71–80 of 528 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have enough excess in society that we can spare enough of those things to those who are unable to take care of themselves.
It almost seems as if you are trolling. Surely we can, at least, agree that the excesses you mention exist only because of those who produce.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The wrong decision is not being insured for disaster and not saving enough when you were able to work, electing to spend the money instead. Not being unlucky with your health or having an accident. That's clearly stated in my original response if you care to read and not knee-jekingly respond. For someone who has been born disabled, the conversation should be moved to the people who brought them to life and are respo…
> For someone who has been born disabled, the conversation should be moved to the people who brought them to life and are responsible for their survival. Please explain exactly what you are suggesting or advocating for here.
e.g my grandmother had a brother who their brain stopped developing at a very young age (afaik 5), the parents ensured and my grandmother ensured that my uncle lived a full (but sadly difficult) life living and been taken care of by them and then my grandma after they passed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“We have enough excess in society” How are you measuring this? Hopefully something better than stock prices.
The world produces so much excess food we pay farmers not to grow it and fast fashion brands burn unsold merchandise in the desert.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tell me how someone born disabled made the wrong decision? After that, tell me how someone who became disabled after an accident which they themselves did not cause, made the wrong decision? Thirdly, tell me how someone who lived perfectly healthy just happend to have some blood clot shot into their brain suddenly, made the wrong decision?
The wrong decision is not being insured for disaster and not saving enough when you were able to work, electing to spend the money instead. Not being unlucky with your health or having an accident. That's clearly stated in my original response if you care to read and not knee-jekingly respond. For someone who has been born disabled, the conversation should be moved to the people who brought them to life and are respo…
If you read this article and feel worried about your financial situation if you become disabled, you might look into long-term disability insurance (LTD). It's a policy where, if you become disabled to the point where you can't work, it pays out $X per month, every year until you're 65. And if you're partly disabled and have to cut back your hours, some policies compensate you for those lost wages. These LTD policies…
As another commenter has pointed out, the surest ally in this case is family. Not all families are tight, but families are largely the ones who will take care of the indigent in a compassionate, long-term way.
The productivity topic is interesting. From my view, it really is _people_ that require you to be useful. Different social or political systems can be better or worse about this, but all of them are sort of playing with the same base human behavior.
Try being the one who constantly needs help from your friend. That friend will leave eventually. And they'll leave in an emotional sense. They'll sort of think less of you, or be a bit disgusted.
Try getting a woman to be sexually attracted to you if you constantly need her help or support. Outside of a few interesting fetishists, you're out of luck.
You don't even need to imagine the workplace scenario -- you already know how that works.
But picture a pre-industrial, barter economy. How well would you do when you're not able to contribute? There is history of people caring for the old, infirm, and indigent ... but remember that when you go that far back you're talking about kin-groups. You're taking care of your grandfather, or your great uncle. Not some random guy you happened upon.
> If your worth is not determined by your productivity, then what remains of you underneath it all? Everything else. You are worth so much more than your productivity. I'm glad I never got sucked into the protestant work ethic, since defining yourself based on your labour and the value you generate from that sounds woefully narrow-minded (this doesn't feel like quite the right word, but close enough). It's probably h…
This is something that needs to change at the cultural level but is incredibly hard to change because in order to do so you need to convince most people that the foundational understanding of their worth as a person needs to come from somewhere else.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who produces the food you eat, the clothes you wear, the house you live in, the energy you use, the medicine you consume, etc. while you airily define ‘productivity’ as reading the classics and spending time with friends?
We have enough excess in society that we can spare enough of those things to those who are unable to take care of themselves.
Its everybody for themselves in US, fuck the rest, the more the better. Some 'society' it is. The more miserable and poor others are, the better you can exploit them right. How horrible the world would be if those folks stocking shelves in shops or trimming your hair would also have a shot for a decent life.
Middle class is for mediocre suckers, either your are a star (at least from financial perspective, usually the rest of life is very opposite of it) or a loser. Can't say I can respect that system, but as long as I am not part of it nor bombed by its military industrial complex to death I simply don't care. Folks can stay and be part of that system or leave, that part of freedom is still sorta there.
Or that an unproductive member of society wasn't always scorned or at least viewed negatively by those having to produce.