8 ms·

> My ideal work life is to write about whatever I want, however I want, and be able to turn that into a comfortable living. I am always torn when I read someth

> My ideal work life is to write about whatever I want, however I want, and be able to turn that into a comfortable living. I am always torn when I read something like this. On one hand, I want people to be able to pursue their passions. On the other hand, I know that it is impossible for the world to function if everyone got to only do what they want. This person wants to be able to earn a living doing whatever they want, but they also want to enjoy the benefits of other people doing things they don’t want to do. They want to be able to travel, but that requires other people to do a lot of labor they probably don’t want to do. The boarding agent, flight attendant, and pilots likely all don’t want to be doing what they are doing while he flies. The person who cleans the plane and loads the luggage aren’t doing what they want to be doing. This is going to apply for so much of what the author is going to expect from others to support his lifestyle of doing whatever he wants whenever he wants. He wants to write while other people grow his food, provide his infrastructure, the services he requires. In the end, I don’t think it is a healthy goal for people to expect to not have to do work that they don’t want to do. Sure, it might turn out that you can support yourself doing what you wanted to do anyway (although even then you will probably have to do a lot of stuff that isn’t what you want to do, too), but I don’t think you should expect it or define success in life as being able to do that.

iglio 4y ago
What you say is true and necessary today with the limited deployment of automation in the world. However, it needn’t be that way forever: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Communism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Commu...
- _wqdq 4y ago
  I'm rather ambivalent about it all myself, but just in case anybody else is curious I've found Nihislist Communism [1] to be the most coherently argued critique of FALC (and other utopian Marxist ideologies). [1] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihi...
jvalencia 4y ago
IMO, I think that pursuing a standard of living for you and your family is a reasonable and honorable goal, even if that means work is a chore. If you can love what you do that's a perk, but even if it's not there, the goal still remains. Having disposable income means you can pursue leisure opportunity, give charitably, gain security for your loved ones, etc. You don't have to love your job to accomplish your goals.
ge96 4y ago
Easier said than done but save and retire then free to do what you want.
NikolaNovak 4y ago
Basically, what is the equilibrium? There are many social equilibriums, and not all are equally desirable for all; but Everybody writing from their backpacks while traveling is not one of the equilibria states (which does not necessarily mean it's not a suitable goal for an individual, as long as expectations are tempered:)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lijogdfljk 4y ago
Agreed. It's why i get frustrated in a lot of the antiwork movements. The core of the antiwork movement is about respect and healthy treatment of course; but as a community they also fraternize (?) with people who think we shouldn't have to work at all; that it's optional and society is just asleep to this simple and obvious "fact". But of course it's bunk. Until automation "saves humanity"[1] we have to work. We can and should push for healthy balances, respectful treatment of workers, sane retirement ages, etc. But still, work needs to be done, and i find it incredibly frustrating that some people think we can all just stop working. [1]: Though i'm quite pessimistic that automation will save humanity. I suspect that while it could, it will also cause such turmoil in the beginning that we fail as a species. A nuclear winter of the working class.
- ModernMech 4y ago
  At the same time, a lot of us who are “working” are actually doing bullshit nonsense that is created just to keep us busy. Meanwhile a lot of people who do actual work like raising children, taking care of elder parents, or educating themselves are not considered to be “working” because they’re not generating someone else a profit. What would happen if all the bullshit work ended tomorrow? Would the world come to an end? I don’t think so. But if all the unpaid work out there went undone, yes, society would quickly fall apart. I don’t follow the “anti work” movement so I won’t pretend to know what they as a group believe. But for me, I believe we can drastically redefine the concept of work and come out ahead.
