F**k work

Yes we do need people to do that ( at least until we figure out how to automate that too ) I'm just saying not all jobs are needed. Hell I might even go so far as to say that some jobs are a hindrance on society.

“Need” is a tricky word here. Not even using robots- just industrial technology- we can easily take the job of tens or hundreds of people and give it to one. With computers and robotics we could theoretically replace most jobs- and we could have robots fix robots so that 50 robots need one robot to fix them- and one human fixes that robot so that for every hundred robots only 2 people need steady work.

But... what do those people do then? “Disguised unemployment” or “bust work” you can call it. It isn’t necessarily a human needs to do a job, or that a job even needs to be done- it’s that you have a human who doesn’t have a job to do. What do they do? The structure of our society in general- even communism- calls on people to produce work within society. We aren’t quite to where post scarcity economics would work- and beyond that... to really make such measures not “needed” required either we tame “want” or we can feed the wants of all.

There are only so many houses along the Malibu coast- more people want them than can have them. How does one allocate those homes in a world where all are “equal” without money? How do you allocate those in a world where some people just don’t have any means to ever achieve what they want- without causing riots or hopelessness?

The idea that one can achieve their dreams is a system of control- most communism’s including the USSR had this and it is central to capitalism. You inevitably will have more people doing without the things they want regardless of what society type you have- than you will have who can have almost all they want. To prevent uprising or revolution you need compliance. A system that rewards participation and following “the rules”- where people have a place and can aspire to a greater place but you can ultimately blame their failures on them and not the system.

That is a failing in most communism’s and “planned states.” Where people are unhappy- they can blame the state- resent the state- more easily. The system is what dictates their life. Freedom gives control- China is a successful example of this- blending elements of styles of government and economics to create the illusion of choice amidst total control. Even where people are aware of the state control- other mechanisms aid in compliance- central to that is an idea of strong self determinism- that a persons place in the world is more reliant on themselves and what they do than on the state.

So when we say these jobs aren’t “needed-“ Well... the world wouldn’t stop spinning without them- the sun wouldn’t burn out, and all life on earth wouldn’t end. However these not “needed” jobs are a mechanism of social control and a way to support a system of economics based in commoditization. Where human labor and human lives have differing dollar values associated with them. We don’t “need” amazon or Netflix or the stock market. It’s all imaginary and isn’t indexed to actual reality.

The value of a company is subjective. Tesla over doubled its stocks near in a blink- they didn’t double production, employment, pay, doubly their size with new buildings or double sales. They didn’t suddenly invent a game changing new technology. If you took everything they had and sold it- it wouldn’t equate to the stock value. That value is an emotional assessment based on how people FEEL the company is doing. It’s quantifies but largely arbitrary.

These systems do work though-well... they function. They can be studied and manipulated and understood. So the fact that they aren’t strictly “needed” or even based in a reality beyond human thought isn’t relevant. They serve a purpose . Likewise- retail jobs and other not “needed” jobs serve a purpose- and that purpose isn’t always at face value. It’s all part of a system used to influence reality to get benefits for those who agree to cooperate in the system.

@Abusername I'm not a fan of that personally. 1. That's how all futuristic robot wars start. 2. Yes it is a nice motovational image, but it is unrealistic to think we can all follow our dreams of Not working for some else. Teachers are necessary and have provably one of the worst jobs in America, but there they are!

Of course not everyone could do exactly what they wanted but the higher the percentage the better. The world just feels too full of pointless busy work. If we can free up more time for people to work on what they want to why not? How much potential are we wasting forcing people into a pointless grind? Honestly I think the ideal is somewhere in between like you get basic food and housing taken care of then work to earn luxury products. At the very least I would like to see the work week get shortened. That was the trend for years and years and it should continue.

Oh no. I agree 1000%. There are enough unemployed people that shortening the work week and hiring people to cover to generate jobs would be a sensible stop gap on the way to just having people work less for more. Ultimately- it would be nice and I think we should move to a society where work is done based on passion- people study, help, create, because that is what moves them- and instead of worrying about how so and so is getting a “free ride” because they do less or nothing- we should structure a society that
1. Is designed to absorb the small percentage of people who short or long term aren’t productive and
2. Instills and fosters humans who are naturally driven and embrace those drives- prioritizing functional gain over “profit.”

As said earlier- “profit” is a largely artificial idea no longer linked to reality. You can make profit simply by moving numbers on a page- not through any actual productivity- no increase in work done or goods supplied- just through accounting something differently. If you have 2 apples- no matter how you wrote it there are 2 apples.

So we emphasize this “profit” and money goes to those closest to the profit. Sales will almost always make more than support- front end will almost always make more than backend. The person who designs an interface or add campaign that aesthetically draws profit will see a greater value placed on the than the person who actually does the work needed to be done to bank tangible money.

And if we weren’t so profit motivated- if instead of putting people in jobs that are basically a controller that isn’t plugged in to the game so we could justify their existence- if we had them clean the environment or work on massive civil projects or we could identify their strengths and grow those- we could do amazing things.

But a profit driven system is based on profit. No one cares what beanie babies or pogs or beyblades or chia pets contribute to social well being or the world- of people would buy hats with dildos on them in mass- that would be the worlds leading business and the owners would be rich and powerful- highly valued human beings because they generated profit. The system feeds what people want- almost without regard to what the want is- and most people would say that’s not how to raise a human being- catering to their every whim.

So yes. I’d love to see a society where- and it turns out we COULD do this- everyone had a home because people need homes, not one where some people own 2,5, even thousands of livable dwellings and there are more than enough empty homes for everyone to have one- but if you say that people will reply “what did they do to deserve it?” Or “why do they get a free home and I have to pay..?” Well- the fact you CAN pay is why- the fact they don’t have one and you do perhaps?

It all comes down to greed. Most of us have enough space that we could let at least one person love with us. We don’t. Most of us have enough spare money that we could really help someone else- but we spend it on us because we “earned a treat” or whatever. We are by and large all mostly guilty of the sins that keep us from living in a perfect world. It’s very “Genesis” and one doesn’t have to be religious to see a parable of humans getting expelled from paradise for our behavior. We could make paradise but we don’t. Why let a species like that ruin paradise? Why not let them learn the hard way how to be good people- or suffer forever by their own deeds?

@abusername sure a shorter week or hours might help people spend more time with family or doing a hobby they like and that way help with the feeling of mission on important things in life. My point is thay although it is inspirational, it is not realistic. Sure some people can or achieve it, but like you said we at least need to cover our basics, and that's (usually) posible with a "grind" work, and some luxury might be possible either making an effort to find a better job or really applying oursels to have our own business maybe. But some people might just need a 9 to 5 with low risk because they have a family or any specific reason, like a disability. And it would be awful if a robot takes their job. Some jobs are seem like mundane and are actually important to society (except for some office jobs)