4 ms·

> But if it is enough to survive on, then too many people who are capable of working will choose to instead just survive on it indefinitely. So what? I would a

> But if it is enough to survive on, then too many people who are capable of working will choose to instead just survive on it indefinitely. So what? I would argue that most people want to feel purpose in life. If they don’t work, they want to do something else to feel fulfilled, something to be looked up to for, something to feel good about doing. It could be art, a sport, maybe just gardening, picking up trash in their neighborhood or organizing local events/classes. Most retired people don’t just sit in front of the tv waiting to die, or become criminals because they don’t have a job. I think it would be amazing if most people didn’t have to work for a living. And only the people that want to work did so.

nverno 5y ago
> So what? This is how the poor stay poor, and those who are "just broke" become poor. In fact, people who are working are much more likely to engage in other community activities and volunteer.
- callmeal 5y ago
  >In fact, people who are working are much more likely to engage in other community activities and volunteer. I can definitely say that people who are forced to work with capricious scheduling, or those that have to work more than one job just to survive are a lot less likely to do that.
- imtringued 5y ago
  People stay poor because there is no opportunity for them to stop being poor by working. If they were poor voluntarily then we wouldn't have to give a damn about them as we already did everything possible. If you gave a poor person the opportunity to become rich through work, would they still decide to stay poor? When you are being rewarded for hard work it is hard to grasp the concept that some not all people are being rewarded for hard work. Pretty much every entrepreneur falls into that trap. Everything they do can have a direct impact to their bottom line so they work hard and long hours. Meanwhile they wonder why their employees with low wages that are often below planned minimum wage increases do the bare minimum to not get fired. It is pretty obvious. They are going on a silent strike as that is the last drip of their bargaining power. We then get lessons that the poor are poor because of laziness.
RhodoGSA 5y ago
What you're describing isn't real life. Living as a species takes work - granting a portion of the population to essentially become dead weight, with entitlement to being able to live off the fruits of other peoples labor won't end well.
- nicbou 5y ago
  Our species wears pants, flies airplanes and invented cocaine. The argument about what's natural and what isn't is rather ridiculous to make.
  - RhodoGSA 5y ago
    i didn't say natural, i said real life. Those things are all products of labor, without that labor they wouldn't exist.
- EliRivers 5y ago
  This is what we have now, is it not? The ultra-rich aren't numerous and many of them hide well, but this is what they're doing and the amount of wealth they seem to hoard (and be continually acquiring) is a lot more than the wealth needed to provide for the bottom. The less rich (but still very rich) who do still choose to work are similarly siphoning off large amounts from the backs of others. They are very skilled at getting the majority of the population to look the other way and blame poor people (and the other usual suspects), but as you suggest, they can't hide forever. If that won't end well, I genuinely look forwards to seeing how we deal with them.
  - RhodoGSA 5y ago
    the ultra-rich built amazon, made very profitable trades, or inherited the labor of the ancestors. Also, you seems to be applying that there is a fixed pie wealth. The rich can create wealth where there wasn't before. Rob the rich and give to the poor is also a terrible strategy.
    - EliRivers 5y ago
lmm 5y ago
> Most retired people don’t just sit in front of the tv waiting to die Citation? I'd like you to be right, but my subjective experience is that a lot of them pretty much do.
- Broken_Hippo 5y ago
  I had a great-grandmother that kept very, very busy after retiring until dementia took over: The other great grandmother complained at 95+ that her knees wouldn't work well enough to keep busy. And this is how folks that feel fairly healthy tend to be, as long as they have enough money. Don't get me wrong: Pretty much everyone slows down when they age, and a lot of mundane tasks can easily get more difficult or take more time - but folks are still busy with a full life. And then you start hitting a sliding scale, and poor health, poverty, lack of transportation and/or wheelchair access, and a slew of other things makes it really easy to wind up being the person that sits at home. The other unfortunate reality is that some of the folks are sitting because they are dying. I've not yet died, but I suspect it tires you. I also don't think this is a trend that will stay: I'm 42, and I have a completely different relationship to television than my mother. Unlike her, I rarely sit down and simply watch a show - and I know lots of folks like this. Games and hobbies and communication with others and all this other stuff is going on. And assuming we can still use our fingers and wrists well enough, I think this will stay.
cmckn 5y ago
I appreciate the moonshot thinking, but I don’t think this is a realistic framework for human civilization. We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. Inequality and resentment are inevitable when some contribute (or feel like they contribute) more than others. I think humans are generally not evil, but we are also quite fickle. I think you’re describing the dystopia of The Hunger Games from the perspective of a Capitol resident. :)
- callmeal 5y ago
  >I appreciate the moonshot thinking, but I don’t think this is a realistic framework for human civilization. We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. That's right - "the idle rich" is not just a saying.
- mandmandam 5y ago
  > We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. There is more than enough wealth to feed and house everyone, so the issue is not of contribution, but distribution. And boy oh boy, are things badly distributed. Look at the graphs of worker productivity compared to average wage for the last hundred years - they are staggering.
Siira 5y ago
> I think it would be amazing if most people didn’t have to work for a living. Who doesn't? But we are not in a post-scarcity economy.
- imtringued 5y ago
  We aren't. We are merely in a buyers market for labor and a sellers market for housing which is squeezing workers.

