4 ms·

Nobody would work if housing and food were super cheap, for instance.

by HPsquared 10mo ago

nkrisc 10mo ago
There’s an equilibrium. If no one worked, housing and food would not be super cheap.
kingkawn 10mo ago
Or people would do things they were genuinely interested in rather than from desperation
I-M-S 10mo ago
Saving the economy by turning water into a luxury item. The op-eds basically write themselves.
- robocat 10mo ago
  Your cynicism is too close to the truth. Liquid Death, CocaCola branded water, and household water filtration are unbelievable luxuries. Manufactured status for the masses. And my examines are truly luxuries: they are unnecessary for drinking water in developed countries. Pools and green lawns have higher status when water is more expensive/scarcer. I don't hang out with extremely high-status people, or the extremely wealthy, but I'm sure both of those groups have some surprisingly luxury water. Luxury is a human concept that is completely disconnected from the underlying product. Provenance, Branding, Myth, Environmental, Science all matter for status.
toomuchtodo 10mo ago
There are overwhelming examples of people who continue to work when all of their basic needs are met. Some work because they love to, some work because they have to; we, collectively, should be trying as hard as possible to make work optional (automation, etc), because the point of life is to live, not to work. Some combination of Abundance [1], Solarpunk [2], etc. The entire planet will eventually be in population decline [3] (with most of the world already below fertility replacement rate), so optimizing for endless growth is unnecessary. So keep spinning up flywheels towards these ends if we want to optimize for the human experience, art, creativity, and innovation (to distribute opportunity to parity with talent). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/12/supply-boom-in-cheaper-renewables-will-seal-end-of-fossil-fuel-era-says-iea https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/12/supply-b... [3] https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf (think in systems)
- kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 10mo ago
  > the point of life is to live, not to work I'd love to learn how you came to this definitive conclusion. At no point in human history have humans not worked (I'm sure there are some limited exceptions, none of which have been sustainable). Perhaps you meant to say the point of life is to survive, but you have to work to make that happen.
  - toomuchtodo 10mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Top_Five_Regrets_of_the_Dying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Top_Five_Regrets_of_the_Dy... https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Waldo_Emerson https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Waldo_Emerson “Art is the proper task of life” -- Nietzsche "Art is to console those who are broken by life." -- Vincent van Gogh Broadly speaking, creation is the meaning of life, not work, although some creation could be considered work. Survival is table stakes to achieve self actualization and a chance at finding meaning and contributing to the commons during a lifetime.
  - allturtles 10mo ago
    > At no point in human history have humans not worked This is a non sequitur. The discussion is about the point of life. At no point in history have humans not pooped, but I would imagine that few consider pooping the point of life.
- Ray20 10mo ago
  > people who continue to work when all of their basic needs are met There are no such things as "basic needs". If people can easily satisfy their basic needs, they simply expands this concept until it ceases to be easily satisfied In other words, abundance is a myth promoted by mentally ill cultists, and meeting the basic needs of all people is unattainable.
  - toomuchtodo 10mo ago
    Disagree. Citations below. Please consume more data and update priors accordingly. How much growth is required to achieve good lives for all? Insights from needs-based analysis - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245229292... | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2024.100612 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2024.100612 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43465127 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43465127 - March 2025 (26 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42529256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42529256 - December 2024 (10 comments) (TLDR Decent living standards for 8.5B people would require 30% of current resource use)
greekrich92 10mo ago
If people were broadly socialized for collaboration and collective good, people could and would achieve as much with many fewer hours of work, and with the many more hours available for personal creative pursuit and play. There is no innate human nature that prevents this, only a prevailing social order which reinforces individualism and competition at the expense of the many.

Nobody would work if housing and food were super cheap, for instance.

nkrisc 10mo ago

There’s an equilibrium. If no one worked, housing and food would not be super cheap.

kingkawn 10mo ago

Or people would do things they were genuinely interested in rather than from desperation

I-M-S 10mo ago

Saving the economy by turning water into a luxury item. The op-eds basically write themselves.

robocat 10mo ago
Your cynicism is too close to the truth. Liquid Death, CocaCola branded water, and household water filtration are unbelievable luxuries. Manufactured status for the masses. And my examines are truly luxuries: they are unnecessary for drinking water in developed countries. Pools and green lawns have higher status when water is more expensive/scarcer. I don't hang out with extremely high-status people, or the extremely wealthy, but I'm sure both of those groups have some surprisingly luxury water. Luxury is a human concept that is completely disconnected from the underlying product. Provenance, Branding, Myth, Environmental, Science all matter for status.

toomuchtodo 10mo ago

There are overwhelming examples of people who continue to work when all of their basic needs are met. Some work because they love to, some work because they have to; we, collectively, should be trying as hard as possible to make work optional (automation, etc), because the point of life is to live, not to work. Some combination of Abundance [1], Solarpunk [2], etc. The entire planet will eventually be in population decline [3] (with most of the world already below fertility replacement rate), so optimizing for endless growth is unnecessary. So keep spinning up flywheels towards these ends if we want to optimize for the human experience, art, creativity, and innovation (to distribute opportunity to parity with talent). [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_book) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_(Klein_and_Thompson_... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/12/supply-boom-in-cheaper-renewables-will-seal-end-of-fossil-fuel-era-says-iea https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/12/supply-b... [3] https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/Slides_London.pdf (think in systems)

kQq9oHeAz6wLLS 10mo ago
> the point of life is to live, not to work I'd love to learn how you came to this definitive conclusion. At no point in human history have humans not worked (I'm sure there are some limited exceptions, none of which have been sustainable). Perhaps you meant to say the point of life is to survive, but you have to work to make that happen.
- toomuchtodo 10mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Top_Five_Regrets_of_the_Dying https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Top_Five_Regrets_of_the_Dy... https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Waldo_Emerson https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ralph_Waldo_Emerson “Art is the proper task of life” -- Nietzsche "Art is to console those who are broken by life." -- Vincent van Gogh Broadly speaking, creation is the meaning of life, not work, although some creation could be considered work. Survival is table stakes to achieve self actualization and a chance at finding meaning and contributing to the commons during a lifetime.
- allturtles 10mo ago
  > At no point in human history have humans not worked This is a non sequitur. The discussion is about the point of life. At no point in history have humans not pooped, but I would imagine that few consider pooping the point of life.
Ray20 10mo ago
> people who continue to work when all of their basic needs are met There are no such things as "basic needs". If people can easily satisfy their basic needs, they simply expands this concept until it ceases to be easily satisfied In other words, abundance is a myth promoted by mentally ill cultists, and meeting the basic needs of all people is unattainable.
- toomuchtodo 10mo ago
  Disagree. Citations below. Please consume more data and update priors accordingly. How much growth is required to achieve good lives for all? Insights from needs-based analysis - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452292924000493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S245229292... | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2024.100612 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wdp.2024.100612 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43465127 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43465127 - March 2025 (26 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42529256 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42529256 - December 2024 (10 comments) (TLDR Decent living standards for 8.5B people would require 30% of current resource use)

greekrich92 10mo ago

If people were broadly socialized for collaboration and collective good, people could and would achieve as much with many fewer hours of work, and with the many more hours available for personal creative pursuit and play. There is no innate human nature that prevents this, only a prevailing social order which reinforces individualism and competition at the expense of the many.