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

“So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 206 posts

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#161

Post by zo1 »

sktrdie wrote: post #139
aerocapture wrote: post #92

Instead of asking ourselves which particular jobs are "bullshit" and which are not, maybe we should ask why we need or want "jobs" at all. If every citizen received some minimum universal basic income, what might we do with our time instead of going to jobs we hate? I think the point might be that we've reached a state of technological progress where many of the functions of a modern civilization can be handled by a…

Wouldn't a UBI simply be inflationary? That is, rather than making 0 you make 1500 (say). But since everybody is making 1500, then it would be the same as making 0 again. So unless we have strict blocks on pricing things, UBI seems nonsensical.

At the very least, it skews peoples' motivations for work. I.e. Do nothing and get 1500, or work as a low-wage say woodcutter/garbage man, and get 1600. You're effectively doing a shitty 9-5 job so you can get 100 (or whatever $X) more than the guy next door doing nothing all day.

People say that's liberating and "equality" for all, buy I say it's completely the opposite and directly unfair to a lot of people.

And now that I re-read your post about it being an inflationary scenario, it makes more sense. All of a sudden, you have a reduction in individuals willing to do hard/hateful labor for a small amount more than basic income. This reduces their supply, and thus the salaries go up. Essentially, it sounds like it would make 1500 the new 0 as you put it. Not sure where to follow that train of thought further, though.

Anyone care to continue it from there?

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#162

Post by orangecat »

spydum wrote: post #93
_abattoir wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When most people say "bullshit job", it seems to me like they really mean "job that could be solved by a well-built machine". Farming used to be a bullshit job until we built gigantic combines and automated watering systems and agricultural data storage systems, and now our farming problems are electronic, not logistic. (except for water, but that's another story.) So for the example of an actuary, ideally their job…

> The moral of the story is we should automate jobs that people don't like doing. who decides what jobs people dont like doing? Just because you might not like being a taxi driver, farmer, actuary, etc, doesnt mean you should demolish the job with automation -- plenty of people find these jobs provide a fulfilling workday and are passionate about them. any automation there would deprive them of doing them as a profes…

how would we feel if tomorrow, we woke up and some guys from stanford published new research on AI which can automagically produce working software given a set of requirements -- and they give it away for free. the role of software development is no longer required

It might be inconvenient for me in the short term, but the world would be much better off overall. Trying to forbid that technology so that I could keep my current job would be selfish and destructive.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#163

Post by roymurdock »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #133
diminoten wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You honestly can't be so arrogant so as to assume that if you can't see the benefit of an activity, that it must not have any benefit, right? Lobbyists are critical to the functioning of the American system of government. They're even mentioned in the Constitution. Private equity firms make retirement possible. PR researchers enable companies to not have to deal exclusively with the populist swaying of public opinion…

Go on. I'd like to see how telemarketing is useful. For me, it's a more demeaning job than being a prostitute - at least in the latter case, two parties engage in a mutually beneficial exchange of value. The job of a telemarketer is to trick a person into wasting his/her hard-earned money on a subpar product the person doesn't even need.

Useful is such a relative word.

Telemarketing is useful in some way to the person who employs the telemarketer. Otherwise he/she wouldn't pay someone to do it.

It's also useful to the person earning the salary, who then spends their salary consuming in the economy. Not everyone is lucky/brave enough to pursue what they are truly passionate about.

Finally, even if the job doesn't generate any sales, it's still redistributing wealth away from one set of people (shareholders of the company) to others in the economy. Is this useful?

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#164

Post by a3n »

stillsut wrote: post #106
yummyfajitas wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So for the example of an actuary, ideally their job would also be automated by an advanced program...If we took every actuary working 9 to 5, and instead threw all of their tens of thousands of daily working hours at coding a program to do their job... What, exactly, do you think actuaries do during their 9-5? Do you think they manually compute actuarial tables with a TI-89?

Actuary here: only 5% of billable-hours go into the concept of the math and probability behind setting appropriate price. 95% of the work involves translating the messiness of real-world into the model-based world. This is the type of thing that's obliviously difficult to automate: e.g. more difficult to build a robot-nurse than a robot-surgeon.

Yes, as I was following this subthread, I imagined that an actuary's real job was to recognize and model things to be insured or otherwise predicted. The math is just the executive summary.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#165

Post by phaemon »

walshemj wrote: post #96
danparsonson wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect he wants the world to change more fundamentally than that - per your example, if you have a good state-provided health service then the health insurance question is simply no longer an issue. There are of course countries that do this already. I think motor insurance would be a more difficult one to do away with - the question being if people didn't have to pay for any accidents they caused (via insurance pr…

er so what does he think the NI Stamp (social security) pays for

It's supposed to be for Works & Pensions (unemployment and pensions basically) but I think it now goes into the general tax pot. It's not health insurance though.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#166

Post by rayiner »

zo1 wrote: post #158
rayiner wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, have you ever lived in a country without strong centralized law enforcement? I have. It sucks. Even if 90% of people don't use violence, that just creates an enormous incentive for the other 10% of people to do so. And those 10%, organized into gangs, can terrorize the other 90%.

