Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 576 posts

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#31

Post by IanDrake »

wildmusings wrote: post #6
jokoon wrote: post #5

There is a difference between a job you like, and a job you do because you believe "work sets you free" or because you believe work is a some sort of value or a necessary pain everybody has to take part in. I'm unemployed and I really don't think I have any duties to work in fast food or to deliver pizza because I must contribute. If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will. I think it's a great thi…

> I'm unemployed and I really don't think I have any duties to work in fast food or to deliver pizza because I must contribute. If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will. I think it's a great thing to be able to live a frugal life and still be healthy enough. Why do you think that you should have the right to live off of other people's work? Welfare checks aren't fairy money, they're money that ca…

Judging by the down votes you must be wrong. Welfare is indeed fairy money.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#32

Post by crdoconnor »

henrikschroder wrote: post #22
crdoconnor wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll have "enough" full time labor when everybody it fully satisfied with what they have and there's nothing more that they'd buy if they had more money.* Until then, if there's not enough jobs, that's an artificially induced shortage (e.g. austerity). * Excepting natural resources - e.g. "more" beachfront property.

So you're saying there's no way to reach post-labour before post-scarcity? Hmm, that's interesting, I hope it's not true.

I'm saying that austerity is being disguised as near-post-scarcity. Jobs are hard to come by in the US at the same time that infrastructure is crumbling. That's a lack of jobs not a lack of necessary work.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#33

Post by Eupolemos »

wildmusings wrote: post #14
gambiting wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he thinks is irrelevant. The system is in place to allow people without jobs to survive. We either have to have that, or guarantee that everyone has a job - I come from a former communist republic that tried to do the later, it's not pretty. I would much rather live in a country that let's him live off welfare than in a country that tries to shove a job everyone's throat.

I'm not against welfare. I was responding to his assertion that he feels no obligation to work, even if jobs are available.

But in reality there's more to it, right?

Yes, jobs are available, but they also get filled quickly. There's no shortage. The unemployed can out-bid each other in a "how-low-can-you-go" competition, but that just leads to working poor.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#34

Post by jjoonathan »

alexmingoia wrote: post #21
carsongross wrote: post #2

The essay suffers from Ted-talk disease: lots of grand gestures and bromides, not as much rigorous thinking. The underlying problem is an important one, however. A little-discussed solution to this problem is one I would like to see tried, distributism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism A book I am currently reading (and enjoying) on it is: https://www.amazon.com/Toward-Truly-Free-Market-Distributist...

> Under such a system, most people would be able to earn a living without having to rely on the use of the property of others to do so. Examples of people earning a living in this way would be farmers who own their own land and related machinery, plumbers who own their own tools, software developers who own their own computer Nonsense. Our abundance is increased by specialization not a lack of it. Specialization and…

If 5 companies all invest R&D in developing smartphones that fulfill essentially the same purpose, is 4/5ths of the R&D money wasted? I'd say not -- competition decreases prices and increases quality. Even if it's "morally" redundant as compared to a world run by a benevolent supercomputer, it serves a concrete purpose with concrete benefits.

Similarly, if a tractor can prevent Joe from working a miserable low-skill job in a world where the supply of labor dramatically exceeds demand, it's a good investment for Joe. Even if it's "morally" just as redundant as the R&D dollars, it serves a concrete purpose with concrete benefits.

Of course, Joe would have to buy a great deal more than a tractor to realize this dream, not to mention that the fabled "tractor" which could actually free Joe from working harder than a minimum wage job doesn't exist yet, and probably bears little resemblance to the "car for farming" we've been talking about. Currently the cost of centralized production (the rent-seeking it enables) is small compared to the benefits. I don't think that's in question. I do think it's a function of manufacturing technology, though, and I don't think the scales are destined to forever tip the way they do now.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#35

Post by sqeaky »

lucideer wrote: post #30
alexmingoia wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Under such a system, most people would be able to earn a living without having to rely on the use of the property of others to do so. Examples of people earning a living in this way would be farmers who own their own land and related machinery, plumbers who own their own tools, software developers who own their own computer Nonsense. Our abundance is increased by specialization not a lack of it. Specialization and…

Generally speaking, I agree with the overall content of your post. However your first and last sentences really emphasise for me the real problem: oversimplifying and stratifying the discussion. "Nonsense" is an extreme overstatement, there are nuances to both arguments. "This is economics 101" is exactly the problem: we're dealing with an economic system that isn't working. Questioning economics 101 is precisely wha…

How do you build a system that is stable where an individual is expected to leave some personal gain on the table?

