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

“People simply empty out”

lettersofnote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 477 posts

Re: “People simply empty out”

#41

Post by enraged_camel »

jgross206 wrote: post #38
enraged_camel wrote: post #32

>>You know my old saying, "Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors." Some people balk at the idea of "wage slavery," primarily because they think it is so different from the traditional slavery that it should not be called that. But the question is, if you are doing something and the alternative is starvation and death, are you really a free human being? If you think about it for a…

The difference, to me, is that the lack of freedom you describe is simply a part of the human condition (food and shelter require work, which has been true as long as life has existed) as opposed to what you call "traditional slavery" which is man-made.

>>"traditional slavery" which is man-made.

So is capitalism. So is the corporate hierarchy. Heck, the society we live in right now is man-made. Why does that matter as an evaluation criteria?

Yes, food and shelter have always required work. The difference is that they have required work by the person for the person. Or by the person for their family. Or by the person for their tribe. This meant that you worked only as much was actually needed - i.e. subsistence - and no more.

That is a very different set up than what we have now. The cost of healthcare alone makes subsistence living impossible.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#42

Post by dvanduzer »

enraged_camel wrote: post #32

>>You know my old saying, "Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors." Some people balk at the idea of "wage slavery," primarily because they think it is so different from the traditional slavery that it should not be called that. But the question is, if you are doing something and the alternative is starvation and death, are you really a free human being? If you think about it for a…

It's a loaded term, though. Regardless of whether you believe African-Americans are still experiencing the negative effects of slavery 150 years after it was abolished.

The thing that is so particularly sinister:

A: "Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the others."

B: "You're right, so we should do away with affirmative action."

C: "Exactly, it's racist since these days there are plenty of white people that are just as disadvantaged."

D: "I hereby enact this law that officially ends affirmative action."

E: "Great, now let's solve the nuanced problems of inequality across the board!"

crickets

Re: “People simply empty out”

#43

Post by _delirium »

dictum wrote: post #40
_delirium wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hence the somewhat curious (and I think, very American) idea of the "Golden Years". If you put your head down and work hard, taking no vacations, until you're age 65, then you flip 180 degrees in the other direction and retire into a life of full-time leisure. So if you live long enough, it really won't be a waste; you cash it in all at the end! A Scandinavian psychologist somewhat recently proposed a typically Scand…

>he suggested people should work to age 80, but work proportionally less in all the years up to there. At 70, your body is generally not able to do the same things you were doing at 20/30, at least not with the same ease. A 75 year old man could work as hard as a 25 year old man, but the same amount of work will probably take a greater toll on his health. In a way, seems like his scheme is pretty much geared to make…

Is it really more impractical for a 70-year-old to work 25 hours, than for a 60-year-old to work 40 hours? The latter is widely expected today, and we expect 60-year-olds to work as hard as 25-year-olds. Otherwise, we'll hire the 25-year-old over them. If that's a problem, we should change it across the board.

Note that this proposal is also in the context of a system that provides full support for job retraining and unemployment pay in the gaps (and a good disability and mental-health system), so if you run into serious problems you have options.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#44

Post by mikeash »

consz wrote: post #35
pdx6 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. It is $3323. 1oz gold coin price in USD: 1969 40 2013 1362

Incorrect, it is worth approx $0. Data General NOVA: 1969 $8000 2013 ~$0 $100 * ($0 / $8000) = $0

Nah, it's really worth $110,150, since you could have held on to the $100 for two years, then bought into Intel's IPO which would result in 5,000 shares held today due to subsequent splits, which are currently going for $22.03 each.

I first tried this exercise with oil instead of gold, but the price change over the period in question is nearly identical. I doubt it means anything, but I thought it was interesting.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#45

Post by wwweston »

I've been at my current full-time job a bit over a year. The previous six years were a mix of freelance, contract, and startup work -- sometimes full-time, sometimes way-more-than-full-time, and sometimes not at all... but usually part-time.

There are some things I like about the current job, and if I stick around at least another six months, I'll likely play a key role in overhauling the front end of a major automaker's website using state-of-the art. Not a bad feather to stick in a cap.

