Why is working *less* a vision of utopia?

[Nexus]

- Working allows us to find balance between energy intake and output: it gives us a consistent outlet for our energies

Your use of the word 'energy' is as slippery as a new-ager's. This energy exchange you speak of could easily be attained by exercise and hobbies.

Working can give us psychological benefits
- We have the satisfaction of achieving things
- We have the satisfaction of professional growth throughout our life
- We are mentally challenged to learn new skills and be great at them
- Working allows us to accumulate wealth and life security
- Working allows us to meet people and take a greater part in society

All these things are because our capitalistic system mandates them. Some of them aren't exclusive to working. And some of them aren't really even true like "working allows us to accumulate wealth". People that are actually wealthy got that way by either inheritance or leveraging the system and profiting from other people's work. No one worked their way to a billion dollars by the fruits of their labor.

A few years ago I had a friend who had been on disability for two years. For that entire time she had no job, didn't go to school, and had limited funds. She was extremely unhappy and is much happier now that she's back in school accomplishing things.

She was extremely unhappy because under our current socioeconomic system was near the bottom rung of life due to her limited funds.

 

[ZiprHead]

I have a lot to do, but work keeps interfering.

Bronzeage wins the internet.

 

[RavenSky]

Another old saying goes, work is when you don't like what you're doing. I guess if we had a utopia where everything was provided for everybody, people could still do things they used to get paid for. They just wouldn't have to.

I agree with your idea that we are hardwired to be restless. If nobody had to work for money, we'd spend more time working on creative pursuits, personal projects, and recreation; those things expend energy too.

^^^ That

 

[Warpoet]

Doing work as in expending energy, with the gist being that the necessity of expending energy to stay alive is how we've evolved. Every animal in the history of earth has had to do meaningful work to stay alive. (school kids are still working in that sense)

Yes, and the majority of the world's animals also live under constant threat of being devoured by predators, and only very recently in human history have people had the comfort and security to even entertain a discussion such as this one -- and it's still only a minority of us that can do so. Is that a bad thing? If not, why would freeing ourselves from the constant struggle to make ends meet be a bad thing?

I'll give you if we had to do *less* work, and *easier* work we'd probably be happier, but I don't see why *doing no obligatory work* should be a goal. There's only so many times you can walk through a park and play catch.

This appears to be a fundamental misconception behind this thread. You seem to think that sloth and torpor are the default state of those people who don't toil away for the sake of subsistence. How about traveling and seeing the world? Getting in shape? Learning a foreign language or how to play an instrument? There's plenty of things I would do if I had the time and money, but I'm too busy with my shitty job.

 

[Warpoet]

- Working allows us to find balance between energy intake and output: it gives us a consistent outlet for our energies
- Working can give us psychological benefits
- We have the satisfaction of achieving things
- We have the satisfaction of professional growth throughout our life
- We are mentally challenged to learn new skills and be great at them
- Working allows us to accumulate wealth and life security
- Working allows us to meet people and take a greater part in society

No offense, but in all honesty, I think the majority of people in the developed world would laugh at this list. It reads to me like the stuff the HR department sends out to the staff when they're getting ready to fuck them out of their benefits or something; I know that's not your agenda, but that's what it reads like.

Nothing on this list applies to me, except the security part, and that's only because I fought for the ability to do my job remotely (the pay is fine for where I live now, but complete dogshit for where my company is located). And since under American labor law, I can be fired at any time for any reason, it's still pretty marginal. This is an entry-level job, and there are much better jobs out there, but there are also lots and lots of people out there who'd trade their job for mine any day.

A few years ago I had a friend who had been on disability for two years. For that entire time she had no job, didn't go to school, and had limited funds. She was extremely unhappy and is much happier now that she's back in school accomplishing things.

Did you consider that maybe whatever problem caused her to go on disability, as well as the financial and emotional hardship attached to that, were the root of her unhappiness, and not the fact that she wasn't working? Also, there's a flip side to your coin: I don't know what disability benefits are like in Canada, but in the U.S. they're a fucking disgrace and almost impossible to live off of. Many people who are very ill and should not be working are forced to simply because they need the money. You'd have a very hard time convincing these people that working is a positive element of their lives.

