7 ms·
...that if you don't have a job, it's up to you to make yourself valuable to employers. Most people do not have the opportunity to make themselves valuable. I
by dev1n 11y ago
...that if you don't have a job, it's up to you to make yourself valuable to employers.
Most people do not have the opportunity to make themselves valuable.
It's generally understood that at this point in history most people shouldn't really have to work at all. The whole point of technology is to make living easier for everyone. The root of this problem, as far as I can understand it, is misallocation of capital, not of "jobs". The efficiency of the free market is telling the labor market, "hey, you don't need to do this job anymore." So why are we still forcing these people to work? They should be allocated the capital gains reaped from market efficiencies that are a result of technological innovations.
- ajmurmann 11y agoBecause the US has a trauma from the cold war related to anything social this will never happen in the US. There will have to be 50%+ unemployment before anything like that happens here.
- ewzimm 11y agoThe basic problem is that this idea that people shouldn't have to work goes against centuries of religious thinking which is strongly embedded in American culture. The idea of the Protestant/Puritan work ethic is that hard work is a sign of God's grace and centrally important to the character of a person and society as a whole. Sometimes you will hear people talk about this directly, but more often it's just implied because it has become awkward to assert religious ideas on society explicitly. Until that cultural pillar of hard work defining a person's character and place in God's kingdom goes away, we will be stuck with this idea that people are defined by their work.
- michaelbuddy 11y ago?? People should be defined on the actions they take, which is generally the goals, groups (industries) they belong to and work within. Otherwise it opens the floor to losers that think they are defined by whatever mix gender color, disabilities they have. You may think I'm being harsh, but I'm starting to see that now at conferences. "I'm Tina, I'm cis-gendered disabled" It's like they want to put some kind of moral hierarchy on people based on whatever minority label sticks.
- ewzimm 11y agoI think I'm miscommunicating here. I'm not saying that people should be defined by anything in particular, just that this idea of a work ethic tied to being evidence of being a good person blessed by God is a traditional cultural concept which started in Europe and took root in America and then many other places in the world as well. What you're talking about is an effort by people to be more inclusive by communicating things about themselves that they want others to be aware of. I can understand how this can be awkward and annoying, but it also has positive effects of bringing out these kinds of unstated assumptions like the idea of a work ethic. If you look at history, groups tended to be more cohesive and share cultural values. This made it easy for most people to relate to each other because they could rely on certain unstated agreements. Now that we have more of an interconnected world, it's important to figure out how we can live together despite different understandings and identities. Not everyone is on board with this kind of diversity, but it's hard to see how we can move forward without finding some way to connect to people who aren't like us, and so far one of the solutions put forward is to over-communicate.
- michaelbuddy 11y agoAll Good points here. I'm not sure people are hung up on traditional religious values when it comes to respecting other people for hard work. We all just innately identify and respect with people who see their roles in contributing to society. I want to meet "bob the ditch digger" more than "bob, the son of serial killer" Same Bob, but with the label he controls and moves forward society with.
- michaelbuddy 11y ago> Most people do not have the opportunity to make themselves valuable. I disagree. You can make yourself valuable in many ways, not tied to any job you're prospecting to win. Making yourself a valuable person to society is where everyone unemployed should be. That's how you win the respect of people who work. That's what it's about. Now how one does that could be in many forms. And it's not necessarily something that needs to take up more than a couple hours a day even. in fact you find that people who work not only put in their 8 hours, they follow that up with volunteering, speaking at engagements, mentoring, helping others at church, all kinds of things.
- dev1n 11y ago...more than a couple hours a day../ There's the heart of the issue though. When you're on food stamps you're not thinking of creative ways to make yourself valuable because you don't have time or energy. You're thinking about how to feed your children and family. You're working two menial jobs that suck up any time and affect your mental health, thus further degrading any possibility of you finding some creative avenue to make yourself valuable.
- barney54 11y agoAlmost anyone can go to college these days. The entire point of college is for people to gain skills. Why are we forcing people to work? Because it cost money--ie. other people's time and energy--to feed, cloth, and take care of people.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- branchless 11y agoWhy are we still forcing these people to work? Two reasons. 1. to scare people who are still required - do this or be destitute like them 2. to stop people sitting around and concluding that the system stinks, that people shouldn't be living in luxury because they inherited wealth and that we shouldn't have to pay high rent to exist
- lgieron 11y ago> It's generally understood that at this point in history most people shouldn't really have to work at all. "Generally understood" - what? It is still a fringe belief. Please don't post things that are not true as facts.