>" I'm curious, have you ever lived in a country without strong centralized law enforcement? I have. It sucks. " Did that country also have laws against carrying firearms? How about laws that prevent individuals from defending themselves? E.g. Castle-doctrine, self-defense, private security firms, etc. You may hail it as proof that without a state, safety is not ensured. But I see it as an unfortunate limbo position…

> But I see it as an unfortunate limbo position where there is no protection provided by the state to the inhabitants, and there are also legal/state obstacles in place to prevent private individuals from performing that function.

Private security can't replace the state. In South Africa, the rich can hire private security because the state exists as a backstop to prevent security companies from turning on their clients. Without the state, any organization effective enough in the exercise of violence to provide real security has every incentive to simply enslave its clients.

> One of us is right in this regard. Perhaps it's also some sort of gray area where everything except X, Y, Z can be provided for privately without the need for a state. But would you at least concede that we can never know the true point in this spectrum without testing it?

We have tested it. In Somalia and Yemen and Pakistan. Feudal Europe. States didn't always exist. They arose as defense mechanisms to the power of organized groups to terrorize the majority with violence.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#167

Post by glennsl »

zo1 wrote: post #161
sktrdie wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a UBI simply be inflationary? That is, rather than making 0 you make 1500 (say). But since everybody is making 1500, then it would be the same as making 0 again. So unless we have strict blocks on pricing things, UBI seems nonsensical.

At the very least, it skews peoples' motivations for work. I.e. Do nothing and get 1500, or work as a low-wage say woodcutter/garbage man, and get 1600. You're effectively doing a shitty 9-5 job so you can get 100 (or whatever $X) more than the guy next door doing nothing all day. People say that's liberating and "equality" for all, buy I say it's completely the opposite and directly unfair to a lot of people. And no…

Yes, shitty jobs would actually pay well. That's hardly unfair is it? The labour market would become an actual free market, where prices are properly determined by supply and demand, not by "motivation for work", more aptly known as wage slavery.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#168

Post by skybrian »

zo1 wrote: post #161
sktrdie wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a UBI simply be inflationary? That is, rather than making 0 you make 1500 (say). But since everybody is making 1500, then it would be the same as making 0 again. So unless we have strict blocks on pricing things, UBI seems nonsensical.

At the very least, it skews peoples' motivations for work. I.e. Do nothing and get 1500, or work as a low-wage say woodcutter/garbage man, and get 1600. You're effectively doing a shitty 9-5 job so you can get 100 (or whatever $X) more than the guy next door doing nothing all day. People say that's liberating and "equality" for all, buy I say it's completely the opposite and directly unfair to a lot of people. And no…

There is some reduction in incentive to work, but the idea is that most people will still want more money so they'll keep working.

Also you're assuming people have the right incentives today. Is working two minimum wage jobs to make ends meet really what you want people to do?

This is really about changing the relative negotiating power between employers and employees. Having some fallback income makes it easier to take time off to go to school, start a business, or find a better job. Also it goes right back into the economy as revenue for some business, so it's hard to see how it can be bad for business.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#169

Post by TeMPOraL »

roymurdock wrote: post #163
TeMPOraL wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go on. I'd like to see how telemarketing is useful. For me, it's a more demeaning job than being a prostitute - at least in the latter case, two parties engage in a mutually beneficial exchange of value. The job of a telemarketer is to trick a person into wasting his/her hard-earned money on a subpar product the person doesn't even need.

Useful is such a relative word. Telemarketing is useful in some way to the person who employs the telemarketer. Otherwise he/she wouldn't pay someone to do it. It's also useful to the person earning the salary, who then spends their salary consuming in the economy. Not everyone is lucky/brave enough to pursue what they are truly passionate about. Finally, even if the job doesn't generate any sales, it's still redistr…

Useful for humanity. Because "useful for employee" or "useful for employer" are bad measures that allow really stupid things to exist.

This job is based on lying and/or deceiving to people to trick them into buying somethng. Whoever is paying for it is actively hurting other humans. In a way it's worse than bullshit - it's a malicious job.

Re: “So many people spend their working lives doing jobs they think are unnecessary”

#170

Post by alexhill »

zo1 wrote: post #161
sktrdie wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a UBI simply be inflationary? That is, rather than making 0 you make 1500 (say). But since everybody is making 1500, then it would be the same as making 0 again. So unless we have strict blocks on pricing things, UBI seems nonsensical.

At the very least, it skews peoples' motivations for work. I.e. Do nothing and get 1500, or work as a low-wage say woodcutter/garbage man, and get 1600. You're effectively doing a shitty 9-5 job so you can get 100 (or whatever $X) more than the guy next door doing nothing all day. People say that's liberating and "equality" for all, buy I say it's completely the opposite and directly unfair to a lot of people. And no…

The point of a universal income is that everybody gets it, employed or not. It's not an unemployment benefit. The garbage man brings in 3100.
Post reply on HN