On the other hand, the chances that I'll do anything else in the meanwhile seem pretty slim. I notice in the last year alone, my energy for original/personal projects is diminished, I feel less creative/thoughtful in general -- and arguably even less interesting than during the aforementioned freelance period. I do feel, as Bukowski put it, somewhat emptied out by my work.

It's possible what I really need is a different full-time gig, since I have been in some full-time situations that felt energizing. But I'm starting to be convinced that when I'm hiring myself out part-time, I stay more personally grounded and sharper as far as my general skills and strength in the field goes.

Unfortunately, steady skilled part-time employment seems to be considerably more difficult to find than full-time.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#46

Post by mikeash »

jusben1369 wrote: post #26
baddox wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the distinction between "perceived value" and just normal value?

Little but that's sort of a distraction to the main point of the discussion. Using gold is no more helpful than say using the price of a barrel of crude oil then and now.

Interestingly, using crude oil gets you about the same results as gold. The figures above show a 34x nominal increase in the price of gold, while crude oil over the same period went up 32x.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#47

Post by dcraw »

enraged_camel wrote: post #32

>>You know my old saying, "Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors." Some people balk at the idea of "wage slavery," primarily because they think it is so different from the traditional slavery that it should not be called that. But the question is, if you are doing something and the alternative is starvation and death, are you really a free human being? If you think about it for a…

Life cannot be sustained without effort. Does real freedom entail freedom from the demands of reality? The question I have is, whose obligation would you say it is to provide a job that you consider good enough?

Re: “People simply empty out”

#48

Post by coryrc »

enraged_camel wrote: post #41
jgross206 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference, to me, is that the lack of freedom you describe is simply a part of the human condition (food and shelter require work, which has been true as long as life has existed) as opposed to what you call "traditional slavery" which is man-made.

>>"traditional slavery" which is man-made. So is capitalism. So is the corporate hierarchy. Heck, the society we live in right now is man-made. Why does that matter as an evaluation criteria? Yes, food and shelter have always required work. The difference is that they have required work by the person for the person. Or by the person for their family. Or by the person for their tribe. This meant that you worked only a…

> The cost of healthcare alone makes subsistence living impossible.

You don't seem to understand what subsistence living means.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#49

Post by PavlovsCat »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #23

I support and understand what he's saying, but I think too many times we set up this false choice between "pursuing our dreams" and "working for the man" There's honor -- and authenticity -- in making choices for your life that involve working in the system. I used to look down on those who worked jobs they hated and would say things like "That's just not for me. I don't know how you can do it." until one day somebod…

That other people don't have a choice in doing that jobs they complain about doesn't mean there is "honour" in that. It's degrading to be forced into doing something you see no value in.

And what does "authenticity" even mean in this context? There is authenticity and uniqueness in the things people do despite their soul killing jobs, but what's authentic about, say, selling your body? I find this just as condescending, sorry: If those people complain, i.e. if they say it sucks for them, then it sucks for them. Talking about authenticy and uniqueness, and pretending they have much a of a choice, is respecting a strawman (i.e. decisions they never got to make), while disrespecting their actual situation.

Re: “People simply empty out”

#50

Post by enoch_r »

enraged_camel wrote: post #41
jgross206 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference, to me, is that the lack of freedom you describe is simply a part of the human condition (food and shelter require work, which has been true as long as life has existed) as opposed to what you call "traditional slavery" which is man-made.

>>"traditional slavery" which is man-made. So is capitalism. So is the corporate hierarchy. Heck, the society we live in right now is man-made. Why does that matter as an evaluation criteria? Yes, food and shelter have always required work. The difference is that they have required work by the person for the person. Or by the person for their family. Or by the person for their tribe. This meant that you worked only a…

> The cost of healthcare alone makes subsistence living impossible.

What? It's perfectly possible to receive "subsistence healthcare" in today's society--just never go to the doctor or take any medicine. If you want to splurge, do some research online, and you'll gain knowledge leagues ahead of "subsistence" medicine.

Post reply on HN