Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Clarkeprops t1_j0744yv wrote

Reply to comment by ShowerGrapes in The problem isn’t AI, it’s requiring us to work to live by jamesj

Yes. Late stage capitalism is toxic. I’m not saying you should make ANYONE any money. Even just picking up trash 30 hours a week. Do SOMETHING. Fix city benches. Repair books at the library. Repaint playgrounds. Be a kids soccer coach. ANYTHING. Just do a thing for society.

2

ShowerGrapes t1_j07bbr3 wrote

it's much simpler than that. people WANT to do things, believe it ot not. most people do anyway. they WANT to contribute. they just don't want to be threatened with starvation and homelessness if they don't do what the system deems worthy enough to be granted those things. we just have to find new ways to motivate people that don't include the get-rich scheme of the bullshit "American dream".

9

Clarkeprops t1_j07ch1f wrote

I disagree. Lots of people don’t want to do anything but self indulgent pursuits. Video games, partying, drinking, eating… nobody wants to be a server and everyone wants to be served.

−1

ShowerGrapes t1_j07d27d wrote

they do that because this system has no place for them. because it's all geared towards profits right now. it's because all we offer is money as a carrot, and exposure and starvation as the stick. there are better and more efficient motivations out there. it just has to be tailored more. personalized. we are in a position where we can do that now our technology has advanced beyond the need of currency. we can even, if we wanted to, preserve a social hierarchy without money, royalty even.

9

ProfessorUpham t1_j07g52v wrote

/u/ShowerGrapes knows what’s up.

Laziness is neither evil nor inherent to being human. It’s just another thing people do. Robots doing shitty jobs will mean people can focus on tasks that make them happy. In the long term that would reduce laziness.

5

ShowerGrapes t1_j07mqx3 wrote

and it won't matter if the things people do are marketable or not i.e. are capable of making other people rich or not. we've been missing out because talented people have to work meager, soul-sucking jobs. i'd gladly tip my hat to a few more "lazy" people to have a decent life while gaining new art and philosophy. van Gogh sold exactly one painting to his brother, and the system drove him insane. he persevered anyway but his brand of insanity is the exception, not the norm.

besides, if the nebulous concept of being lazy is a genetic thing, can we really blame people who are lazy for being lazy?

6

ProfessorUpham t1_j07gqss wrote

I would quit my job and do all of these things if I had my daily material needs met. It makes me cry thinking that I can’t do them. Instead I have to work 9-5 weekdays, and after 20+ years living this way has made me incredibly depressed. You would probably call me lazy, but a well educated psychologist might call me extremely burned out and systematically unmotivated.

6

ShowerGrapes t1_j07nyea wrote

i'm in the same boat. spent over 20 years in the software engineering industry, making assholes who wouldn't give me the time of day richer, helping to cement the system as it is, glaring problems and all. i am now completely burnt out by it. lately I've been cooking a bit, making barely enough to get by, writing and helping my family and friends and it's been much more rewarding.

everything is geared toward moving up the social, corporate, political and luxury-goods ladders, trading increases in pay for shinier stuff and more glamorous niehborhoods, more expensive toys and fancier clothing. slow down and you appear to be stuck. corporate America is now becoming the norm. because it seems to work for them. that's only because it has an extensive weeding-out process.

7

Clarkeprops t1_j07rix6 wrote

I wouldn’t call you lazy at all. That’s the whole point of UBI. And under a basic level of conditions, I think it’s a great idea. In practise, the COVID benefits were exploited and millions was defrauded to people that were already millionaires.

It’s a great idea, but in practise it works horribly. So many people cheat. Personally I think that’s why Russia is full of remorseless cheaters. They come from a system where the only way to get enough is be corrupt.

0

ShowerGrapes t1_j09mfzr wrote

UBI is silly. any number, they'll game the system. instead of ubi, give everyone a place to live (even if it's a shared space, enough food to eat and medical help if they need it. that way the system can't figure out how to "top" your ubi money

3

Clarkeprops t1_j09rsa2 wrote

But who builds the place, who grows the food? Who pays for all of it?

