If the economists in the article are to be believed, these aren't simply "people that don't want to work." They're people who ordinary have always worked, but a

If the economists in the article are to be believed, these aren't simply "people that don't want to work." They're people who ordinary have always worked, but are now being actively persuaded not to by this new force known as video games. So it's not analogous to alcoholics being alcoholics. It's better compared to the introduction of a wholly new drug into society, which has subsequently altered the behavior of a heretofore normal, hard-working, non-addicted segment. Secondly, while it may seem appropriate to deride these people as useless and lazy ne'er-do-wells, that characterization isn't apt. It's not as if they're living lives of misery, unable to overcome some base desire to pull themselves out of it. Quite the contrary: they're happier than the rest of us. They're looking at the options that society has presented them with, and making a perfectly logical choice to spend their days engaged in meaningful, rewarding, social, challenging, and fulfilling activity -- in a fantasy world. Why would they go to work at dead end jobs if they have the option not to?