nverno 5y ago

> So what? This is how the poor stay poor, and those who are "just broke" become poor. In fact, people who are working are much more likely to engage in other community activities and volunteer.

callmeal 5y ago
>In fact, people who are working are much more likely to engage in other community activities and volunteer. I can definitely say that people who are forced to work with capricious scheduling, or those that have to work more than one job just to survive are a lot less likely to do that.
imtringued 5y ago
People stay poor because there is no opportunity for them to stop being poor by working. If they were poor voluntarily then we wouldn't have to give a damn about them as we already did everything possible. If you gave a poor person the opportunity to become rich through work, would they still decide to stay poor? When you are being rewarded for hard work it is hard to grasp the concept that some not all people are being rewarded for hard work. Pretty much every entrepreneur falls into that trap. Everything they do can have a direct impact to their bottom line so they work hard and long hours. Meanwhile they wonder why their employees with low wages that are often below planned minimum wage increases do the bare minimum to not get fired. It is pretty obvious. They are going on a silent strike as that is the last drip of their bargaining power. We then get lessons that the poor are poor because of laziness.

RhodoGSA 5y ago

What you're describing isn't real life. Living as a species takes work - granting a portion of the population to essentially become dead weight, with entitlement to being able to live off the fruits of other peoples labor won't end well.

nicbou 5y ago
Our species wears pants, flies airplanes and invented cocaine. The argument about what's natural and what isn't is rather ridiculous to make.
- RhodoGSA 5y ago
  i didn't say natural, i said real life. Those things are all products of labor, without that labor they wouldn't exist.
EliRivers 5y ago
This is what we have now, is it not? The ultra-rich aren't numerous and many of them hide well, but this is what they're doing and the amount of wealth they seem to hoard (and be continually acquiring) is a lot more than the wealth needed to provide for the bottom. The less rich (but still very rich) who do still choose to work are similarly siphoning off large amounts from the backs of others. They are very skilled at getting the majority of the population to look the other way and blame poor people (and the other usual suspects), but as you suggest, they can't hide forever. If that won't end well, I genuinely look forwards to seeing how we deal with them.
- RhodoGSA 5y ago
  the ultra-rich built amazon, made very profitable trades, or inherited the labor of the ancestors. Also, you seems to be applying that there is a fixed pie wealth. The rich can create wealth where there wasn't before. Rob the rich and give to the poor is also a terrible strategy.
  - EliRivers 5y ago

lmm 5y ago

> Most retired people don’t just sit in front of the tv waiting to die Citation? I'd like you to be right, but my subjective experience is that a lot of them pretty much do.

Broken_Hippo 5y ago
I had a great-grandmother that kept very, very busy after retiring until dementia took over: The other great grandmother complained at 95+ that her knees wouldn't work well enough to keep busy. And this is how folks that feel fairly healthy tend to be, as long as they have enough money. Don't get me wrong: Pretty much everyone slows down when they age, and a lot of mundane tasks can easily get more difficult or take more time - but folks are still busy with a full life. And then you start hitting a sliding scale, and poor health, poverty, lack of transportation and/or wheelchair access, and a slew of other things makes it really easy to wind up being the person that sits at home. The other unfortunate reality is that some of the folks are sitting because they are dying. I've not yet died, but I suspect it tires you. I also don't think this is a trend that will stay: I'm 42, and I have a completely different relationship to television than my mother. Unlike her, I rarely sit down and simply watch a show - and I know lots of folks like this. Games and hobbies and communication with others and all this other stuff is going on. And assuming we can still use our fingers and wrists well enough, I think this will stay.

cmckn 5y ago

I appreciate the moonshot thinking, but I don’t think this is a realistic framework for human civilization. We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. Inequality and resentment are inevitable when some contribute (or feel like they contribute) more than others. I think humans are generally not evil, but we are also quite fickle. I think you’re describing the dystopia of The Hunger Games from the perspective of a Capitol resident. :)

callmeal 5y ago
>I appreciate the moonshot thinking, but I don’t think this is a realistic framework for human civilization. We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. That's right - "the idle rich" is not just a saying.
mandmandam 5y ago
> We already live in a society in which not everyone contributes (rich and poor), and it’s problematic. There is more than enough wealth to feed and house everyone, so the issue is not of contribution, but distribution. And boy oh boy, are things badly distributed. Look at the graphs of worker productivity compared to average wage for the last hundred years - they are staggering.

Siira 5y ago

> I think it would be amazing if most people didn’t have to work for a living. Who doesn't? But we are not in a post-scarcity economy.

imtringued 5y ago
We aren't. We are merely in a buyers market for labor and a sellers market for housing which is squeezing workers.