  - cortesoft 4y ago
    > At the same time, a lot of us who are “working” are actually doing bullshit nonsense that is created just to keep us busy. I am not going to argue that some work is more essential than other work, but I disagree that some jobs are created just to keep people busy. Why would anyone hire someone just to make sure they stayed busy? That is simply not happening. The people who control the money aren't worried about keeping people busy, they are worried about making more money. Now, is there a large part of our economy that only exists because people who have capital will pursue anything in order to grow their capital? Yes, absolutely, but those jobs still exist because someone else will give them money to obtain what the job produces. Companies aren't sitting around thinking, "oh man, too many people in the world aren't busy... let's create some more useless jobs"
spoonjim 4y ago
Just because something’s not attainable for everyone doesn’t mean you shouldn’t aspire to it yourself. Sure, lots of people will have to do stuff they don’t want to, so what? It’s like aspiring to be the best basketball player of all time. Not only is it unattainable for more than one person, but to achieve it you have to destroy everyone else’s ambitions to do the same.
- cortesoft 4y ago
  I don't think it is bad to try to make money doing what you want, but I do think it is unhealthy and antisocial to define success in life as only doing what you want at all times. To compare it to your basketball analogy, it is fine to pursue becoming the best basketball player of all time, but if you think you have failed if you don't achieve it is not good.
- cdkmoose 4y ago
  To extend the analogy, OP is saying I want some team to pay me to play basketball, but I will only play on the days I feel like it, independent of the team's schedule. That generally doesn't hold up well. If you want someone to give you money you need to conform to their desires enough to get the money, and that won't be what you want all the time.
ericmcer 4y ago
This assumes everyone has some higher ambition that they are unable to pursue due to bills. A lot of people grew up in shitty situations so job security and the ability to provide stability for their family gives life enough meaning. Expectations are definitely relative.
- colpabar 4y ago
  I think the point is that if you asked someone with a job such as a janitor or an airline luggage worker if they'd rather get paid to do something that they enjoy doing, the answer would be yes 100% of the time. To go even further, the answer would be yes for everyone with a job except for that small lucky few who actually enjoy what they do. And of course, this is not realistic, because some people would want to get paid for things that no one would be willing to pay for.
  - ericmcer 4y ago
    If you asked them what they would rather be doing I doubt many would reply with painter, writer, musician, or other career worthy passions. Obviously if someone’s passion is eating pizza or watching TV or spending time with their kids it would be unrealistic that they turn that into a career. I have many friends who work blue collar jobs and most of them aspire to do the same work but get paid more, work less or work for themselves.
  - asah 4y ago
    disagree: I've known lots of workers who are actually quite content. Obviously, everybody wants more money/benefits/etc, respect, pleasant work conditions, etc. But the workers I know have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST in jobs like research scientist, politician, stockbroker, lawyer, doctor, programmer, etc because they involve all sorts of skills & tasks they fear, despise or seem wildly unobtainable. Many people are introverted and fear meeting strangers and public speaking. Many people are enjoy the physical world and "it makes my head hurt" to spend hours thinking about abstract stuff, which a lot of these "desk jobs" involve. I highly recommend the book: How to Tell When You're Tired source: 30 years working all sorts of jobs, from warehouse and retail jobs to executive and board roles.
flippinburgers 4y ago
I am fairly confident that many (most) pilots love their job. The others that you listed are probably valid.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Some might be stuck there, but I still agree that it is largely a passion career unlike many others. Not that there is levels where compensation isn't horrific, but even those are working towards career growth.
