Literally a modern serfdom
See, it’s not the working that’s the issue. It’s the lack of control over our surplus value. It’s the lack of control over the means of production.
Can’t forget the terrible consequences of failing to meet “quota” (make enough to pay the bills).
But thanks for pointing this out, it really is similar, just with enough layers of abstraction to make the structure hard to see.
Almost all white collar work is now and has been for a long time goal based. There are people who, since they started working in modern times, don’t even know what a quota is
And with automation, more and more will become as such
I don’t mean a literal work output “quota”, that’s what I meant with layers of abstraction. A better question to ask yourself is how many Americans live paycheck to paycheck? The expensive nature of the modern world, the difficulty in being paid well enough to achieve not just stability but some personal forward progress - getting the resources for these is what I mean about needing to hit a “quota”.
What proportion of Americans are unable to hit the quota, described this way? What are the consequences, both to them and to wider society? Pretty bad situation, reminds me of just more complicated/obfuscated, “fuzzier” feudalism.
One, like they said that’s not what they meant. Two, work is only goals-based to a point. If I finish my job early then almost in almost any office I don’t get to go home early. I used to get my shit done in half the day and, because I asked and no one would give me more(even when I identified issues I could fix), I would spend the other four hours watching Youtube or browsing the internet.
The only reward for doing your work faster is getting more work. My roommate was able to move to a four day work-week but had to do so because of burnout and even though they get their shit done the company still only agreed if they could reduce their salary by 20%.
Automation has also already been here for some time in many forms. Our productivity is higher than it’s ever been thanks to so many wonderful innovations and new technologies and yet we still only have two short days to have a weekend and still have to force our way through an 8hr workday even though every study shows that we cannot be consistently productive on that schedule.
Not only that, but as time goes on, we become more productive and generate more profits, only to see the age of retirement increased
Age of retirement goes up, working hours stay the same(or sometimes even get worse), wages go down(compared to inflation), and we still only have two measly weekend days. And the real kicker is that we know for a fact that we’d actually be even more productive if we soent less time at work.
It’s all horseshit.
This productivity increase has been happening since the start of humanity.
It’s kind of accumulative effect given the gains from technology we have
It makes sense that people will be able to work then more years, as your qol is also increasing as well
Wtf indeed
deleted by creator
I do wonder what the alternative is… Would that be growing/hunting your own food and making your own clothes and building your own shelter? I don’t know about anyone else, but I would not live long in that scenario.
The context is that there is enough wealth in most western countries that not everyone must work to survive. Working should be for having access to more things that just surviving, and not everyone should be required to work all the time just to survive.
Basic needs are basic, like food, shelter, and healthcare. If everyone had access to those basic things they would be free even if they need to work to attain more.
Someone still has to work for those things to be produced.
While I don’t disagree. there don’t have to be dragons hoarding all the wealth making us fight among ourselves to survive
An asset appreciating in value does not deprive anyone else of money in their wallet.
If you bought a rookie baseball card for $5, the player had a great year and now the card’s worth $100, your net worth increased by $95. But who is down $95 as a result of your card becoming more valuable?
Nobody. Wealth is not zero sum. And the vast majority of increases in wealth among the wealthiest is newly-created wealth. You literally can’t become a billionaire in a human lifetime simply by short-changing your workers. A linear increase like that just will not get you there.
Also, wealth in the form of purchased investments into businesses that run within the economy, is literally the opposite of hoarding. If you buy things with your money, you’re not hoarding your money.
but an asset appreciating in value off the back of another persons labor deprives the laborer of their fair share
Were they not paid for their time in a consensual agreement?
That’s not the gotcha you think it is. They get the shit end of the stick and if they ask for more they get shown the door and if people gang up and try to form a union the capitalist police state send goons to break it up because how dare the proles ask for more money.
There is a vast gap between “most people need to work for everyone in society to live comfortably” and “every individual needs their own personal income to survive”.
The point is that technology means a fraction of the population can feed and house the rest, and that fraction doesn’t need to live like royalty, and the rest don’t need to live in servitude for that exchange to happen.
Don’t you want others to enjoy your success with you? Apply that principle to all of humanity the world over, and you have what could be, if we just stopped waring over hoards.
Nowhere in your comment did you refute the fact that it’s currently not possible to have a society where no one has to work. There still has to be human labor.
I said nothing about the distribution of wealth or supporting our current system.
I don’t think even OP or OC meant that nobody would work. But “work” as we imagine it now need not exist. Most specialist roles are fulfilling enough that people do them enthusiastically and with passion. It would be first and foremost a worker lead economy, rather than people being desperate for jobs. Companies need to buy talent in a more competitive market instead, in all industries not just the specialisations.
I imagine there’s still a wealth hierarchy but it’s a lot less dispirate and follows meritocratic lines, including the merit of being willing to get your hands dirty doing dirty or dangerous work not currently possible to automate. And obviously being very talented at sport, music, art, comedy, etc such that people want to spend any excess wealth they have on supporting them or buying access to their content (like now).
It’s not so different from now, it’s just the continued progressive advancement of what we see in many European nations already.
Surely there isn’t an economic system in which people don’t work for a top 1%, but for everyone, you could say a communal, or a social, economic system…
I mean, that experiment has been run and it is wildly difficult to manage (humans are quite wily!).
It’s called democratic socialism.
This ain’t a shitpost, but it is a realpost
Yeah, I was confounded as to what about this was a shitpost.
You know, if you lived self-sufficient you’d still have to work for meeting basic needs. Even in pretty much any form of socialism you are expected to work. So yeah, I don’t know what you think you are saying, but I think you are saying a whole lot of nothing here
The problem isnt the work, the problem is you dont get most of the reward for it. It all sits in some nepo baby ceos bank account, probably overseas so they never pay taxes on it either. Every company does this, and competing with them is a risk with a 98% casaulty rate
Which is funny and sad because keeping the fruits of your labor instead of contributing to some collective is the argument for capitalism and against socialism in standard American politics.
The problem isn’t that people have to do work. The problem is that we live in an economic system where the increase in profit created by technological advances is seized by business owners to make themselves richer, at the expense of the workers who they employ. This allows some to become billionnaires while others have to work multiple jobs or become homeless.
The goal isn’t to be self-sufficient – the goal is to continue to work with others, while abolishing the class of people who would happily seize profit created by your own labour to make themselves an easy buck.
I thought lemmy already surpassed this “stage”
This isnt a shitpost
A society must consist of individuals willing to perform labor- that much I know. I also know the current system isn’t working
Yeah the deal is, you do a sensible and helpful amount of work, and get taken care of in return, like (almost) everybody else.
If you work long hours, it’s because it’s thrilling and you choose to, even when money isn’t involved.
You’re free to use your enormous wealth to secure a comfortable life for yourself and your ilk, just like they are.
That’s the logic. Law of the jungle. The strongest survive. And that’s why freedom absolutists are either moronic or evil.
Many people sincerely believe certain kinds of labor to be valued at less than the cost of a decent human livelihood.
