4 ms·

Setting one’s kids up well is one of the primary motivators to work an outsized amount.

by ericd 4y ago

lancesells 4y ago
This is part of why I can see copyright extending past an author's death. For many it takes a lifetime to pay off monetarily. For some artist's they don't see any success until death.
jhanschoo 4y ago
I see a society where one's kids have to put in their own effort in order to do well as more egalitarian, productive, and democratic. Parents of means who want their kids to do well can't do so with material possessions, but have to take exceptional care in their upbringing and skills. It correctly dissuades parents from working to the point of alienation and unjust negligence of children attempting to set their children up for success (which presumably increases the chances of maladjusted children), and presumably will result in more productive labor from the child.
- __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
  I see that society when I'm being optimistic. Usually I see one where the parents' efforts end up contributing to zero-sum games such that they set their children up for success at the expense of their peers, which creates wasteful conflict down the line and ends up being negative-sum in the long run.
  - jhanschoo 4y ago
    Presumably parental involvement in their children to set them up for success inherently makes lives more worth living than, say, excessive work to the neglect of children. It's not as though private corporate competition isn't at times wasteful and destructive effort anyway.
    - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
      Well yeah, working too hard and neglecting your children is obviously the worst of both worlds. But I don't think anybody is shooting for that outcome. I'm worried about the cases where the parents are working hard, for instance, to be able to afford property in the good school districts. In aggregate this widens class strata and creates preventable problems that the children will have to address (e.g. now you have to pay cops to keep the riffraff in its place when you could've just not had riffraff). Better to invest in solving problems that everybody shares, because your kid will be part of that everybody. Though I admit that that's easier said than done.

Setting one’s kids up well is one of the primary motivators to work an outsized amount.

by ericd 4y ago

Setting one’s kids up well is one of the primary motivators to work an outsized amount.

This is part of why I can see copyright extending past an author's death. For many it takes a lifetime to pay off monetarily. For some artist's they don't see any success until death.

jhanschoo 4y ago

I see a society where one's kids have to put in their own effort in order to do well as more egalitarian, productive, and democratic. Parents of means who want their kids to do well can't do so with material possessions, but have to take exceptional care in their upbringing and skills. It correctly dissuades parents from working to the point of alienation and unjust negligence of children attempting to set their children up for success (which presumably increases the chances of maladjusted children), and presumably will result in more productive labor from the child.

__MatrixMan__ 4y ago
I see that society when I'm being optimistic. Usually I see one where the parents' efforts end up contributing to zero-sum games such that they set their children up for success at the expense of their peers, which creates wasteful conflict down the line and ends up being negative-sum in the long run.
- jhanschoo 4y ago
  Presumably parental involvement in their children to set them up for success inherently makes lives more worth living than, say, excessive work to the neglect of children. It's not as though private corporate competition isn't at times wasteful and destructive effort anyway.
  - __MatrixMan__ 4y ago
    Well yeah, working too hard and neglecting your children is obviously the worst of both worlds. But I don't think anybody is shooting for that outcome. I'm worried about the cases where the parents are working hard, for instance, to be able to afford property in the good school districts. In aggregate this widens class strata and creates preventable problems that the children will have to address (e.g. now you have to pay cops to keep the riffraff in its place when you could've just not had riffraff). Better to invest in solving problems that everybody shares, because your kid will be part of that everybody. Though I admit that that's easier said than done.