- treis 4y ago
  Judging by their reputation as alcoholics I'd disagree. Actually seems like a quite terrible job. Doing the same thing every day over and over. And after the novelty of flight wears off probably quite boring. I know being a passenger is and outside of take off/landing I'm not sure there's much difference.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  My dad loved being a fighter pilot and instructor. He had zero interest in being an airline pilot, however, as it was just "boring holes in the air". I suppose it's like being a race car driver compared to a bus driver.
Bubble_Pop_22 4y ago
> but I don’t think you should expect it or define success in life as being able to do that. Why not? Maximum consumption with minimum amount of work is the very definition of success in every process.
dasil003 4y ago
I feel like this framing conflates personal and societal responsibility in an unhealthy way. At the end of the day we all benefit from specialization, that's the entire basis for our modern standard of living. I don't think it's the individual's responsibility to ensure that things are fair at a societal level. Not only would it be impossible given personal preferences and the subjective experience of work, but it can also have negative psychological consequences if one believes that work is not morally valuable if one doesn't dislike it. Now, if the OA felt entitled to his chosen career path regardless of economic reality then I agree that would be uncool, but I'm not seeing that here. The author is not looking for a handout. He is simply grappling with the tradeoff between optimizing for max remuneration vs the nature of the work itself.
frittata 4y ago
I've co-founded two startups and the biggest surprise/lesson for me was that most people don't want to forge their own path and customize every detail of their life. I had co-founders in each who after leaving our startups went on to 'normal' jobs and are much happier now. There are without a doubt flight attendants who hate their job, but I'd guess that most of them like their jobs and like the structure and accountability that is provided to them, and not having to figure out every detail themself. And then there are people like myself who can't stand being told what to work on and how to schedule my day.
- hirvi74 4y ago
  > but I'd guess that most of them like their jobs and like the structure and accountability that is provided to them, and not having to figure out every detail themself. It's also nice not having to worry about when/if your next paycheck will come in, if you can afford your health insurance, get company matches on 401ks, etc.. Freedom is free, after all. While security may be an illusion to some degree, it's a compromise for freedom that many are willing to make (myself included). I sometimes get urges to go out and sow some wild oats, but I debate if it's worth all the effort in the end.
- ip26 4y ago
  The structure & scaffolding can also liberate you to focus on getting really good at the things you care about.
jrm4 4y ago
I could not possibly disagree with this sort of "everybody has to work" view more; I think it's the primary problem with our current society if you could boil it down to that. Thorstein Veblen said it better than I ever could. More precisely, I suppose, it's not the factual content that I have a problem with. It's technically true, but it also doesn't need to be said. It's like telling a human to keep breathing. So instead, it serves the purpose of contributing to a society that values "sacrificial work" too much.
- bluefirebrand 4y ago
  So who gets to decide who has to do the necessary work for society to function and who gets to sit around and do nothing except benefit from their work? Do you have an equitable way to solve this issue? Or maybe people who don't do strictly necessary work still need to do something. And maybe you consider that "sacrificial", I consider it "contributing"
  - jrm4 4y ago
    I do, because it's not actually that big of an issue. The correct answer here is "localism." What would it look like in your town? I don't know, but I don't need to. Just ensure that small groups are able to figure it out for themselves. The real harm isn't the imaginary laziness you fear here.. It's scaled political power that allows groups to exploit others.
    - epups 4y ago
      That makes no sense. Most stuff you consume is not produced locally. And even then, why would I want to be a local firefighter or whatever if some other people get to sit on their ass every day?
