3 ms·

As the value of employment declines, it is unsurprising that fewer people choose to work. I would recharactetize the 'crisis' (why it is a crisis was never arti

As the value of employment declines, it is unsurprising that fewer people choose to work. I would recharactetize the 'crisis' (why it is a crisis was never articulated in anything but thinly puritanical moral terms) as the natural consequence of increased elasticity in the demand for employment (caused by improved benefits, shifting social norms) combined with reduced payoffs for employment (stagnant wages). I think that's overly reductive, but I'm having trouble pinning down why (in the terms laid out by the article) there is a crisis rather than a shifting market.

adventured 10y ago
> As the value of employment declines, it is unsurprising that fewer people choose to work That doesn't follow at all. The value of employment was dramatically lower in 1880 or 1910 than it is today. The value proposition was much worse for the worker, in regards to the harshness of the work, the compensation, and the worker protection laws (near complete lack thereof). You can now purchase a far greater standard of living with far easier work and far fewer hours worked. The difference is that there was zero social safety net a century ago. If you didn't work back then, the suffering was dramatically greater and it would increase your mortality rate astronomically. Today if I choose not to work, I can get free food, free healthcare, free or near-free shelter, and numerous other benefits. A debate can certainly be had about the extent of those benefits. However having grown up in one of the poorest regions in the US, I knew plenty of families that existed solely based on welfare programs and never worked, they were masters at gaming the welfare state. Today millions of people are faking disability to leech off of SS disability. Such things simply did not exist previously, you either worked or else suffered immensely.
Spooky23 10y ago
People need to be occupied and have purpose. Many people on HN don't grok this, which illustrates the gap.
- zaccus 10y ago
  Being occupied/having a purpose is not the same thing as having a 9-5 job that you do to pay the bills. Many people would prefer to occupy themselves in ways that don't necessarily generate money. leisure != idleness
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  It's easier to have purpose when the market doesn't have to decide if that purpose has value. Want to stay at home and take care of a child or aging parent? Ain't going to happen without budgeting or basic income.

adventured 10y ago

> As the value of employment declines, it is unsurprising that fewer people choose to work That doesn't follow at all. The value of employment was dramatically lower in 1880 or 1910 than it is today. The value proposition was much worse for the worker, in regards to the harshness of the work, the compensation, and the worker protection laws (near complete lack thereof). You can now purchase a far greater standard of living with far easier work and far fewer hours worked. The difference is that there was zero social safety net a century ago. If you didn't work back then, the suffering was dramatically greater and it would increase your mortality rate astronomically. Today if I choose not to work, I can get free food, free healthcare, free or near-free shelter, and numerous other benefits. A debate can certainly be had about the extent of those benefits. However having grown up in one of the poorest regions in the US, I knew plenty of families that existed solely based on welfare programs and never worked, they were masters at gaming the welfare state. Today millions of people are faking disability to leech off of SS disability. Such things simply did not exist previously, you either worked or else suffered immensely.

Spooky23 10y ago

People need to be occupied and have purpose. Many people on HN don't grok this, which illustrates the gap.

zaccus 10y ago
Being occupied/having a purpose is not the same thing as having a 9-5 job that you do to pay the bills. Many people would prefer to occupy themselves in ways that don't necessarily generate money. leisure != idleness
toomuchtodo 10y ago
It's easier to have purpose when the market doesn't have to decide if that purpose has value. Want to stay at home and take care of a child or aging parent? Ain't going to happen without budgeting or basic income.