3 ms·

Humans have incredible propensity to acclimatize to the environment. That's the only reasoning I could arrive at when I was poor and saw people around willing t

Humans have incredible propensity to acclimatize to the environment. That's the only reasoning I could arrive at when I was poor and saw people around willing to do the most mundane back breaking work than to seek other forms of employment. The lever that is used in society today is desperation as opposed to higher pay per hr in the "Looking Backward" case. The sanitation worker doesn't enjoy their work and no amount of lower hours may compel them to be scarred by the experience. On the other hand desperation and hunger forces them to take what ever job they could salvage. Most of them would would get used to it while some would work their way out.

justncase80 11y ago
I believe convincing people to do "bad jobs" by means of desperation is named Wage Slavery. Besides being immoral and degrading, its pretty inefficient. On the other hand, some jobs that need to be done plain out unpleasant. How do you convince someone to do it? In the Looking Backwards scenario the incentive to do one of the "bad jobs" isn't being paid more per hour, everyone is paid the same, its working less hours which I think is subtly different.
- anon4 11y ago
  Less hours at the same pay is more money per hour. But there is a subtle difference - cleaning toilets for 2 hours is much different mentally than cleaning toilets for 8 hours. And you can then go look after dogs at the shelter for 4 more hours and get two paychecks.
  - justncase80 11y ago
    Yes, its more money per hour of work but its not more money per week in this system.
- boona 11y ago
  Everyone needs to pitch in, you need to serve humanity so that it provides you with the things you need. If the only thing you can do to do your part is sanitation work, then sanitation work it shall be. That is, until you find new ways to serve others. Slavery is something altogether different, and you really have to be in a position of privilege to conflate the two. The history of slavery is an incredibly dark one. Out of respect to those who've suffered under it's cruelty, I don't think it's right to use that word in this context. Doing your part is not slavery.
  - justncase80 11y ago
    Yes agreed, in any social system everyone needs to work (if able) in order for society to thrive. Wage slavery is a very specific term that I didn't just make up and I believe it accurately describes what you were talking about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
    - boona 11y ago
      I know the term, as well as Marx's class theory. Pointing me to a Wikipedia article doesn't change the fact that it's insensitive hyperbole.
justncase80 11y ago
Also, besides "getting used to it" or "working their way out of it" there are a few other quite grim possibilities that can happen in Wage Slavery. Namely suffering and early death. Sometimes the workers band together (aka unionize) or straight up rebel causing civil war. These are all things that have happened in the past, could happen again in the future.
- hvfhhvv 11y ago
  Early death is not just a possibility. Stress is associated with undesirable jobs. Stress causes early death. The poor have shorter less happy lives because they are stressed. We live in a disgusting, indeffensible world full of small minded little people.
otakucode 11y ago
I think it is very important not to forget another factor - the Protestant Work Ethic. This had a gigantic influence on US culture and we still live with it today. It is the reason people reflexively object to McDonald's workers fighting for higher pay, and don't care that those workers are earning far more for their employer than they are being paid. The Protestant Work Ethic is the belief that the work itself, specifically the suffering endured while performing the work, which is of value. 'Hard work is its own reward'. It is a big part of why the improvements in productivity that came about in the 1980s due to computers and automation technology entering the workplace did not result in higher wages. Because the productivity was not a product of greater human suffering, the people did not 'deserve' any greater pay. The most virtuous are those who struggle and suffer the greatest for the lowest pay. They are paid primarily in the most valuable currency, the suffering, and to suggest that they deserve greater pay or to give them greater pay would denigrate them. Obviously this is not a viewpoint that most people would or can describe specifically. But it is what underlies the prevailing attitudes most people have about work. To desire easy work, is immoral or weak. To desire high pay for a job which is not tremendously taxing, is immoral or weak. A person who is not working strenuously is inherently a worse person than one who is. It's why the unemployed are looked down upon, and why the working poor, no matter how exploited they might be, are revered as the 'salt of the earth' and the like. It is why it is presumed that a person who is not doing hard physical work is not "really working". Mental work is of such a fundamentally different character from physical labor that our society simply doesn't know how to process it. The idea that a person, with the use of technology, can produce as much value as 100 people doing the same job manually seems a dirty kind of trick. Dirty either because the person is cheating and skirting the virtuous hard work, or dirty because being willing to accept such a situation is immoral. Wanting a job you love to do, and expecting to be paid well for it, is a fantasy tolerable only in children. To actually expect it is one of the biggest reasons older people say that Millenials seem "entitled" brats. In truth, the Millenials just seem to inherently understand that we're at the point where technology simply makes it the best (for everyone, employers included) course.
- myth_buster 11y ago
  Thank you for this excellent response. The first part made me think that in the past when church was so dominant and had to get people to work for them, this philosophy would have done the trick. 'Hard work is its own reward' This unfortunately brought the "Work will set you free" quote to mind but I'm not in a position to further comment on it. I think people in power (Churches, Politicians, CEOs) would always try to portray work in this light as it is inherently valuable for them. I think this might be the case too with the older folks calling Millennial entitled brats.