    - xmprt 4y ago
      How is localism supposed to enable things like mobile phones, internet, video games, movies, travel, etc., function? You're suggestion is essentially to go back to the stone age. Additionally, wouldn't localism require more people to do things that they don't enjoy? For example, I'm not a fan of farming and I don't think many of my neighbors are either but fortunately, we're all able to eat pretty much any dish we like because of the food shipped from distant farms every day. > What would it look like in your town? I don't know, but I don't need to This sounds a lot like a non-answer. Perhaps I would understand what you're talking about better if you explained how you believe it would work in your town where you do have more context.
Animats 4y ago
And then he turned to the dark side: "The obvious opportunity at the time was to sell SEO services."
m463 4y ago
I think of wall street, google and others hiring the brightest minds to assure their revenues... Meanwhile, if a small fraction of those minds worked on a more efficient toilet, or desalinating water the ROI for society would be significantly higher. But I guess market forces are at work. and they make it possible for people to be paid for growing food or building infrastructure in accordance with demand.
- jdsully 4y ago
  Toilets are pretty efficient already and we have the airplane kind that use even less water. For California it might make a difference to pipe salt water for toilet use but that wouldn’t make sense around the Great Lakes.
swayvil 4y ago
You think that we need people doing stuff they don't want to do in order for the world to function. Ok. But how much? For example, somebody needs to clean the sewers. But does anybody need to do that 40 hours a week? How about 4 hours a week? I dunno about you but I could do any horrible job if it's only 4 hours a week. And then I could spend the rest of my time doing my fun job and/or whatever I feel like doing. That would be pretty close to doing only what I want. How does that work for you?
duxup 4y ago
I had some friends in college with those ideas too. I always got the feeling that despite their ideas stated that they should apply to everyone, they really just meant them and what they wanted.
renewiltord 4y ago
> This is going to apply for so much of what the author is going to expect from others to support his lifestyle of doing whatever he wants whenever he wants. He wants to write while other people grow his food, provide his infrastructure, the services he requires. What? I totally have this today and it's great and not only am I happy, but also all these people who don't want to do things find that I can pay them to do things and then they're happy too. In fact, they're happier that I pay them to do these things than if I didn't pay them to do these things and they had to do other things.
jamesrcole 4y ago
People striving to do what they want is generally a good thing, I think. A lot of innovation and benefit to society results from that.
falsemove 4y ago
There’s nothing wrong with people doing what they want to be doing. Even to your “perceived” grand visions like curing cancer or something else society has high value of - those people are usually motivated by doing that particular thing. And those people try until it’s either feasible or not, meaning they can make a living off of it. And they will get better by doing any of those things by failing and then being motivated trying harder and perhaps succeeding. So it seems that the economics will just work itself out. But I wouldn’t have a problem with somebody wanting to do something especially when they actually make an effort to do something. I think all people should have the opportunity to at least try, especially if they do you one of these jobs they don’t want to do to be able to afford the opportunity to try what they want. Respect to those people.
musicale 4y ago
> My ideal work life is to write about whatever I want, however I want, and be able to turn that into a comfortable living. My ideal work life is to eat snacks while reading HN, for a couple of hours each week (or more/fewer as desired), and to be able to turn that into a comfortable living.
ornornor 4y ago
I feel this might be a false dichotomy: there are shittier jobs to be done for society to function, but the don’t have to be done 40–60h a week per person. What if instead you could make a living working Whittier jobs a day or two a week and doing whatever you want the rest of the time? It’s harder to run a marathon sprinting, but it’s doable going slower.