I will grant that large numbers of people who don't work fail to capitalize on their free time and are utterly miserable for a variety of reasons. But I would argue that this is more often than not either due to circumstances beyond their control, or because they are simply bad at managing their time and focusing on their personal development. Some people benefit from the structure and organization of a job, but the stress that comes with needing to work to support one's self is still something I don't view as a positive force, and I believe that most people would be happier without NEEDING to work to survive. I can definitely say that in my own experience, the most unhappy, stressed and fucking miserable people I've met are those of all social strata who work tirelessly for whatever reason at jobs they don't enjoy. And the few people I meet who seem genuinely happy more often than not either A) enjoy their jobs or B) don't have to work, and spend their time doing constructive things that help them grow as a person.

 

[NobleSavage]

Over the past few months I've read a few quotes and discussions about people who predicted that technology will eventually become so advanced that people won't *have* to work. We could feasibly have very short work weeks, if not, not work at all, and have technology take care of the hard stuff. Years ago I would have thought that this was a reasonable goal, but these days I'm not so sure, at least to a degree.

To put it simply, it comes back to the old saying: happiness comes from something to do, someone to love, and something to hope for. When you look at people as a biological system we're energy consumers who ideally need to expend as much energy as we intake. So in our natural state we have to do things, we have to do energetic work, whether that work is obligatory or not. And so it would seem that eliminating the need for things to do is actually counter-productive to our natural state.

Take the idea to the extreme and imagine that no one at all worked. Just think about how much free time we would have to spend, and how much time we'd have to spend doing pointless things just to move around a bit.

And so I think the reality of a happy, or happier life, happens when people find a good balance between work and free time, not have nothing but free time.

I didn't read the 3 pages of comments, but this is my take: I have a roommate from college that has made enough money to be set for life. He started doing Iron Man Triathlons and is trying to qualify for Kona. You don't need a "job" to be disciplined, passionate, and happy.

 

[dystopian]

I'll give you if we had to do *less* work, and *easier* work we'd probably be happier, but I don't see why *doing no obligatory work* should be a goal. There's only so many times you can walk through a park and play catch.

Then you'll find something else to do. Hell, even sitting around doing nothing your body is still expending energy. If you think that people *need* some sort of *obligatory* work in order to find enjoyment/purpose in life, then I think you don't really understand the human psyche very well.

 

[J842P]

Says who? It's normal and natural for humans to *not* work for quite a long time as we're growing up. The only reason we become required to do 'work' later on in life is because the necessary work is no longer being done *for* us; not because work is somehow innate to our existence.

If people feel the need to keep themselves busy in a world where they are not required to work in order to live and get luxuries, then they will find ways to keep themselves busy. Why would the ways those hypothetical future people keep themselves busy in somehow be more pointless than most of the shit people get paid to do today? I rather think there'd be a lot more of a point and a lot more satisfaction to be had in the things people would find to keep themselves busy with as opposed to (most) of the things we do to make money.

Doing work as in expending energy, with the gist being that the necessity of expending energy to stay alive is how we've evolved. Every animal in the history of earth has had to do meaningful work to stay alive. (school kids are still working in that sense)

I'll give you if we had to do *less* work, and *easier* work we'd probably be happier, but I don't see why *doing no obligatory work* should be a goal. There's only so many times you can walk through a park and play catch.

By your definition of work, sleeping is work. We are always "expending energy."

 

[rousseau]

I'll give you if we had to do *less* work, and *easier* work we'd probably be happier, but I don't see why *doing no obligatory work* should be a goal. There's only so many times you can walk through a park and play catch.

Then you'll find something else to do. Hell, even sitting around doing nothing your body is still expending energy. If you think that people *need* some sort of *obligatory* work in order to find enjoyment/purpose in life, then I think you don't really understand the human psyche very well.

Maybe, or maybe I do.