justncase80 11y ago

I believe convincing people to do "bad jobs" by means of desperation is named Wage Slavery. Besides being immoral and degrading, its pretty inefficient. On the other hand, some jobs that need to be done plain out unpleasant. How do you convince someone to do it? In the Looking Backwards scenario the incentive to do one of the "bad jobs" isn't being paid more per hour, everyone is paid the same, its working less hours which I think is subtly different.

anon4 11y ago
Less hours at the same pay is more money per hour. But there is a subtle difference - cleaning toilets for 2 hours is much different mentally than cleaning toilets for 8 hours. And you can then go look after dogs at the shelter for 4 more hours and get two paychecks.
- justncase80 11y ago
  Yes, its more money per hour of work but its not more money per week in this system.
boona 11y ago
Everyone needs to pitch in, you need to serve humanity so that it provides you with the things you need. If the only thing you can do to do your part is sanitation work, then sanitation work it shall be. That is, until you find new ways to serve others. Slavery is something altogether different, and you really have to be in a position of privilege to conflate the two. The history of slavery is an incredibly dark one. Out of respect to those who've suffered under it's cruelty, I don't think it's right to use that word in this context. Doing your part is not slavery.
- justncase80 11y ago
  Yes agreed, in any social system everyone needs to work (if able) in order for society to thrive. Wage slavery is a very specific term that I didn't just make up and I believe it accurately describes what you were talking about. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wage_slavery
  - boona 11y ago
    I know the term, as well as Marx's class theory. Pointing me to a Wikipedia article doesn't change the fact that it's insensitive hyperbole.

justncase80 11y ago

Also, besides "getting used to it" or "working their way out of it" there are a few other quite grim possibilities that can happen in Wage Slavery. Namely suffering and early death. Sometimes the workers band together (aka unionize) or straight up rebel causing civil war. These are all things that have happened in the past, could happen again in the future.

hvfhhvv 11y ago
Early death is not just a possibility. Stress is associated with undesirable jobs. Stress causes early death. The poor have shorter less happy lives because they are stressed. We live in a disgusting, indeffensible world full of small minded little people.

otakucode 11y ago

I think it is very important not to forget another factor - the Protestant Work Ethic. This had a gigantic influence on US culture and we still live with it today. It is the reason people reflexively object to McDonald's workers fighting for higher pay, and don't care that those workers are earning far more for their employer than they are being paid. The Protestant Work Ethic is the belief that the work itself, specifically the suffering endured while performing the work, which is of value. 'Hard work is its own reward'. It is a big part of why the improvements in productivity that came about in the 1980s due to computers and automation technology entering the workplace did not result in higher wages. Because the productivity was not a product of greater human suffering, the people did not 'deserve' any greater pay. The most virtuous are those who struggle and suffer the greatest for the lowest pay. They are paid primarily in the most valuable currency, the suffering, and to suggest that they deserve greater pay or to give them greater pay would denigrate them. Obviously this is not a viewpoint that most people would or can describe specifically. But it is what underlies the prevailing attitudes most people have about work. To desire easy work, is immoral or weak. To desire high pay for a job which is not tremendously taxing, is immoral or weak. A person who is not working strenuously is inherently a worse person than one who is. It's why the unemployed are looked down upon, and why the working poor, no matter how exploited they might be, are revered as the 'salt of the earth' and the like. It is why it is presumed that a person who is not doing hard physical work is not "really working". Mental work is of such a fundamentally different character from physical labor that our society simply doesn't know how to process it. The idea that a person, with the use of technology, can produce as much value as 100 people doing the same job manually seems a dirty kind of trick. Dirty either because the person is cheating and skirting the virtuous hard work, or dirty because being willing to accept such a situation is immoral. Wanting a job you love to do, and expecting to be paid well for it, is a fantasy tolerable only in children. To actually expect it is one of the biggest reasons older people say that Millenials seem "entitled" brats. In truth, the Millenials just seem to inherently understand that we're at the point where technology simply makes it the best (for everyone, employers included) course.

myth_buster 11y ago
Thank you for this excellent response. The first part made me think that in the past when church was so dominant and had to get people to work for them, this philosophy would have done the trick. 'Hard work is its own reward' This unfortunately brought the "Work will set you free" quote to mind but I'm not in a position to further comment on it. I think people in power (Churches, Politicians, CEOs) would always try to portray work in this light as it is inherently valuable for them. I think this might be the case too with the older folks calling Millennial entitled brats.