7 ms·

I think we're all increasingly aware that our society and infrastructure are crumbling, and no matter how "rich" the country as a whole is, if you haven't built

I think we're all increasingly aware that our society and infrastructure are crumbling, and no matter how "rich" the country as a whole is, if you haven't built up your own security through wealth, you're [going to be] fucked. And that awareness translates into people being willing to overwork themselves, so they don't lose their spot in the rat race; and corporations with money to spend on workers are well-positioned to take advantage of that, and they do.

PavlovsCat 8y ago
That's tragic, since the "rat race" is kind of the reason why society and infrastructure are crumbling.
- robertfw 8y ago
  I think the rat race is a symptom, not a cause
  - PavlovsCat 8y ago
    What would you say is the cause?
    - marnett 8y ago
      Many would say globalized, unfettered capitalism.
phillc73 8y ago
> if you haven't built up your own security through wealth, you're [going to be] fucked. Another approach is to build security through self sufficiency and community based initiatives. For example, growing your own food wherever possible, or community gardens on common land. There is a long list of examples and ideas where future security, defining that as decent quality of life, health and education, doesn't need to be based around monetary wealth.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kazinator 8y ago
  Modern society relies on mass scale agriculture which cannot be replaced by community gardens. If everyone had to meet their nutritional needs with a community garden that is within walking distance of where they live, we basically couldn't have cities. Growing your own food is work; where is the retirement plan? What if you're not able? Even if you are, many people want to do things other than farming when they retire. It feels like the ultimate defeat: what have I achieved in this lifetime of work, when I'm reduced to land-to-mouth existence, like an ancestor tens of thousands of years before me? Where is the progress? Theft is a problem in community gardens. If you just grow enough to sustain yourself and someone steals your produce, you're back to fucked.
- jniedrauer 8y ago
  I really don't think this is viable. I grew up on a mostly self sustaining farm. I've seen how inefficient and unpredictable it is at small scale. There are simply too many of us to revert back to an agrarian society. We have to create food at a very large scale. Which means we have to become better at sharing it.
- jimbokun 8y ago
  Almost no one in the US has a problem with getting enough food. Maybe substandard nutrition, but no one is going to starve. Healthcare and education are areas where a common option could make a major difference in people's lives. But I think the "community" has to be pretty large to make a meaningful impact.
  - Hydraulix989 8y ago
    This may be true in socially progressive areas such as Silicon Valley, but it is far from the case anywhere else. Hunger is further down Maslow's pyramid. You can't even begin thinking about things like education until you are able to adequately eat. http://map.feedingamerica.org http://map.feedingamerica.org
eiaoa 8y ago
> I think we're all increasingly aware that our society and infrastructure are crumbling, and no matter how "rich" the country as a whole is, if you haven't built up your own security through wealth, you're [going to be] fucked. And that awareness translates into people being willing to overwork themselves, so they don't lose their spot in the rat race; and corporations with money to spend on workers are well-positioned to take advantage of that, and they do. I disagree. That only makes sense if you assume you (and everyone like you) are politically powerless and the rot and decay are inevitable. There's also another option: redirect that excess effort you're expediting to hoard for the failure into fixing the system before it fails. Your personal efforts to fix it might fail, but some other group that heeded the same call might succeed, and that's all it takes. Hoarding wealth might seem like a safer bet, but it's just as prone to failure. The kind of wealth you could accumulate through hard work might not be enough to give you the security you want, and to get more you have to take big risks anyway.
- mattnewton 8y ago
  When participating in the system of the US, wealth and job security are extremely useful. It may be rational to think “I will have more impact working to the bone and then donating/volunteering, than I would if I worked less and volunteered more”
  - eiaoa 8y ago
    > When participating in the system of the US, wealth and job security are extremely useful. It may be rational to think “I will have more impact working to the bone and then donating/volunteering, than I would if I worked less and volunteered more” I think that's the trap: you can't work yourself to the bone then have energy to work more to be active in your community, volunteer, run for office, pester politicians with letters, etc. Those are the kind of activities that I think could avoid the decay and perhaps even lead to some improvement. I think it's a mistake to view "donating money" as meaningful response to many current social problems. Many of them are caused or propped up by people with more money than you could ever dream of having. Thinking that mere donations can win is like thinking a group insurgents could win in a stand-up direct fight against the US Army. The insurgents have different advantages than the US Army, and if they're smart, they'll use them rather than futilely attempting to reach parity with the US Army's strengths. There's definitely some minimum amount of donations that will be required to really change things, but at a certain point I think the returns diminish.
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
This is the "appeal to worse problems" fallacy. Given that the US is wealthier than most of Europe and yet people work much longer hours with little worker protection, people could could demand much better.
- wpietri 8y ago
  Yup. The intense self-focus and zero-sum mentality in that line of thinking ignores that a more collaborative approach can get better results for everybody.
  - rabidrat 8y ago
    I agree that it can get better results. But I'm not sure if you've noticed that the political party-in-power in the US is actively against collaborative approaches. I'd love to cooperate and win-win for everyone, but at some point you have to acknowledge that it's going to take a larger effort than is currently available.
    - wpietri 8y ago
      I think you're confusing the current condition of the federal government with America as a whole. At state and local levels, there are plenty of examples of more collaborative thinking. And a great deal of what happens in any country happens with little relation to the government. We can always collaborate as individuals.
TomMckenny 8y ago
With esentially no exceptions, people don't overwork themselves their whole lives for society, they do so for themselves or their kids. When they don't get a commensurate benefit form extra work, they won't do it. If there are societies sliding downward it is because they are extracting too much wealth from the people who produce it. Among other things, just eliminating rent seeking would be a boon.
dwaltrip 8y ago
Society is crumbling...? I'm pretty sure the data doesn't back that up. We face many problems, to be sure, but this is nothing new.
- rabidrat 8y ago
  It doesn't matter what the data says, the feeling that our society is crumbling is palpable, and that is what drives this overwork. People my age (40s) and younger do not believe that our institutions will be able to support us in our old age and retirement. We do not even believe that the earth's ecosystems will be able to support us (as a group) then. In 30 years, we as individuals better have resources accumulated to support ourselves, or we will be unable to afford basics like healthcare, shelter, and even food. For that matter, many of my non-tech friends (in their 40s) are already only one health crisis away from being homeless. I only have two couches and they all can't stay with me. I am doing relatively well and even I feel the pressure to overwork and "make hay while the sun shines", so maybe I can help support them when they need it.
  - zamber 8y ago
    I'm waiting for a massive exodus of US citizens to Europe for healthcare. Also the perceived society crumbling is self-imposed. Raging culture wars, terrorism as an excuse for totalitarian paranoia, freely accessible firearms, school shootings, obesity epidemic, trade tariffs, monopolistic corporations lobbying for laws, ecological disasters. Frankly, I'm happy with my European backwater if the cost of getting off well after WW2 would be the list above. No wonder the US collectively is stressed out to the extreme.
    - mcculley 8y ago
      It's not just healthcare. I often get into discussions about our ridiculous gun situation. Often, I am told by advocates for the status quo that if I don't like it, I should leave. Maybe I will take that advice. What happens to a community when all of the people who want to improve it who have the means to emigrate give up and leave?