0

ShowerGrapes t1_j09w17b wrote

who does it now?

2

Clarkeprops t1_j0anbkw wrote

The people consuming it.

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0bf0t5 wrote

why do you think the same people won't do it?

2

Clarkeprops t1_j0br89b wrote

Because they’re not capable of building housing and rigging it up to code.

If you want a society of self sufficient non specialists, you get Mennonites.

If you want to live in a mid-high density building in a city, you need concrete engineers, crane operators, plumbers, electricians and about 40 other professions. Their time isn’t free.

Even building a house requires permits, and the land to build it on. Technically you could learn it all yourself and it’s fine if it’s to code, but you’re looking at 200k minimum in property and materials just in the middle of nowhere.

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0bs1s6 wrote

you're suggesting the people who currently build houses won't be able to do the same? wtf are you talking about. why would that change? keep all code and all that bullshit. we already have specialists. why would they go away? are you talking about some alternate reality? why would any of that go away?

2

ShowerGrapes t1_j0bs6hy wrote

>you need concrete engineers, crane operators, plumbers, electricians and about 40 other professions.

we'd still have them. nothing is "free". just like when we always had to do "work" we'll always have systems in place for people to benefit from the work they do. people benefited from the work t hey did before currency was invented. they'll continue to after currency is discarded .

2

Clarkeprops t1_j0btbia wrote

You just said “give everyone a place to live” like there’s some house printer that can make extras.

Who exactly are you suggesting will be giving the houses, and who will pay for it?

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0btlfq wrote

who pays for it now? who makes the houses now? none of it would change. and no, not everyone needs a house. nowhere did i say we should build everyone a house. a place to live isn't necessarily a house. a house is something you'd need to work toward.

2

Clarkeprops t1_j0f8ge0 wrote

“Give everyone a place to live” -your words

WHO is giving out these places to live?

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0g89ui wrote

the same people making houses today, would continue to make them.

1

Clarkeprops t1_j0gsd53 wrote

You know you’re not answering my question though.

Who is GIVING out these places to live?

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0gsq1m wrote

you're talking about the transition from a capitalistic, profit based system to one more humane. i'd imagine the people who most benefited from the system should be the ones to bear responsibility for fixing it.

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0bt8uo wrote

people seem to think the "economy" as we define it has always existed. there were thousands of years after the invention of organized farming and before the invention of currency where farms were built, houses constructed, innovations made and necessary work done by people with zero hoarding mentality and almost no social hierarchy. before farming, tribes manage to work together for a hundred thousand years without currency and without millionaires.

it's not only possible, it's the original way we did things.

we can have both now. we've reached the point where we can reorganize society. keep the hierarchy for people who want that sort of thing but also eliminate poverty. all we need to do is find new ways to motivate people. it can be done.

2

Clarkeprops t1_j0f8r45 wrote

We can’t go back to a barter and trade economy. How are you going to pay for your internet? Do a 6 hour shift driving AT&T’s truck for them?

We don’t live in a village with a blacksmith and baker. Todays society can’t ever function without currency

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j0g84hx wrote

it's true we can't go back to barter and trade but it's also true that with technology today, we no longer need currency to function. we're getting there anyway, by small steps. we're "disrupting" industries, putting people where they need to go, doing what they need to do, what needs to be done. uber, fiverr, etc.

things still need to be done and there's no reason why the people who could do it best and want to do it, will still do it. we can also tie jobs to quality of life, if we wanted to.

1

ShowerGrapes t1_j07bn6x wrote

that's the reality of why we doin't provide basic necessities to people today: it would be a lot more difficult to hoard wealth and lord over people if the threat of starvation wasn't a motivating factor. you'd have to pay more for your luxuries because people won't be forced to be part of your luxurious lifestyle. where would we get servants from? well, guess what, there are people who WANT to serve. it just isn't money that motivates them.

3