That runs entirely counter to human nature. If you can solve that you may have something workable, but without it "Nonsense" is as good a word as any.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#36

Post by henrikschroder »

atemerev wrote: post #26
henrikschroder wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're saying there's no way to reach post-labour before post-scarcity? Hmm, that's interesting, I hope it's not true.

How it could be not true? What is "fair" income in scarcity?

I can imagine a future where the basic standard of living for everyone is like what we give senior citizens today. Everyone is clothed, fed, has a roof over their heads, and has access to medical care.

But if you want more than basic, then you have to perform labour of some sort. Want to take the trip to Mars? Gotta work for it.

Yes, there will be a difference between those who labour and those who don't, but I still think it would be a huge win if noone in society would ever struggle to put food on their table.

There's a struggle between retired pensioners and everyone else in society about how much retired citizens should get, but there's still an understanding on both sides that past labour has some value, but that that value is less than present labour, so there's a balance. I hope the same would be true in a post-labour society.

And, of course, the difference between the labourers and the not-labourers would be an incentive to reach post-scarcity where that difference is wiped out.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#37

Post by cperciva »

lucideer wrote: post #30
alexmingoia wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Under such a system, most people would be able to earn a living without having to rely on the use of the property of others to do so. Examples of people earning a living in this way would be farmers who own their own land and related machinery, plumbers who own their own tools, software developers who own their own computer Nonsense. Our abundance is increased by specialization not a lack of it. Specialization and…

Generally speaking, I agree with the overall content of your post. However your first and last sentences really emphasise for me the real problem: oversimplifying and stratifying the discussion. "Nonsense" is an extreme overstatement, there are nuances to both arguments. "This is economics 101" is exactly the problem: we're dealing with an economic system that isn't working. Questioning economics 101 is precisely wha…

"This is economics 101" is exactly the problem: we're dealing with an economic system that isn't working. Questioning economics 101 is precisely what's needed, and I'd argue that while your arguments are sound, they've been treated as absolutes, which they're not.

This makes as much sense as saying "You say that my magical spacecraft won't work due to the laws of physics, but physics is exactly the problem: We can't travel to Alpha Centauri yet. Questioning the laws of physics is precisely what's needed...".

You don't get to ignore facts simply because they're inconvenient.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#39

Post by GFischer »

wildmusings wrote: post #14
gambiting wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What he thinks is irrelevant. The system is in place to allow people without jobs to survive. We either have to have that, or guarantee that everyone has a job - I come from a former communist republic that tried to do the later, it's not pretty. I would much rather live in a country that let's him live off welfare than in a country that tries to shove a job everyone's throat.

I'm not against welfare. I was responding to his assertion that he feels no obligation to work, even if jobs are available.

I didn't downvote you, but I believe it didn't come across that way (it's hard to gauge what you tried to convey across the Internet sometimes).

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#40

Post by a3n »

Practicality wrote: post #4

At this point I've already come to accept that fulltime labor for everyone is simply not going to happen. We just don't need it. The big question is will the majority be able to maintain enough power to obtain income for those who aren't working, or will we see some kind of serious class warfare/starving populations? This is a huge question in human history and it remains to be seen how we as a species are going to a…

> The big question is will the majority be able to maintain enough power to obtain income for those who aren't working, or will we see some kind of serious class warfare/starving populations?

In the United States it will be the class warfare/starving thing. You don't deserve anything here unless you pay for it. Many people believe that taking unemployment compensation is shameful.

I think a lot of us will be fed in prisons.

EDIT: In some places you have to pay to not be vertical. https://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/feb/18/defensive-ar...

> Sculptor Fabian Brunsing brought a satirical eye to the issue by creating the “pay bench”, an art installation of a park bench that retracts its metal spikes for a limited time when the prospective sitter feeds it a coin. Chinese officials, completely missing the joke, thought that this was a great idea and installed similar benches in Yantai Park of the Shangdong province.

Post reply on HN