PavlovsCat 8y ago

That's tragic, since the "rat race" is kind of the reason why society and infrastructure are crumbling.

robertfw 8y ago
I think the rat race is a symptom, not a cause
- PavlovsCat 8y ago
  What would you say is the cause?
  - marnett 8y ago
    Many would say globalized, unfettered capitalism.

phillc73 8y ago

> if you haven't built up your own security through wealth, you're [going to be] fucked. Another approach is to build security through self sufficiency and community based initiatives. For example, growing your own food wherever possible, or community gardens on common land. There is a long list of examples and ideas where future security, defining that as decent quality of life, health and education, doesn't need to be based around monetary wealth.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
kazinator 8y ago
Modern society relies on mass scale agriculture which cannot be replaced by community gardens. If everyone had to meet their nutritional needs with a community garden that is within walking distance of where they live, we basically couldn't have cities. Growing your own food is work; where is the retirement plan? What if you're not able? Even if you are, many people want to do things other than farming when they retire. It feels like the ultimate defeat: what have I achieved in this lifetime of work, when I'm reduced to land-to-mouth existence, like an ancestor tens of thousands of years before me? Where is the progress? Theft is a problem in community gardens. If you just grow enough to sustain yourself and someone steals your produce, you're back to fucked.
jniedrauer 8y ago
I really don't think this is viable. I grew up on a mostly self sustaining farm. I've seen how inefficient and unpredictable it is at small scale. There are simply too many of us to revert back to an agrarian society. We have to create food at a very large scale. Which means we have to become better at sharing it.
jimbokun 8y ago
Almost no one in the US has a problem with getting enough food. Maybe substandard nutrition, but no one is going to starve. Healthcare and education are areas where a common option could make a major difference in people's lives. But I think the "community" has to be pretty large to make a meaningful impact.
- Hydraulix989 8y ago
  This may be true in socially progressive areas such as Silicon Valley, but it is far from the case anywhere else. Hunger is further down Maslow's pyramid. You can't even begin thinking about things like education until you are able to adequately eat. http://map.feedingamerica.org http://map.feedingamerica.org

