In 1998, 48% of respondents in one survey said they never used the internet. Just a few years later, weekly use was growing more normal. Now, it’s everywhere, all the time.
Even if so - the definition of oneself is what that person gets paid for, not what that person enjoys doing (or even is just good at)?
(Especially with jobs, folk on LinkedIn will describe their job as anything but their actual everyday job, or lie/exaggerate about their job when with other people - so not even that “role” is true.)
… like, lmao, except if it’s like a weird grinding kink or something.
I think there is no possible world where people are without meaningful work and are happy about it.
–>
Even if they collected $10,000 a month and got to spend all of their time doing hobbies and spending time with family, it would feel pointless and hollow.
What is the difference between “hobby” and “work” if not what random people decide what is better monetised?
Both is labour & value added.
In a world where everyone gets enough money people could do what they actually want. So a CEO wouldn’t be “stuck” being a CEO if they don’t like that job & would rather be eg a baker. In the current system bcs of a huge pay divergence you get an unhappy CEO (who ofc won’t quit) and an unhappy baker that just couldn’t get a more suited paying job.
But we as a society would get a lot more out of life & cultural progression if people would be happy & satisfied at what they do (job=hobby).
Empirical evidence (even USA did extensive tests in the 60s) show that given a universal income (so basically no scarcity) basically nobody just sits around watching TV all day, everyone is productive (research, art, services, etc).
Imagine only having customer support or food industry workers that truly enjoy their job & want to do it.
How many prodigies are stuck at random dead end jobs with no prospects and life options?
Labour is what we all benefit from.
Work is what the employer/owner benefits from.
Get some annoying trust fund kid, take all their money away from them, and tell them that they now have to get a job but it’s a good thing because now their life has meaning. Let’s see how happy they are about it.
I don’t know how you’ve managed it but you’ve managed to invent toxic-domestication, The idea that someone’s life can’t be worth living unless they are working. I don’t know maybe you’re young but when you get to your 40s you begin to realise that actually what you really want out of life is just to be left alone, you really aren’t craving notoriety. If you can just sit in the hobby room and build airfix models or whatever then go to the pub, for the next 40 years you’d be happy.
I really don’t know why you’re arguing about this because there have been actual experiments where people have been given UBI and pretty much everyone ends up just going and doing their own stuff. I’ve never heard of anyone complaining about being given free money.
I think people would find new ways to struggle that they actually enjoy and would likely end up contributing. Imagine a couple of thousand people with their new modest but stress free budgets decide to join a yearly potato cannon contest, Sure its not going to invent anything new directly but you now have a bunch of people learning about ballistics and stoichiometry and high pressure engineering all egging eachother on to shoot that potato further. The competition gets more and more fierce and with the much lower stakes people start trying some more out there ideas, before you know it you have a modest but highly effective solution to reliably obtaining the correct gas mixture for something like a combined light gas gun.
And that’s a deliberately silly example, you’d get a ton more art, people deciding to be athletes, coders, all sorts of hobies that can encourage healthy competition and often benefit society in surprising ways.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
That’s a sign of toxic culture, not of men wanting to be defined by what value they can bring.
*monetary value
(in relation to toxic culture)
(bcs value that people actuality bring to society often isn’t fairly valued in terms of money or even not at all)
deleted by creator
Even if so - the definition of oneself is what that person gets paid for, not what that person enjoys doing (or even is just good at)?
(Especially with jobs, folk on LinkedIn will describe their job as anything but their actual everyday job, or lie/exaggerate about their job when with other people - so not even that “role” is true.)
… like, lmao, except if it’s like a weird grinding kink or something.
–>
What is the difference between “hobby” and “work” if not what random people decide what is better monetised?
Both is labour & value added.
In a world where everyone gets enough money people could do what they actually want. So a CEO wouldn’t be “stuck” being a CEO if they don’t like that job & would rather be eg a baker. In the current system bcs of a huge pay divergence you get an unhappy CEO (who ofc won’t quit) and an unhappy baker that just couldn’t get a more suited paying job.
But we as a society would get a lot more out of life & cultural progression if people would be happy & satisfied at what they do (job=hobby).
Empirical evidence (even USA did extensive tests in the 60s) show that given a universal income (so basically no scarcity) basically nobody just sits around watching TV all day, everyone is productive (research, art, services, etc).
Imagine only having customer support or food industry workers that truly enjoy their job & want to do it.
How many prodigies are stuck at random dead end jobs with no prospects and life options?
Labour is what we all benefit from.
Work is what the employer/owner benefits from.
Okay let’s do an experiment.
Get some annoying trust fund kid, take all their money away from them, and tell them that they now have to get a job but it’s a good thing because now their life has meaning. Let’s see how happy they are about it.
deleted by creator
I don’t know how you’ve managed it but you’ve managed to invent toxic-domestication, The idea that someone’s life can’t be worth living unless they are working. I don’t know maybe you’re young but when you get to your 40s you begin to realise that actually what you really want out of life is just to be left alone, you really aren’t craving notoriety. If you can just sit in the hobby room and build airfix models or whatever then go to the pub, for the next 40 years you’d be happy.
I really don’t know why you’re arguing about this because there have been actual experiments where people have been given UBI and pretty much everyone ends up just going and doing their own stuff. I’ve never heard of anyone complaining about being given free money.
deleted by creator
You’re so right, how can I find meaning without making somebody else’s money for them? Woe is me…
deleted by creator
I think people would find new ways to struggle that they actually enjoy and would likely end up contributing. Imagine a couple of thousand people with their new modest but stress free budgets decide to join a yearly potato cannon contest, Sure its not going to invent anything new directly but you now have a bunch of people learning about ballistics and stoichiometry and high pressure engineering all egging eachother on to shoot that potato further. The competition gets more and more fierce and with the much lower stakes people start trying some more out there ideas, before you know it you have a modest but highly effective solution to reliably obtaining the correct gas mixture for something like a combined light gas gun.
And that’s a deliberately silly example, you’d get a ton more art, people deciding to be athletes, coders, all sorts of hobies that can encourage healthy competition and often benefit society in surprising ways.
deleted by creator