do people who don't have to work spend their days? I can think of two categories of such people: those unemployed who are paid benefits and not obliged to look for work (in the US through accidents of history this is largely those on disability) and the children of wealthy parents. Neither seem to live happy lives, and in the case of the children of the rich (and, equally, retired people), those who are most fulfilled tend to be those who found conventional employment or something very much like it. I've known friends who took a sabbatical intending to e.g. write a novel, only to find they actually preferred working.

by hodwik 11y ago

Because most work sucks, and 99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long. If you remove the artificial incentives to work, no one will work.

TeMPOraL 11y ago

> Because most work sucks, and 99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long. That's bullshit view of humanity and frankly, insulting to me as a human being. If you really take a look at "99% of people" you'll see individuals with dreams and passions, most of whom never get to realize them. That nice girl who served you burger and fries in a drive-thru? She wanted to be a pianist, but she had to enter the job market early. She is knitting over the weekend and cares about local problems. That taxi driver who drove you to work probably builds RC planes in the little free time he has, or maybe serves in HOA. If you really, really look at general population, you'll see people with energy to build, create and experiment. Some of them get lucky and find a fulfilling job. Most of them have to try and cram their real work into weekends, if they even have them. And yes, a lot of them come back from work and go straight to drinking and watching TV - because that's the only thing you can do to relax after you spend all your energy on a 8+ hour job and commute. It's a symptom. Yes, if you remove artificial incentives to work, some people will stop working. Maybe a lot. They'll go drinking, spending time with friends, and trying to figure out what they really care about in life, now that they have time. And most will likely get bored after at most a month of drinking and start doing something productive. Because humans in general have the need to build, create and improve. Things will have to be rearranged; some jobs automated, others maybe taken in short shifts out of the sense of social responsibility. But they will get done. Reality is not WALL-E.

copperx 11y ago
This. If I became a millionaire overnight I would probably take a month off to be supremely lazy. Then I would get back to work in whatever strikes my fancy, probably for VERY long hours.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- hodwik 11y ago
  "whatever strikes my fancy" is very likely not something we need to survive on this planet as a species. Do you have any idea how much mindless, painful, miserable work the people of Earth do to allow you to have a computer connected to the internet, with food in your belly, streets to your house, a house to live in, with electricity to turn on? Only on a site for programming could so many people honestly believe such a white-collar-centric hypothesis.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    ""whatever strikes my fancy" is very likely not something we need to survive on this planet as a species." So? Neither is what 99% of companies are doing.
  - TeMPOraL 11y ago
    > Do you have any idea how much mindless, painful, miserable work the people of Earth do to allow you to have a computer connected to the internet, with food in your belly, streets to your house, a house to live in, with electricity to turn on? That's why Basic Income is a topic now and not 100 or 1000 year ago. We know we could automate most of that survival-level task, at least in principle; at minimum reduce it to small amount of maintenance job while we push for development of self-healing materials. Also, UBI seems inevitable now - because the market starts to incentivize automation of everything, and that means most people will be out of jobs soon anyway. You prefer them to starve and/or rebel and trash all our progress, or shall we just skip that bullshit and go straight to something better? > Only on a site for programming could so many people honestly believe such a white-collar-centric hypothesis. Or maybe this "site for programming" is acutely aware of our current level of technological development.
    - hodwik 11y ago
      >"You prefer them to starve and/or rebel and trash all our progress, or shall we just skip that bullshit and go straight to something better?" Irrelevant. Technological progress does not erase work, it merely changes what work the market will pay for people to do: -People will hire teams of people to play video games with them. -They will hire teams of costume designers to create wild, highly personalized clothing for them. -They will pay for live musicians in their living rooms. -They will pay young beautiful people to lounge around in their living rooms. -They will pay large teams to plan and cater elaborate parties in their homes. -They will purchase expensive hand-thrown dishes, because they'll think it shows their authenticity and good taste. -Homes will be decorated to a degree which we have little conception of today. -Teams of well-paid cinematographers will produce their home movies. -People will buy social media teams to write funny twitter posts for them. To us this all seems very frivolous, but the general populace of the 1600's would have thought the same of most of what we do: Our insistence on buying numerous outfits, that we would pay someone else to paint our house, that we buy new shoes when our old ones look worn, that people are hired just to decorate coffee shops and concert venues, sign spinners, travel agents, ballet instructors, and so on. If you can't imagine what they will hire people to do, that just says that you're not "frivolous" enough to understand the whims of the people of the future. You'd hate them if you met them, but their system will actually work, unlike UBI.
hodwik 11y ago
>"wanted to be a pianist" >"builds RC planes" Like I said. People don't want to work. You just changed the examples of not working to be more elitist. Who tars the roof? Who wades through clogged sewer lines? Who mines the rare metals in your cellphone? Who farms the maggots for industrial fisheries? Who makes the textiles? Who slaughters the cattle? Proctologist? Who embalms our dead? Who does QA for your phone's RAM? Who cleans up the remains at violent crime scenes? Who solders together your alarm clock? Who tears out asbestos?
- clock_tower 11y ago
  Who does this sort of work? People who want to make more money than the basic income, were I to guess. These jobs (insofar as they need to be done, and some certainly do) will always be difficult, dangerous, and/or repulsive; but with basic income, they'd have to offer enough money and prestige to attract people who are now free to walk away.
- TeMPOraL 11y ago
  > Like I said. People don't want to work. No. You said, I quote, "99% of people would rather be screwing, drinking and watching TV all day long". My examples are all kinds of things you can get paid for if you are lucky and that use skills important for providing value to society. > Who tars the roof? Who wades through clogged sewer lines? Initially people, for additional money. Later, machines. > Who mines the rare metals in your cellphone? Who farms the maggots for industrial fisheries? Who makes the textiles? Who slaughters the cattle? Machines. > Proctologist? Who embalms our dead? People, for additional money. > Who does QA for your phone's RAM? Machines. > Who cleans up the remains at violent crime scenes? People, for additional money. > Who solders together your alarm clock? Machines. > Who tears out asbestos? We don't use it anymore. There's a spectrum between "no one working anymore" and "UBI giving you other choice than work or starve".
- littletimmy 11y ago
  Pay up. If it is important enough to you that you want it done, pay above basic minimum wage and someone will do it for you. Must we keep people in wage slavery because you want your roof tarred? We've heard this sort of argument before, of course. Back before the emancipation, some white landlord would say "If we let these negroes go, who is going to pick the cotton?" --- We ended slavery, and we should end wage slavery.
lmm 11y ago
I used to think that, but in reality how do people who don't have to work spend their days? I can think of two categories of such people: those unemployed who are paid benefits and not obliged to look for work (in the US through accidents of history this is largely those on disability) and the children of wealthy parents. Neither seem to live happy lives, and in the case of the children of the rich (and, equally, retired people), those who are most fulfilled tend to be those who found conventional employment or something very much like it. I've known friends who took a sabbatical intending to e.g. write a novel, only to find they actually preferred working.