Based on the responses I've gotten in this thread I've done some re-considering, but it seems like I've started on an extreme and other posters have taken the opposite extreme. Somewhere in between there must be a happy medium, which I've hinted at.

Take not working to it's logical extreme. No one *has* to do anything, there's no need to do well in school, or even a need to study, and everyone spends their entire life at leisure. Why is this reality a good thing? It would essentially be a long march towards death, and 'leisure' would in effect lose all meaning because there would be no alternative. Filling time would, in effect, become our job.

Now take working to its logical extreme. We're *always* doing obligatory work, we're under immense pressure, our life is at risk. This is also an uncomfortable reality, which is closer to what many people experience in this age.

Somewhere in the middle people are given meaningful tasks that fill their time, that give them a consistent outlet for their energies, that motivate them to improve as a person, to grow, and so on.

Even people with lots of funds usually do some kind of useful work because doing things is a part of who we are. The problem then, isn't that people don't want to work, it's that people don't necessarily want to do the work that they're doing.

 

[ksen]

Sometimes the answer is not in the middle.

 

[Kharakov]

Sometimes the answer is not in the middle.

Like when you're cutting out the rot.

 

[Bronzeage]

Then you'll find something else to do. Hell, even sitting around doing nothing your body is still expending energy. If you think that people *need* some sort of *obligatory* work in order to find enjoyment/purpose in life, then I think you don't really understand the human psyche very well.

Maybe, or maybe I do.

Based on the responses I've gotten in this thread I've done some re-considering, but it seems like I've started on an extreme and other posters have taken the opposite extreme. Somewhere in between there must be a happy medium, which I've hinted at.

Take not working to it's logical extreme. No one *has* to do anything, there's no need to do well in school, or even a need to study, and everyone spends their entire life at leisure. Why is this reality a good thing? It would essentially be a long march towards death, and 'leisure' would in effect lose all meaning because there would be no alternative. Filling time would, in effect, become our job.

Now take working to its logical extreme. We're *always* doing obligatory work, we're under immense pressure, our life is at risk. This is also an uncomfortable reality, which is closer to what many people experience in this age.

Somewhere in the middle people are given meaningful tasks that fill their time, that give them a consistent outlet for their energies, that motivate them to improve as a person, to grow, and so on.

Even people with lots of funds usually do some kind of useful work because doing things is a part of who we are. The problem then, isn't that people don't want to work, it's that people don't necessarily want to do the work that they're doing.

I have a friend who does not need to work. When he turned 25, he was given control of his trust fund, which gave him an annual income of around $600K a year. That was 1982. He had just graduated college with a degree in business admin. He could have become a drunken wastrel, but that's really not his nature. He married a nice woman and they have a couple kids. Over the years, he has purchased several small businesses and franchises. None of them are still in existence. These days, he owns a couple of pieces of commercial real estate, which he manages. He keeps an office in one of them for his "consulting" business. He advises people who want to buy a small business.

As I said, he doesn't need to do any of this. His business ventures have all met slow lingering deaths, but he's never declared bankruptcy. He can't, because he has more than enough income to pay the debts. Why does he work so hard, when he gets so little in return?

The reason is simple. He is embarrassed to say he doesn't have a job. America does not have enough idle rich to form a distinct social class. If there were an American version of Downton Abby, it would have to be about John D. Rockefeller's family, and everyone of them would have a job. When you go to a party and meet someone new, the first information that is exchanged is "what do you do?"

Once the necessities of life have been provided(my friend had this the day he was born), there is great social pressure, especially in the US, to do something useful, if for no better reason than to demonstrate you have the ability.

On the other extreme, there are people born with nothing. They work more than one job for an income that allows barest survival. They don't have time for embarrassment. For them, the idea of less work is Utopian.

 

[Archimedes]

Why should we endeavor to continue to live like cavemen scraping away every day for the necessities to survive? Especially if we live in an era where technology is able to do most of the grunt work?

There is nothing noble in having to toil the day away.

What I'm suggesting is that this might actually make people happier than doing nothing at all, which might be the case because that's how we've evolved.

