5 ms·

Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive

Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive it to be? I don't think it's work specifically that's tied to morality, but production. If someone is obviously consuming more than they're producing, then they're going to get negative attention. In 2022 it's not always clear exactly how much someone is producing, so it's generally assumed that someone with a full time job produces enough to cover their needs while the unemployed surviving off of welfare do not. We even make allowances for people trying to reach net positive production. Students, for example, aren't typically looked down upon. It's only people who are actually lazy and not doing anything useful with their lives that are looked down upon, and rightfully so.

eunoia 4y ago
> Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive it to be? This is how we end up with no art, no music, no culture, no raising of the future generations etc. If the only metric via which we value time spent and effort spent is money earned none of these (very important) things can compare even to the most useless widget making / admin job. Do we even know what it is to be human anymore?
- CodeSgt 4y ago
  Plenty of people pay for art and music. I didn't say they weren't valuable, I said what you're trying to offer specifically may not be valuable. I know you think it's some incredible service that everybody wants, but have you considered that maybe it isn't?
  - Forgeties79 4y ago
    Are you in the arts or a field adjacent to it, by chance?
    - CodeSgt 4y ago
      That's not relevant to the discussion, if you have something you want to say then just say it. Don't try to ask me a question you think you know the answer to and then tell me my answer precludes me from having an opinion on the subject at hand. This is one of the most common methods I see employed by bad-faith conversationalist and it's sickening. Your point should stand on it's own merit, not on your ability to invalidate the "oppositions" side.
      - Forgeties79 4y ago
        > That's not relevant to the discussion, if you have something you want to say then just say it. Hey ease off throttle man. This isn’t Reddit.
        CodeSgt 4y ago
- nradov 4y ago
  That makes no sense. People do pay for those things. They buy art and concert tickets. Teaching isn't super lucrative but they earn a decent living wage in most areas.
  - Forgeties79 4y ago
    Agreed with your comment up to this: >but they earn a decent living wage in most areas. Debatable and only part of the problem. Education is a terrible example for you to bring up, as evidenced by the absurdly low salaries they receive combined with the broad expectations of their job (therapy, education, tutoring, crisis intervention, nutrition, baby sitting, special needs identification, the list goes on). Have you seen the turnover rates in education? It’s in an appalling state. No resources, garbage pay, and now they’re being asked to shoot back at school shooters as their schools are redesigned to look like prisons, all while politicians play tug of war with their curriculum as a proxy battle for social policies. The sad fact is we don’t value educators in the US. Hell we don’t value caregivers much either.
annyeonghada 4y ago
>Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive it to be? Is producing cigarettes, making apps more addictives, making food superpalatable, synthetizing pernicious drugs and so on more valuable than producing documentaries, studying ancient languages and civilazations, studying exoterical physics topics? Not everything that we're paying for is valuable and not everything valuable is being paid for.
- CodeSgt 4y ago
  I guess that depends on how you define value. Tobacco, while unhealthy, can have great value to the user. Those addictive apps provide a low cost leisure activity for millions of people. We all benefit from advances in food sciences every day. Many of those pernicious have a purpose and are often more helpful than they are harmful. All the things you mentioned provide at least short term tangible benefits to the consumers. How will the average person benefit from the study of ancient languages and civilizations or esoteric physics? People already pay for documentaries they're interested in, there's a reason they're produced. Why do you think academia for academia's sake is inherently beneficial for the rest of society? I see this notion of expressed here and elsewhere that if something is academically challenging or interesting, it must therefore be good to spend time studying.
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  > Not everything that we're paying for is valuable and not everything valuable is being paid for. Honestly all of these threads could be distilled into this simple point. Way more concise than what I wrote that’s for sure haha.
hansword 4y ago
> It's only people who are actually lazy and not doing anything useful with their lives that are looked down upon, and rightfully so. Your view is manifestly incorrect. There are so many groups of people that are looked down upon, what you describe is just a tiny tiny subset of these. If you are grasping to find an example, that shows a great deal about your position in life. (If you still struggling, start with sex workers, people working in waste management, and people with physical disabilities, aka 'hookers' and 'trash people' and 'cripples'. Yeah, they definitely not looked down upon. LOL. I could literally write 10 pages of further examples.)
- CodeSgt 4y ago
  I obviously wasn't saying the only prejudice in the world exists against lazy people and that no other group of people were ever looked down upon. You've got to use context clues before getting all fired up like this. The was in response to how we purportedly "tie work to morality". It was obviously meant as something closer to: > It's only people who are actually lazy and not doing anything useful with their lives that are looked down upon *for not working a typically job.*, and rightfully so Really you should try to avoid taking things intentionally out of context and getting yourself worked up over, it's not healthy.
  - Forgeties79 4y ago
    You’re being very rude and antagonistic.
    - CodeSgt 4y ago
Forgeties79 4y ago
Do you think the measure of worth in society is how much people are willing to pay for it? Is that the metric by which we should judge all contributions to society? Also, do you think documentaries are valuable? Because the vast majority do not have investors and do not make much money. Frankly without grants we’d barely have any.

eunoia 4y ago

> Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive it to be? This is how we end up with no art, no music, no culture, no raising of the future generations etc. If the only metric via which we value time spent and effort spent is money earned none of these (very important) things can compare even to the most useless widget making / admin job. Do we even know what it is to be human anymore?