iglio 4y ago

What you say is true and necessary today with the limited deployment of automation in the world. However, it needn’t be that way forever: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Communism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fully_Automated_Luxury_Commu...

_wqdq 4y ago
I'm rather ambivalent about it all myself, but just in case anybody else is curious I've found Nihislist Communism [1] to be the most coherently argued critique of FALC (and other utopian Marxist ideologies). [1] https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihilist-communism https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/monsieur-dupont-nihi...

jvalencia 4y ago

IMO, I think that pursuing a standard of living for you and your family is a reasonable and honorable goal, even if that means work is a chore. If you can love what you do that's a perk, but even if it's not there, the goal still remains. Having disposable income means you can pursue leisure opportunity, give charitably, gain security for your loved ones, etc. You don't have to love your job to accomplish your goals.

ge96 4y ago

Easier said than done but save and retire then free to do what you want.

NikolaNovak 4y ago

Basically, what is the equilibrium? There are many social equilibriums, and not all are equally desirable for all; but Everybody writing from their backpacks while traveling is not one of the equilibria states (which does not necessarily mean it's not a suitable goal for an individual, as long as expectations are tempered:)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lijogdfljk 4y ago

Agreed. It's why i get frustrated in a lot of the antiwork movements. The core of the antiwork movement is about respect and healthy treatment of course; but as a community they also fraternize (?) with people who think we shouldn't have to work at all; that it's optional and society is just asleep to this simple and obvious "fact". But of course it's bunk. Until automation "saves humanity"[1] we have to work. We can and should push for healthy balances, respectful treatment of workers, sane retirement ages, etc. But still, work needs to be done, and i find it incredibly frustrating that some people think we can all just stop working. [1]: Though i'm quite pessimistic that automation will save humanity. I suspect that while it could, it will also cause such turmoil in the beginning that we fail as a species. A nuclear winter of the working class.

ModernMech 4y ago
At the same time, a lot of us who are “working” are actually doing bullshit nonsense that is created just to keep us busy. Meanwhile a lot of people who do actual work like raising children, taking care of elder parents, or educating themselves are not considered to be “working” because they’re not generating someone else a profit. What would happen if all the bullshit work ended tomorrow? Would the world come to an end? I don’t think so. But if all the unpaid work out there went undone, yes, society would quickly fall apart. I don’t follow the “anti work” movement so I won’t pretend to know what they as a group believe. But for me, I believe we can drastically redefine the concept of work and come out ahead.
- cortesoft 4y ago
  > At the same time, a lot of us who are “working” are actually doing bullshit nonsense that is created just to keep us busy. I am not going to argue that some work is more essential than other work, but I disagree that some jobs are created just to keep people busy. Why would anyone hire someone just to make sure they stayed busy? That is simply not happening. The people who control the money aren't worried about keeping people busy, they are worried about making more money. Now, is there a large part of our economy that only exists because people who have capital will pursue anything in order to grow their capital? Yes, absolutely, but those jobs still exist because someone else will give them money to obtain what the job produces. Companies aren't sitting around thinking, "oh man, too many people in the world aren't busy... let's create some more useless jobs"

spoonjim 4y ago

Just because something’s not attainable for everyone doesn’t mean you shouldn’t aspire to it yourself. Sure, lots of people will have to do stuff they don’t want to, so what? It’s like aspiring to be the best basketball player of all time. Not only is it unattainable for more than one person, but to achieve it you have to destroy everyone else’s ambitions to do the same.

cortesoft 4y ago
I don't think it is bad to try to make money doing what you want, but I do think it is unhealthy and antisocial to define success in life as only doing what you want at all times. To compare it to your basketball analogy, it is fine to pursue becoming the best basketball player of all time, but if you think you have failed if you don't achieve it is not good.
cdkmoose 4y ago
To extend the analogy, OP is saying I want some team to pay me to play basketball, but I will only play on the days I feel like it, independent of the team's schedule. That generally doesn't hold up well. If you want someone to give you money you need to conform to their desires enough to get the money, and that won't be what you want all the time.

ericmcer 4y ago

This assumes everyone has some higher ambition that they are unable to pursue due to bills. A lot of people grew up in shitty situations so job security and the ability to provide stability for their family gives life enough meaning. Expectations are definitely relative.

colpabar 4y ago
I think the point is that if you asked someone with a job such as a janitor or an airline luggage worker if they'd rather get paid to do something that they enjoy doing, the answer would be yes 100% of the time. To go even further, the answer would be yes for everyone with a job except for that small lucky few who actually enjoy what they do. And of course, this is not realistic, because some people would want to get paid for things that no one would be willing to pay for.
- ericmcer 4y ago
  If you asked them what they would rather be doing I doubt many would reply with painter, writer, musician, or other career worthy passions. Obviously if someone’s passion is eating pizza or watching TV or spending time with their kids it would be unrealistic that they turn that into a career. I have many friends who work blue collar jobs and most of them aspire to do the same work but get paid more, work less or work for themselves.
- asah 4y ago
  disagree: I've known lots of workers who are actually quite content. Obviously, everybody wants more money/benefits/etc, respect, pleasant work conditions, etc. But the workers I know have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST in jobs like research scientist, politician, stockbroker, lawyer, doctor, programmer, etc because they involve all sorts of skills & tasks they fear, despise or seem wildly unobtainable. Many people are introverted and fear meeting strangers and public speaking. Many people are enjoy the physical world and "it makes my head hurt" to spend hours thinking about abstract stuff, which a lot of these "desk jobs" involve. I highly recommend the book: How to Tell When You're Tired source: 30 years working all sorts of jobs, from warehouse and retail jobs to executive and board roles.

flippinburgers 4y ago

I am fairly confident that many (most) pilots love their job. The others that you listed are probably valid.