- Working allows us to find balance between energy intake and output: it gives us a consistent outlet for our energies
- Working can give us psychological benefits
- We have the satisfaction of achieving things
- We have the satisfaction of professional growth throughout our life
- We are mentally challenged to learn new skills and be great at them
- Working allows us to accumulate wealth and life security
- Working allows us to meet people and take a greater part in society

If you've found a job that has those qualities, then congratulations to you.

That's not what a working life in general though, is it, for the population at large?

I worked 12 hour night shifts in a food processing plant for minimum wage. For a while, I had a job working on a food processing line, stuffing frozen pizza crusts into plastic bags. I can't say it I had the satisfaction of either achieving things or professional growth, that I was mentally challenged or learned new skills that I was great at.

Work for a lot of people is tedious, back-breaking, dangerous, etc. and bears no resemblance to the life-affirming list of qualities you posted.

 

[bilby]

Maybe, or maybe I do.

Based on the responses I've gotten in this thread I've done some re-considering, but it seems like I've started on an extreme and other posters have taken the opposite extreme. Somewhere in between there must be a happy medium, which I've hinted at.

Take not working to it's logical extreme. No one *has* to do anything, there's no need to do well in school, or even a need to study, and everyone spends their entire life at leisure. Why is this reality a good thing? It would essentially be a long march towards death, and 'leisure' would in effect lose all meaning because there would be no alternative. Filling time would, in effect, become our job.

Now take working to its logical extreme. We're *always* doing obligatory work, we're under immense pressure, our life is at risk. This is also an uncomfortable reality, which is closer to what many people experience in this age.

Somewhere in the middle people are given meaningful tasks that fill their time, that give them a consistent outlet for their energies, that motivate them to improve as a person, to grow, and so on.

Even people with lots of funds usually do some kind of useful work because doing things is a part of who we are. The problem then, isn't that people don't want to work, it's that people don't necessarily want to do the work that they're doing.

I have a friend who does not need to work. When he turned 25, he was given control of his trust fund, which gave him an annual income of around $600K a year. That was 1982. He had just graduated college with a degree in business admin. He could have become a drunken wastrel, but that's really not his nature. He married a nice woman and they have a couple kids. Over the years, he has purchased several small businesses and franchises. None of them are still in existence. These days, he owns a couple of pieces of commercial real estate, which he manages. He keeps an office in one of them for his "consulting" business. He advises people who want to buy a small business.

As I said, he doesn't need to do any of this. His business ventures have all met slow lingering deaths, but he's never declared bankruptcy. He can't, because he has more than enough income to pay the debts. Why does he work so hard, when he gets so little in return?

The reason is simple. He is embarrassed to say he doesn't have a job. America does not have enough idle rich to form a distinct social class. If there were an American version of Downton Abby, it would have to be about John D. Rockefeller's family, and everyone of them would have a job. When you go to a party and meet someone new, the first information that is exchanged is "what do you do?"

Once the necessities of life have been provided(my friend had this the day he was born), there is great social pressure, especially in the US, to do something useful, if for no better reason than to demonstrate you have the ability.

On the other extreme, there are people born with nothing. They work more than one job for an income that allows barest survival. They don't have time for embarrassment. For them, the idea of less work is Utopian.

Americans are weird.

If you went to a barbecue in Australia, and asked someone 'what do you do?', and they said 'Well I won lotto a few years back, so now I just go surfing and drink beer', nobody would be embarrassed. The responses would be along the lines of 'You lucky bastard' (and, of course, 'It's your shout, then').

Defining yourself by your employment is sad. Being embarrassed because you can't join in the sadness is crazy.

 

[Bronzeage]

I have a friend who does not need to work. When he turned 25, he was given control of his trust fund, which gave him an annual income of around $600K a year. That was 1982. He had just graduated college with a degree in business admin. He could have become a drunken wastrel, but that's really not his nature. He married a nice woman and they have a couple kids. Over the years, he has purchased several small businesses and franchises. None of them are still in existence. These days, he owns a couple of pieces of commercial real estate, which he manages. He keeps an office in one of them for his "consulting" business. He advises people who want to buy a small business.

