6 ms·

I don't see why this is such a surprise, most people hate working. I thought it was almost a truism that people work for retirement, i.e. the point in their li

I don't see why this is such a surprise, most people hate working. I thought it was almost a truism that people work for retirement, i.e. the point in their life when they have enough saved to stop working and just relax and travel or fish or whatever. If there's a way to skip 30 years of working at a job you hate and just start now, most people would take that option. This is the basic problem with basic income, although I still think it's important and necessary, we're going to have to undertake a huge cultural shift and accept a large XX% of the populace just sitting around, vaping and playing video games all day. Not everyone is built to seek out the constant struggle of self-improvement.

xupybd 7y ago
The problem is balancing two parts of human nature. People like to be rewarded for their effort, some people get horribly depressed without this. The other is that people get their happiness from their wealth relative to those around them. It doesn't seem to matter how much wealth people have if inequality is high. How do you build a system that rewards the hard working but limits inequality while allowing some not to work? And how do you do this in such a way that self regulates. Those who choose to work will gain power and influence. If those start to resent those that don't work conditions will likely worsen for the non working.
- cmdshiftf4 7y ago
  Seize the means of production and ensure a ruling government whose core is utilitarianism, comrade xupybd.
  - xupybd 7y ago
    I think the seize the means of production can be done. The ensure a ruling government whose core is utilitarianism is the tricky part.
xyzzyz 7y ago
we're going to have to undertake a huge cultural shift and accept a large XX% of the populace just sitting around, vaping and playing video games all day I don't think most people care too much about that. Unlike communist states which forced people to work, even if the job was bullshit, this is a free country, and if someone wants to sit around doing nothing useful all day, they are perfectly welcome to do so. What the people do care about though is when the government takes their money that they earned through their work and gives it to people who sit all day vaping and playing video games, so that they can keep enjoying their leisurely lifestyle. This is blatant unfairness, being punished for working and rewarded for not working.
- downerending 7y ago
  I care a lot more about the social effects than the "taking my money" part. Having lived in areas with very high unemployment rates, there's not much good to say about them.
  - xyzzyz 7y ago
    > Having lived in areas with very high unemployment rates, there's not much good to say about them. Indeed, and for this precise reason incentivizing unemployment by supporting the vaping and video game habits of the unemployed is exceedingly bad social policy. Suppose government didn't do redistributive welfare. If you're a typical HN user, you'd probably then end up with tens of thousands of extra dollars a year saved on taxes. Would you then use these tens of thousands of dollars to help your own neighbors enjoy life of vaping and playing video games?
    - downerending 7y ago
      I'm not a typical HN user. I probably earn less than 70% of you, and most of my salary goes straight to alimony. Taxes take half of the rest. It's not that those taxes don't sting for me--they surely do--but rather that I think the social effects of worklessness will be huge. It wouldn't take that much for the US to drop into the second world.
- 7y ago
lopmotr 7y ago
People want to relax and go fishing when they're working, not when they've got nothing to do all day. Retirement only looks good while you're working unless you have enough self drive to actively pursue your hobbies when retired, which hardly anyone does. Retirement also shortens your life, at least for men.

xupybd 7y ago

The problem is balancing two parts of human nature. People like to be rewarded for their effort, some people get horribly depressed without this. The other is that people get their happiness from their wealth relative to those around them. It doesn't seem to matter how much wealth people have if inequality is high. How do you build a system that rewards the hard working but limits inequality while allowing some not to work? And how do you do this in such a way that self regulates. Those who choose to work will gain power and influence. If those start to resent those that don't work conditions will likely worsen for the non working.

cmdshiftf4 7y ago
Seize the means of production and ensure a ruling government whose core is utilitarianism, comrade xupybd.
- xupybd 7y ago
  I think the seize the means of production can be done. The ensure a ruling government whose core is utilitarianism is the tricky part.

xyzzyz 7y ago

we're going to have to undertake a huge cultural shift and accept a large XX% of the populace just sitting around, vaping and playing video games all day I don't think most people care too much about that. Unlike communist states which forced people to work, even if the job was bullshit, this is a free country, and if someone wants to sit around doing nothing useful all day, they are perfectly welcome to do so. What the people do care about though is when the government takes their money that they earned through their work and gives it to people who sit all day vaping and playing video games, so that they can keep enjoying their leisurely lifestyle. This is blatant unfairness, being punished for working and rewarded for not working.

downerending 7y ago
I care a lot more about the social effects than the "taking my money" part. Having lived in areas with very high unemployment rates, there's not much good to say about them.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  > Having lived in areas with very high unemployment rates, there's not much good to say about them. Indeed, and for this precise reason incentivizing unemployment by supporting the vaping and video game habits of the unemployed is exceedingly bad social policy. Suppose government didn't do redistributive welfare. If you're a typical HN user, you'd probably then end up with tens of thousands of extra dollars a year saved on taxes. Would you then use these tens of thousands of dollars to help your own neighbors enjoy life of vaping and playing video games?
  - downerending 7y ago
    I'm not a typical HN user. I probably earn less than 70% of you, and most of my salary goes straight to alimony. Taxes take half of the rest. It's not that those taxes don't sting for me--they surely do--but rather that I think the social effects of worklessness will be huge. It wouldn't take that much for the US to drop into the second world.
7y ago

lopmotr 7y ago

People want to relax and go fishing when they're working, not when they've got nothing to do all day. Retirement only looks good while you're working unless you have enough self drive to actively pursue your hobbies when retired, which hardly anyone does. Retirement also shortens your life, at least for men.