Ekaros 4y ago
Some might be stuck there, but I still agree that it is largely a passion career unlike many others. Not that there is levels where compensation isn't horrific, but even those are working towards career growth.
treis 4y ago
Judging by their reputation as alcoholics I'd disagree. Actually seems like a quite terrible job. Doing the same thing every day over and over. And after the novelty of flight wears off probably quite boring. I know being a passenger is and outside of take off/landing I'm not sure there's much difference.
WalterBright 4y ago
My dad loved being a fighter pilot and instructor. He had zero interest in being an airline pilot, however, as it was just "boring holes in the air". I suppose it's like being a race car driver compared to a bus driver.

Bubble_Pop_22 4y ago

> but I don’t think you should expect it or define success in life as being able to do that. Why not? Maximum consumption with minimum amount of work is the very definition of success in every process.

dasil003 4y ago

I feel like this framing conflates personal and societal responsibility in an unhealthy way. At the end of the day we all benefit from specialization, that's the entire basis for our modern standard of living. I don't think it's the individual's responsibility to ensure that things are fair at a societal level. Not only would it be impossible given personal preferences and the subjective experience of work, but it can also have negative psychological consequences if one believes that work is not morally valuable if one doesn't dislike it. Now, if the OA felt entitled to his chosen career path regardless of economic reality then I agree that would be uncool, but I'm not seeing that here. The author is not looking for a handout. He is simply grappling with the tradeoff between optimizing for max remuneration vs the nature of the work itself.

frittata 4y ago

I've co-founded two startups and the biggest surprise/lesson for me was that most people don't want to forge their own path and customize every detail of their life. I had co-founders in each who after leaving our startups went on to 'normal' jobs and are much happier now. There are without a doubt flight attendants who hate their job, but I'd guess that most of them like their jobs and like the structure and accountability that is provided to them, and not having to figure out every detail themself. And then there are people like myself who can't stand being told what to work on and how to schedule my day.

hirvi74 4y ago
> but I'd guess that most of them like their jobs and like the structure and accountability that is provided to them, and not having to figure out every detail themself. It's also nice not having to worry about when/if your next paycheck will come in, if you can afford your health insurance, get company matches on 401ks, etc.. Freedom is free, after all. While security may be an illusion to some degree, it's a compromise for freedom that many are willing to make (myself included). I sometimes get urges to go out and sow some wild oats, but I debate if it's worth all the effort in the end.
ip26 4y ago
The structure & scaffolding can also liberate you to focus on getting really good at the things you care about.

jrm4 4y ago

I could not possibly disagree with this sort of "everybody has to work" view more; I think it's the primary problem with our current society if you could boil it down to that. Thorstein Veblen said it better than I ever could. More precisely, I suppose, it's not the factual content that I have a problem with. It's technically true, but it also doesn't need to be said. It's like telling a human to keep breathing. So instead, it serves the purpose of contributing to a society that values "sacrificial work" too much.