CodeSgt 4y ago
Plenty of people pay for art and music. I didn't say they weren't valuable, I said what you're trying to offer specifically may not be valuable. I know you think it's some incredible service that everybody wants, but have you considered that maybe it isn't?
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  Are you in the arts or a field adjacent to it, by chance?
  - CodeSgt 4y ago
    That's not relevant to the discussion, if you have something you want to say then just say it. Don't try to ask me a question you think you know the answer to and then tell me my answer precludes me from having an opinion on the subject at hand. This is one of the most common methods I see employed by bad-faith conversationalist and it's sickening. Your point should stand on it's own merit, not on your ability to invalidate the "oppositions" side.
    - Forgeties79 4y ago
      > That's not relevant to the discussion, if you have something you want to say then just say it. Hey ease off throttle man. This isn’t Reddit.
      - CodeSgt 4y ago
nradov 4y ago
That makes no sense. People do pay for those things. They buy art and concert tickets. Teaching isn't super lucrative but they earn a decent living wage in most areas.
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  Agreed with your comment up to this: >but they earn a decent living wage in most areas. Debatable and only part of the problem. Education is a terrible example for you to bring up, as evidenced by the absurdly low salaries they receive combined with the broad expectations of their job (therapy, education, tutoring, crisis intervention, nutrition, baby sitting, special needs identification, the list goes on). Have you seen the turnover rates in education? It’s in an appalling state. No resources, garbage pay, and now they’re being asked to shoot back at school shooters as their schools are redesigned to look like prisons, all while politicians play tug of war with their curriculum as a proxy battle for social policies. The sad fact is we don’t value educators in the US. Hell we don’t value caregivers much either.

annyeonghada 4y ago

>Has it occurred to you that the lack of people willing to pay for what you're trying to offer may be indicative that it's not quite as valuable as you perceive it to be? Is producing cigarettes, making apps more addictives, making food superpalatable, synthetizing pernicious drugs and so on more valuable than producing documentaries, studying ancient languages and civilazations, studying exoterical physics topics? Not everything that we're paying for is valuable and not everything valuable is being paid for.

CodeSgt 4y ago
I guess that depends on how you define value. Tobacco, while unhealthy, can have great value to the user. Those addictive apps provide a low cost leisure activity for millions of people. We all benefit from advances in food sciences every day. Many of those pernicious have a purpose and are often more helpful than they are harmful. All the things you mentioned provide at least short term tangible benefits to the consumers. How will the average person benefit from the study of ancient languages and civilizations or esoteric physics? People already pay for documentaries they're interested in, there's a reason they're produced. Why do you think academia for academia's sake is inherently beneficial for the rest of society? I see this notion of expressed here and elsewhere that if something is academically challenging or interesting, it must therefore be good to spend time studying.
Forgeties79 4y ago
> Not everything that we're paying for is valuable and not everything valuable is being paid for. Honestly all of these threads could be distilled into this simple point. Way more concise than what I wrote that’s for sure haha.

hansword 4y ago

> It's only people who are actually lazy and not doing anything useful with their lives that are looked down upon, and rightfully so. Your view is manifestly incorrect. There are so many groups of people that are looked down upon, what you describe is just a tiny tiny subset of these. If you are grasping to find an example, that shows a great deal about your position in life. (If you still struggling, start with sex workers, people working in waste management, and people with physical disabilities, aka 'hookers' and 'trash people' and 'cripples'. Yeah, they definitely not looked down upon. LOL. I could literally write 10 pages of further examples.)

CodeSgt 4y ago
I obviously wasn't saying the only prejudice in the world exists against lazy people and that no other group of people were ever looked down upon. You've got to use context clues before getting all fired up like this. The was in response to how we purportedly "tie work to morality". It was obviously meant as something closer to: > It's only people who are actually lazy and not doing anything useful with their lives that are looked down upon *for not working a typically job.*, and rightfully so Really you should try to avoid taking things intentionally out of context and getting yourself worked up over, it's not healthy.
- Forgeties79 4y ago
  You’re being very rude and antagonistic.
  - CodeSgt 4y ago

Forgeties79 4y ago

Do you think the measure of worth in society is how much people are willing to pay for it? Is that the metric by which we should judge all contributions to society? Also, do you think documentaries are valuable? Because the vast majority do not have investors and do not make much money. Frankly without grants we’d barely have any.