3 ms·

I always have a really hard time relating to where this incredibly negative sentiment about people comes from. It seems like people look at times when other peo

I always have a really hard time relating to where this incredibly negative sentiment about people comes from. It seems like people look at times when other people are "lazy" and extrapolate it to all of humanity, but I think the perception of "lazy" in this context is just what it looks like when a person hates the work they're forced to do and/or is suffering and unhappy due to financial trouble. I feel like most people who seem to lay around doing nothing are doing so in the small time they have where they are not being psychologically and physically exhausted by their job, so it doesn't make sense to assume that's what they want to do. It reminds me of the scene in Battlefield Earth where the aliens with a superiority complex release starving humans into an abandoned building and they eat the first thing they see - a rat. Aha, man's favorite food must be rats!

antisthenes 8y ago
> I always have a really hard time relating to where this incredibly negative sentiment about people comes from. It comes from your head. The statement itself is neutral, and for whatever reason, you're giving it a negative connotation. Most organisms on this planet evolved so as to expend less energy without necessity, humans as no exception. That is not negative or positive - that's a normative judgment you give that statement.
ergothus 8y ago
I'm far from the group that thinks everyone not working is "lazy", but I can understand the situation: If you find someone that is legit being lazy (best examples are clear fraud with no mitigating reasoning) you feel outraged and "stolen from". And it does happen - I worked for Virginia state social services when a hurricane came through, and the department set up centers where you could get fast approval for food stamps - you had to fill out a few (3, i think?) lines about income, and your actual eligibility would figured out later - if you weren't eligible, you'd owe the money back, but the idea was to help people that had lost their food, their jobs, etc immediately. Months later the word came back about fraud. And it was a doozy. The program was a general success, but there were SO MANY fraud cases. And I don't mean "missed a number" or "didn't understand that this asset mattered" or even "struggling but not legally struggling enough" - I mean blatant, totally unnecessary, how-are-you-not-ashamed fraud. As a liberal I found it shocking. It's easy to allow this outrage to count for more than the actual money is worth, to ignore the many, many legit needy cases where people WEREN'T being like this. I read once that the true difference between a liberal and conservative is not about compassion - both can be fully compassionate - but whether they are more outraged by someone in need being neglected or by someone not in need taking advantage of the offer of help. I also think that most people don't actually see either side of this coin - they don't see the people in need getting help, nor those that abuse it. They hear about it and their emotions take hold (in either direction). And most of them, regardless of reaction, aren't hearing the actual truth.

antisthenes 8y ago

> I always have a really hard time relating to where this incredibly negative sentiment about people comes from. It comes from your head. The statement itself is neutral, and for whatever reason, you're giving it a negative connotation. Most organisms on this planet evolved so as to expend less energy without necessity, humans as no exception. That is not negative or positive - that's a normative judgment you give that statement.

ergothus 8y ago

I'm far from the group that thinks everyone not working is "lazy", but I can understand the situation: If you find someone that is legit being lazy (best examples are clear fraud with no mitigating reasoning) you feel outraged and "stolen from". And it does happen - I worked for Virginia state social services when a hurricane came through, and the department set up centers where you could get fast approval for food stamps - you had to fill out a few (3, i think?) lines about income, and your actual eligibility would figured out later - if you weren't eligible, you'd owe the money back, but the idea was to help people that had lost their food, their jobs, etc immediately. Months later the word came back about fraud. And it was a doozy. The program was a general success, but there were SO MANY fraud cases. And I don't mean "missed a number" or "didn't understand that this asset mattered" or even "struggling but not legally struggling enough" - I mean blatant, totally unnecessary, how-are-you-not-ashamed fraud. As a liberal I found it shocking. It's easy to allow this outrage to count for more than the actual money is worth, to ignore the many, many legit needy cases where people WEREN'T being like this. I read once that the true difference between a liberal and conservative is not about compassion - both can be fully compassionate - but whether they are more outraged by someone in need being neglected or by someone not in need taking advantage of the offer of help. I also think that most people don't actually see either side of this coin - they don't see the people in need getting help, nor those that abuse it. They hear about it and their emotions take hold (in either direction). And most of them, regardless of reaction, aren't hearing the actual truth.