151–160 of 499 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't be so happy about it. I'm like you but 5 years in the future when it's time to look for a new job. At the beginning I was keeping my skills sharp, but after a while you become lazy. Especially when you see everyone around you not doing anything you sort of lose your motivation to do work.
So how do you get your skills back?
Edwardian-era mansions employed whole teams of butlers whose sole job was replacing candles. Not everyone is in a position to make a discernible impact on society. 20% of society will always drive 80% of progress. Think hard how you want the remaining 80% to support their families.
Pretty simple, return to a 90% top tax rate and give the proceeds out as Basic Income. This shit situation we are in is not sustainable, we have levels of inequality in the US not seen since the roaring 20s and we all know how that ended.
Suppose we tax Forbes 500 at 100% level and the companies too. That would provide about 2 billion USD a year. Divided by population it will be less than $2k a person yearly.
Suppose you tax top 10%, I'd expect that to double this number. Still way not enough. And we're not even close to military budget.
A few hours later my supervisor and a union rep showed up fuming. They have people for moving things, why was I trying to take their jobs?!
The goon category is interesting in a future world where AI has replaced most jobs, because it can employ an unlimited number of people. (Goon jobs exist to counterbalance other goon jobs. Militaries are the canonical example.) Most jobs -- teachers, auto workers, plumbers, farmers -- have a natural ceiling on employment related to demand, but goon jobs don't because when one side hires more goons, the other side has…
Kind of lost me when they gave military jobs as an example. By this logic, it is "pointless" for organisms to have immune systems, since if other organisms didn't cause infection it wouldn't be necessary. Maybe, but that's not the way the world is (or was, or likely will be anytime soon). It's a definition of "pointless" so remote from the real world as to seem...pointless.
I'm scratching my head at this.
https://aeon.co/essays/why-we-should-guard-against-military-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The frustrating thing is though: we have plenty of real demand Social work, infrastructure repairs, mental health services. But all the effort coalesces around BIG Corp. and Douche Co. needs first Somehow we’re convinced that Bezos and Koch’s are more important than our neighbors Some looney economists will tell you it’s proven in physics these people are just better Ignoring the history of violent imperialism and co…
All demand is "real demand." Someone wants something and is willing to pay you. That's real.
"All demand is real demand" is true only when the demand is not intentionally manipulated.
I'm a programmer working at a big-tech company. I make ~$350k/year, even though my job could be done equally well by a college intern. I only do ~2 hours of productive work in an average day. My previous jobs were far more interesting and challenging, and I had apparently done extremely well in my interviews. Hence why I got an offer with an extremely good compensation package. However, the team that I go put into, i…
Which city? I'm in the midwest and would need that comp to relocate to SF or NY ;( didn't think it would actually be viable. Actually, if you have some time for some questions, can you PM me?
Keynes was a little more direct: "The government should pay people to dig holes in the ground and then fill them up."
However, digging a hole in the ground and then filling it up is horribly, soul crushingly demotivating. Even if someone is working in a job that de facto amounts to doing just that, it should be covered up so that this fact isn't obvious and that a person can reasonably choose to ignore the truth and convince themselves that their job has some real value. Which is actually done, all kinds of internal propaganda, glor…
Probably a motivator to get a better / real job? I certainly prefer that over UBI
Keynes was a little more direct: "The government should pay people to dig holes in the ground and then fill them up."
Keynes said that the government paying people to dig holes and fill them up was sufficient to escape a liquidity trap. He didn't actually advocate nonproductive work.
"If the Treasury were to fill old bottles with banknotes, bury them at suitable depths in disused coal mines which are then filled up to the surface with town rubbish, and leave it private enterprise on well tried principles of laissez-faire to dig the notes up again (the right to do so being obtained, of course, by tendering for leases of the note-bearing territory), there need be no more unemployment and, with the help of the repercussions, the real income of the community, and its capital wealth also, would probably become a good deal greater than it actually is."