bluefirebrand 4y ago
So who gets to decide who has to do the necessary work for society to function and who gets to sit around and do nothing except benefit from their work? Do you have an equitable way to solve this issue? Or maybe people who don't do strictly necessary work still need to do something. And maybe you consider that "sacrificial", I consider it "contributing"
- jrm4 4y ago
  I do, because it's not actually that big of an issue. The correct answer here is "localism." What would it look like in your town? I don't know, but I don't need to. Just ensure that small groups are able to figure it out for themselves. The real harm isn't the imaginary laziness you fear here.. It's scaled political power that allows groups to exploit others.
  - epups 4y ago
    That makes no sense. Most stuff you consume is not produced locally. And even then, why would I want to be a local firefighter or whatever if some other people get to sit on their ass every day?
  - xmprt 4y ago
    How is localism supposed to enable things like mobile phones, internet, video games, movies, travel, etc., function? You're suggestion is essentially to go back to the stone age. Additionally, wouldn't localism require more people to do things that they don't enjoy? For example, I'm not a fan of farming and I don't think many of my neighbors are either but fortunately, we're all able to eat pretty much any dish we like because of the food shipped from distant farms every day. > What would it look like in your town? I don't know, but I don't need to This sounds a lot like a non-answer. Perhaps I would understand what you're talking about better if you explained how you believe it would work in your town where you do have more context.

Animats 4y ago

And then he turned to the dark side: "The obvious opportunity at the time was to sell SEO services."

m463 4y ago

I think of wall street, google and others hiring the brightest minds to assure their revenues... Meanwhile, if a small fraction of those minds worked on a more efficient toilet, or desalinating water the ROI for society would be significantly higher. But I guess market forces are at work. and they make it possible for people to be paid for growing food or building infrastructure in accordance with demand.

jdsully 4y ago
Toilets are pretty efficient already and we have the airplane kind that use even less water. For California it might make a difference to pipe salt water for toilet use but that wouldn’t make sense around the Great Lakes.

swayvil 4y ago

You think that we need people doing stuff they don't want to do in order for the world to function. Ok. But how much? For example, somebody needs to clean the sewers. But does anybody need to do that 40 hours a week? How about 4 hours a week? I dunno about you but I could do any horrible job if it's only 4 hours a week. And then I could spend the rest of my time doing my fun job and/or whatever I feel like doing. That would be pretty close to doing only what I want. How does that work for you?

duxup 4y ago

I had some friends in college with those ideas too. I always got the feeling that despite their ideas stated that they should apply to everyone, they really just meant them and what they wanted.

renewiltord 4y ago

> This is going to apply for so much of what the author is going to expect from others to support his lifestyle of doing whatever he wants whenever he wants. He wants to write while other people grow his food, provide his infrastructure, the services he requires. What? I totally have this today and it's great and not only am I happy, but also all these people who don't want to do things find that I can pay them to do things and then they're happy too. In fact, they're happier that I pay them to do these things than if I didn't pay them to do these things and they had to do other things.

jamesrcole 4y ago

People striving to do what they want is generally a good thing, I think. A lot of innovation and benefit to society results from that.

falsemove 4y ago

There’s nothing wrong with people doing what they want to be doing. Even to your “perceived” grand visions like curing cancer or something else society has high value of - those people are usually motivated by doing that particular thing. And those people try until it’s either feasible or not, meaning they can make a living off of it. And they will get better by doing any of those things by failing and then being motivated trying harder and perhaps succeeding. So it seems that the economics will just work itself out. But I wouldn’t have a problem with somebody wanting to do something especially when they actually make an effort to do something. I think all people should have the opportunity to at least try, especially if they do you one of these jobs they don’t want to do to be able to afford the opportunity to try what they want. Respect to those people.

musicale 4y ago

> My ideal work life is to write about whatever I want, however I want, and be able to turn that into a comfortable living. My ideal work life is to eat snacks while reading HN, for a couple of hours each week (or more/fewer as desired), and to be able to turn that into a comfortable living.

ornornor 4y ago

I feel this might be a false dichotomy: there are shittier jobs to be done for society to function, but the don’t have to be done 40–60h a week per person. What if instead you could make a living working Whittier jobs a day or two a week and doing whatever you want the rest of the time? It’s harder to run a marathon sprinting, but it’s doable going slower.