eiaoa 8y ago

> I think we're all increasingly aware that our society and infrastructure are crumbling, and no matter how "rich" the country as a whole is, if you haven't built up your own security through wealth, you're [going to be] fucked. And that awareness translates into people being willing to overwork themselves, so they don't lose their spot in the rat race; and corporations with money to spend on workers are well-positioned to take advantage of that, and they do. I disagree. That only makes sense if you assume you (and everyone like you) are politically powerless and the rot and decay are inevitable. There's also another option: redirect that excess effort you're expediting to hoard for the failure into fixing the system before it fails. Your personal efforts to fix it might fail, but some other group that heeded the same call might succeed, and that's all it takes. Hoarding wealth might seem like a safer bet, but it's just as prone to failure. The kind of wealth you could accumulate through hard work might not be enough to give you the security you want, and to get more you have to take big risks anyway.

mattnewton 8y ago
When participating in the system of the US, wealth and job security are extremely useful. It may be rational to think “I will have more impact working to the bone and then donating/volunteering, than I would if I worked less and volunteered more”
- eiaoa 8y ago
  > When participating in the system of the US, wealth and job security are extremely useful. It may be rational to think “I will have more impact working to the bone and then donating/volunteering, than I would if I worked less and volunteered more” I think that's the trap: you can't work yourself to the bone then have energy to work more to be active in your community, volunteer, run for office, pester politicians with letters, etc. Those are the kind of activities that I think could avoid the decay and perhaps even lead to some improvement. I think it's a mistake to view "donating money" as meaningful response to many current social problems. Many of them are caused or propped up by people with more money than you could ever dream of having. Thinking that mere donations can win is like thinking a group insurgents could win in a stand-up direct fight against the US Army. The insurgents have different advantages than the US Army, and if they're smart, they'll use them rather than futilely attempting to reach parity with the US Army's strengths. There's definitely some minimum amount of donations that will be required to really change things, but at a certain point I think the returns diminish.

eeZah7Ux 8y ago

This is the "appeal to worse problems" fallacy. Given that the US is wealthier than most of Europe and yet people work much longer hours with little worker protection, people could could demand much better.

wpietri 8y ago
Yup. The intense self-focus and zero-sum mentality in that line of thinking ignores that a more collaborative approach can get better results for everybody.
- rabidrat 8y ago
  I agree that it can get better results. But I'm not sure if you've noticed that the political party-in-power in the US is actively against collaborative approaches. I'd love to cooperate and win-win for everyone, but at some point you have to acknowledge that it's going to take a larger effort than is currently available.
  - wpietri 8y ago
    I think you're confusing the current condition of the federal government with America as a whole. At state and local levels, there are plenty of examples of more collaborative thinking. And a great deal of what happens in any country happens with little relation to the government. We can always collaborate as individuals.

TomMckenny 8y ago

With esentially no exceptions, people don't overwork themselves their whole lives for society, they do so for themselves or their kids. When they don't get a commensurate benefit form extra work, they won't do it. If there are societies sliding downward it is because they are extracting too much wealth from the people who produce it. Among other things, just eliminating rent seeking would be a boon.

dwaltrip 8y ago

Society is crumbling...? I'm pretty sure the data doesn't back that up. We face many problems, to be sure, but this is nothing new.

rabidrat 8y ago
It doesn't matter what the data says, the feeling that our society is crumbling is palpable, and that is what drives this overwork. People my age (40s) and younger do not believe that our institutions will be able to support us in our old age and retirement. We do not even believe that the earth's ecosystems will be able to support us (as a group) then. In 30 years, we as individuals better have resources accumulated to support ourselves, or we will be unable to afford basics like healthcare, shelter, and even food. For that matter, many of my non-tech friends (in their 40s) are already only one health crisis away from being homeless. I only have two couches and they all can't stay with me. I am doing relatively well and even I feel the pressure to overwork and "make hay while the sun shines", so maybe I can help support them when they need it.
- zamber 8y ago
  I'm waiting for a massive exodus of US citizens to Europe for healthcare. Also the perceived society crumbling is self-imposed. Raging culture wars, terrorism as an excuse for totalitarian paranoia, freely accessible firearms, school shootings, obesity epidemic, trade tariffs, monopolistic corporations lobbying for laws, ecological disasters. Frankly, I'm happy with my European backwater if the cost of getting off well after WW2 would be the list above. No wonder the US collectively is stressed out to the extreme.
  - mcculley 8y ago
    It's not just healthcare. I often get into discussions about our ridiculous gun situation. Often, I am told by advocates for the status quo that if I don't like it, I should leave. Maybe I will take that advice. What happens to a community when all of the people who want to improve it who have the means to emigrate give up and leave?