4 ms·

The word "efficient" isn't defined in the article. Is it a synonym for "productivity" (output per worker)? Modern society seems obsessed by productivity. It's

by bambax 6y ago

The word "efficient" isn't defined in the article. Is it a synonym for "productivity" (output per worker)? Modern society seems obsessed by productivity. It's interesting for example that the mission statement for the Gates Foundation is to build a world where every person has the opportunity to live a healthy, productive life. Why is that? What if I don't want to be productive? Am I still entitled to be healthy, or is health reserved for "productive" people? In Cape Town, at the top of Table Mountain lives a species of little mammals, the dassie (rock hyrax). They spend most of their day staring into the void, not looking for food, not mating, doing nothing. (I know because I once spent a day watching them.) The official explanation is that they either stand guard for predators, or they stay immobile in the sun to keep warm. But isn't it possible they're having an aesthetic experience? The scenery there is simply breathtaking, and changes constantly due to moving clouds just below. Contemplation is possibly the least productive activity one can think of; yet it's vital, if not for dassies, at least for us humans. One possibility may be that we love productivity so much, simply because it's eminently, and easily, measurable: weight the output, divide by the number of workers, done. We need a way to measure contemplation.

quotemstr 6y ago
> Am I still entitled to be healthy, or is health reserved for "productive" people? Who pays for the sustenance of these idle people and why are they obligated to do it? Life is not sustained by manna from heaven. Life is sustained by the hard work of real people. Glorifying idleness is a giant "screw you" to the people who make civilization possible.
- zozbot234 6y ago
  We are of course not obligated, but it's a good bet that those who are currently idle will become productive if we enable them to do so, and we all stand to benefit. Teach a man to fish, and all that.
  - quotemstr 6y ago
    I'm all for helping people be productive. It's a shame to waste human potential. But if you have the ability to be productive and choose to be idle instead, nobody is under any obligation to feed, house, or clothe you. If you want things made by other people and you're able to work, you must work. Anything else is incompatible with basic tenets of fairness. And even ignoring fairness and descending to the level of crude practicality, when you take from the productive and give to the unproductive, the size of the former group shrinks and the latter one grows. Eventually, there's not enough productivity to go around and the whole thing collapses.
    - fock 6y ago
      still, even really productive people (such as the ones sewing your shirt) can't yet have all of the above basic goods (let alone something extra), while yet other people (heirs, investors, ...) are consuming insane amounts of labor in no relation to the outputs of their "work" (if they do any). That's what our economic system is happily covering and it's decidedly not fair in any rational way. And its also leading to societal collapse if you're looking at the US.
    - RestlessMind 6y ago
      I am fine with your reasoning as long as we apply the same measure of fairness to "trust-fund babies". If you do nothing and still get good food, big house and nice clothes just because your ancestors worked hard, how is that a fair setup?
- bambax 6y ago
  That is a very clear answer to the question! So the health promise is simply transactional.
- fortran77 6y ago
  > the people who make civilization possible. People like you?
Hallucinaut 6y ago
Sometimes I just lie down and look at the roof. I enjoy these times, but all sense of enjoyment would be lost the moment you develop a metric to track my contemplatative moments
- bambax 6y ago
  Fair point. What I mean is, if we want to be allowed to be contemplative, even for brief periods of time, we need to help society find value in contemplation, or else it will be squeezed out of us.
orwin 6y ago
Increasing efficiency does increase productivity, but to increase productivity you don't have to increase efficiency. You just have to add more machines. But when those machine can't eat anymore, you'll see productivity decline. Related: https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Study_Risk-supply-Europe_TSP-with-Rystad-Data.pdf https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Study...

by bambax 6y ago

quotemstr 6y ago

> Am I still entitled to be healthy, or is health reserved for "productive" people? Who pays for the sustenance of these idle people and why are they obligated to do it? Life is not sustained by manna from heaven. Life is sustained by the hard work of real people. Glorifying idleness is a giant "screw you" to the people who make civilization possible.

zozbot234 6y ago
We are of course not obligated, but it's a good bet that those who are currently idle will become productive if we enable them to do so, and we all stand to benefit. Teach a man to fish, and all that.
- quotemstr 6y ago
  I'm all for helping people be productive. It's a shame to waste human potential. But if you have the ability to be productive and choose to be idle instead, nobody is under any obligation to feed, house, or clothe you. If you want things made by other people and you're able to work, you must work. Anything else is incompatible with basic tenets of fairness. And even ignoring fairness and descending to the level of crude practicality, when you take from the productive and give to the unproductive, the size of the former group shrinks and the latter one grows. Eventually, there's not enough productivity to go around and the whole thing collapses.
  - fock 6y ago
    still, even really productive people (such as the ones sewing your shirt) can't yet have all of the above basic goods (let alone something extra), while yet other people (heirs, investors, ...) are consuming insane amounts of labor in no relation to the outputs of their "work" (if they do any). That's what our economic system is happily covering and it's decidedly not fair in any rational way. And its also leading to societal collapse if you're looking at the US.
  - RestlessMind 6y ago
    I am fine with your reasoning as long as we apply the same measure of fairness to "trust-fund babies". If you do nothing and still get good food, big house and nice clothes just because your ancestors worked hard, how is that a fair setup?
bambax 6y ago
That is a very clear answer to the question! So the health promise is simply transactional.
fortran77 6y ago
> the people who make civilization possible. People like you?

Hallucinaut 6y ago

Sometimes I just lie down and look at the roof. I enjoy these times, but all sense of enjoyment would be lost the moment you develop a metric to track my contemplatative moments

bambax 6y ago
Fair point. What I mean is, if we want to be allowed to be contemplative, even for brief periods of time, we need to help society find value in contemplation, or else it will be squeezed out of us.

orwin 6y ago

Increasing efficiency does increase productivity, but to increase productivity you don't have to increase efficiency. You just have to add more machines. But when those machine can't eat anymore, you'll see productivity decline. Related: https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Study_Risk-supply-Europe_TSP-with-Rystad-Data.pdf https://theshiftproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Study...