3 ms·
What you're describing is what we had in communist times in Eastern Europe. Absolutely everyone had a job since not having a job was illegal. It might not have
by ChuckNorris89 4y ago
What you're describing is what we had in communist times in Eastern Europe. Absolutely everyone had a job since not having a job was illegal. It might not have been a useful one, or a well paid one, or the job of your dreams, but everyone was given a job to do, regardless of how pointless it was, even if you didn't pursue any higher education or vocational training.
You were always given something to do for the state, no matter your situation. That's why automation was so shit compared to the west in the '80s. Why invest in advanced automation to make goods faster and cheaper when you already have endless cheap labor you need to keep busy so they don't revolt, and you don't have much consumer demand for goods since everyone is more or less equally poor?
Granted, most people weren't terribly bothered by this back then, as most jobs, even the shitty ones, came with free housing from the government and free schooling for your kids. So as long as you kept your mouth shut, your head down, showed up to your useless busy-work job, and didn't rock the boat, you'd could have a pretty easy life regardless of your lack of skills or education.
- quantified 4y agoThat's not how capitalism works. Owners will hire the minimum number of workers for as close to minimum wage as possible. Any attempt to have government-created jobs will encounter major fights, even though the USA could use a WPA to fix infrastructure and do the inspirational public works that we can't bring ourselves to otherwise. Masses of starving people are just fine with the owning class.
- jonathankoren 4y agoThe rich want to maintain their position in society. They’ll gladly pay the guillotine insurance of full, but cheap employment.