Question: Why would anyone work in this system?
Response: After all, if one gets all the necessities of life without paying for them,
why would anyone do any work at all? Why wouldn't the lazy, shiftless, no-accounts
just live "on the dole" so to speak?
I am quite confident that
some people would do
just that. Some people don't
have any
desire for cigarettes or alcohol
or big screen TVs or ipods
or fancy clothes or vacations
at the beach. Some people don't
like to play golf or go to
the big game or to rock concerts.
Some people don't have children
whose needs they want to
meet. Some young men don't
want to date pretty girls.
But I digress.
To begin with I will point
out that there are already
quite a few people today who
don't work and have the necessities
of life provided. They live
in jail. There are others who
are the pampered children of
the rich or at least middle
class who just sit around the
house all day and don't even
look for a job. Which indicates
to me that our current form
of money doesn't get everybody
to work as it is.
Second, I would point out
that we have usually got at
least four percent of the adult
population unemployed. Sometimes
that figure is quite a bit
higher than four percent. And
that only counts the people
who are eligible for unemployment
benefits. Government unemployment
statistics don't
include those
whose benefits have run out
or who worked a string of short-term
part-time jobs and never qualified
for unemployment benefits in
the first place. Therefore,
the actual unemployment
figures are much, much higher.
Next, there is the fact that
we have lots of elderly, retired
people who can't work and millions
of children who do not work
yet. So the proportion of our
population that works is really
quite small. ( Am counting
stay at home mothers as people
who work even if they are not
being given money to do so.)
So let's consider the proportion
of people who will work in
a non-POM economy in comparison.
First off, many if not most
of the Payers will be people
who would otherwise be retired
anyway. It is much easier to
judge whether someone else
has done the job than to do
the job one's self. It's much
easier being the critic. Therefore,
there will be many people providing
useful services to a non-POM
economy who would be only consuming
in a POM economy. Second, there
will be no unemployment in
a non-POM economy. If you can
find something useful to do
that will help others and do
it you are employed. The person(s)
you benefit don't have to have
money to give you nor do you
have to have their permission.
There is never a shortage of
money to prevent needed work
from being done. In both senses
of the phrase, in a non-POM
economy "money is no object." Third,
given the huge range of luxuries
that will be available, there
is almost bound to be something
that money can buy that any
person will want. So everyone
will want money and everyone
can find something to do to
get money. If you can communicate
with the world in any way,
you can earn money. Fourth,
everyone will be able to earn
money by helping you earn money.
If you make it known that you
want to earn money, others
will be motivated to help.
This will include providing
tools, transportation, and
training for the work you are
willing to do. Fifth, you can
do work you like. There is
almost bound to be some work
doing something that will benefit
others that you will enjoy
doing. You don't have to do
work which you find unpleasant.
You aren't "trapped" in
a job by a need for money.
Sixth, you work with others
and not for anyone. This means
that though you may do what
someone else tells you to do
you will not do it from fear
or because that person can
punish you for not doing it
but because you are cooperating
with that person and that person's
job is to be the one who tells
you what needs to be done next.
Therefore, you will have more
power at work even if you are
only wielding a shovel.
All of these considerations
mean that there is every reason
to believe that a higher proportion
of the population will be willing
to work in a non-POM economy
than in a POM economy.
Next, let's consider something
that is not literally a part
of your question but which
has a strong bearing on why
you asked that question. That
is the relationship between
people in a POM economy. As
is pointed out in other postings,
a POM simulates a zero-sum
game. That simulation is a
lie because an economy, like
a society as a whole, is not
a zero-sum game. Human beings
are mutually interdependent.
We really need each other to
get alone well and, for most
of us, to survive for very
long at all. But our POM makes
it seem as if what one person
gains some other person or
persons must lost. When we
gain money, some other party
is losing money. When we lose
money (unless we just can't
find it or the currency gets
destroyed) someone else is
gaining money. Everybody else
has a motive to take our money.
This makes us feel like everyone
else is our opponents and as
if they are trying to take
advantage of us. This false
impression of our relationship
to others makes us ask such
questions as "why would
anyone work?" This false
simulation makes us feel as
if we must force people to
work. We don't believe others
will work unless made to do
so. And we especially feel
this way about the poor. Servants
have always had a reputation
for being lazy.
But people have may reasons
to work. You, yourself, would
work for the feelings of pride
and self-worth which work brings
to you. We like to feel independent
and taking care of ourselves
makes us feel independent.
We like to have power and working
makes us more powerful. None
of us would simply sit back
and live on the dole. Well,
other people, even if poor,
feel the same way.
My final point is that every
industrial society has a surplus
of the necessities: food, clothing,
shelter, medical care, and
education. So what harm does
a slacker who is too lazy to
work do? They live on the minimum
in a non-POM economy. They
do not have access to recreational
drugs. They have nothing to
do. They can only go where
the bus lines go since they
will not have a car. The society
is expending a minimum of resources
to keep them alive and no one
is being forced in any way
to do anything for them. So
what harm are they? It's not
as if they had a job making
cigarettes.
|