As I said, he doesn't need to do any of this. His business ventures have all met slow lingering deaths, but he's never declared bankruptcy. He can't, because he has more than enough income to pay the debts. Why does he work so hard, when he gets so little in return?

The reason is simple. He is embarrassed to say he doesn't have a job. America does not have enough idle rich to form a distinct social class. If there were an American version of Downton Abby, it would have to be about John D. Rockefeller's family, and everyone of them would have a job. When you go to a party and meet someone new, the first information that is exchanged is "what do you do?"

Once the necessities of life have been provided(my friend had this the day he was born), there is great social pressure, especially in the US, to do something useful, if for no better reason than to demonstrate you have the ability.

On the other extreme, there are people born with nothing. They work more than one job for an income that allows barest survival. They don't have time for embarrassment. For them, the idea of less work is Utopian.

Americans are weird.

If you went to a barbecue in Australia, and asked someone 'what do you do?', and they said 'Well I won lotto a few years back, so now I just go surfing and drink beer', nobody would be embarrassed. The responses would be along the lines of 'You lucky bastard' (and, of course, 'It's your shout, then').

Defining yourself by your employment is sad. Being embarrassed because you can't join in the sadness is crazy.

I never said it wasn't crazy. No one in America would be embarrassed to live off lotto winnings. What would be embarrassing is running out of money before you die.

Just about every English surname that ends in "er" is an old trade name, Carter, Fletcher, Porter, Butler, etc. Add in every Smith and Wright and it's about half the phone book. We've always been identified by our occupation. It's nothing new.

 

[rousseau]

I think you've touched on something in that people are primarily defined by what they do, but I doubt that your friend has taken on massive business ventures for the sake of not being slightly embarrassed in day to day conversation.

The truth is probably more like: if he didn't do something like that, what would he spend his life doing? When you're sitting around with millions you need to do something not because of social pressure, but because the body literally requires it. If you make the sum total of what you do leisure time, that's a lot of years spent writing books, painting pictures, and running around the block.

 

[Warpoet]

Americans are weird.

If you went to a barbecue in Australia, and asked someone 'what do you do?', and they said 'Well I won lotto a few years back, so now I just go surfing and drink beer', nobody would be embarrassed. The responses would be along the lines of 'You lucky bastard' (and, of course, 'It's your shout, then').

Defining yourself by your employment is sad. Being embarrassed because you can't join in the sadness is crazy.

I have become increasingly convinced in recent years that I would be much happier living in another first-world country that doesn't have the absurd ideas about work and work culture that the U.S. does.

 

[RavenSky]

I think you've touched on something in that people are primarily defined by what they do, but I doubt that your friend has taken on massive business ventures for the sake of not being slightly embarrassed in day to day conversation.

The truth is probably more like: if he didn't do something like that, what would he spend his life doing? When you're sitting around with millions you need to do something not because of social pressure, but because the body literally requires it. If you make the sum total of what you do leisure time, that's a lot of years spent writing books, painting pictures, and running around the block.

Some people currently earn nice livings by writing books, painting pictures or running around the block. Why don't those count as meaningful work (with or without pay) in your mind?

 

[rousseau]

I think you've touched on something in that people are primarily defined by what they do, but I doubt that your friend has taken on massive business ventures for the sake of not being slightly embarrassed in day to day conversation.

The truth is probably more like: if he didn't do something like that, what would he spend his life doing? When you're sitting around with millions you need to do something not because of social pressure, but because the body literally requires it. If you make the sum total of what you do leisure time, that's a lot of years spent writing books, painting pictures, and running around the block.

Some people currently earn nice livings by writing books, painting pictures or running around the block. Why don't those count as meaningful work (with or without pay) in your mind?

I wasn't suggesting those things weren't meaningful, I was trying to suggest that passive hobbies wouldn't be a reliable way to spend one's whole life.

Now if you made a career out of writing books or some other form of art, then it's not a passive hobby and would move back into the realm of doing work.

 

[bilby]