Hence the somewhat curious (and I think, very American) idea of the "Golden Years". If you put your head down and work hard, taking no vacations, until you're age 65, then you flip 180 degrees in the other direction and retire into a life of full-time leisure. So if you live long enough, it really won't be a waste; you cash it in all at the end!
A Scandinavian psychologist somewhat recently proposed a typically Scandinavian reversal of this: he suggested people should work to age 80, but work proportionally less in all the years up to there. Basically redirect the pension system to subsidize more early-age vacation and less pension.
I think you've missed the point of the letter entirely. It's not about people who are obsessed with their work, it's about people who have no choice in the matter.
It's sad that most of the people I meet today can only be described as 'careerists'. I hardly see any artists or people who really enjoy what they do. And you know what your environment can do to you: it can make you or break you. Having an unhappy person next to you is a cyclic and disturbing process. The negativity percolates to unimaginable proportions. Negativity is often more affecting than positivity. That is why it is so important to 'engineer' your surroundings with care.
You know, I don't see the career ascent about forgetting my own life. I see it as a way I can do good for this world. If I have people under my span of control, I can impart what I believe to be good in this world as a part of my leadership and management style.
I also want to be a motivational speaker when I 'grow up'. I came from humble beginnings. Some people's talks have really changed my life. In order to give those talks and be invited to speak, yes you have to ascend the established social order.
Am I wasting my life by working a lot? No. The things I work so hard for have real effects in this world. My mom has been working for over 40 years of her life. If I do things right, she'll be able to retire eventually. Do I work harder than other people do for the same, or less, compensation? I'm sure I do. But you know what, you have to make the best of the situation you're in.
so this is something i don't get - why is your worklife something separated from your personal one? you spend the vast majority of your awake time working (as an adult), so why have this mindset?
once you realize that work by definition is your life, you'll take it more seriously, especially if it is harmful to you. you do not have to swallow each and every bullshit thrown at you, this is your life. you want to travel, experience other cultures? use work to reach this goal. nothing shows you other cultures like working with them directly, on the ground. lots of consulting gigs allow you to do this.
i also don't get this inherent fear that seems prevalent in US corporate culture. well, i fundamentally understand, in Europe you can't get fired on a whim, but over here in US I see this amazing mindset around CEOs and how people behave around them. Massaging emails until they definitely won't cause a ruckus, filtering, keeping silent. Why? Because CEO.
your work time is your life time. treat it as such.
coincidentally the people I have met that have understood this seem to have great careers. they go all in and are not driven by fear. my first boss called this mindset "scheiss di ned aun", viennese for "don't shit yourself". life's too short to be afraid of suits and orgcharts.
How many hours per day have humans worked historically compared to now? Just to survive (not starve to death). Do you think man works more now than historically? Man was cursed (after expulsion from the garden of Eden)/ or evolved (depending on your beliefs) to work, a lot.
Today, too many people have jobs to support their lifestyles, not their lives. People end up working to continue making monthly payments on houses larger than they need, cars fancier than they need, and they won't be able to fully enjoy those things because they're always working 9-5. Today, we are a lot further along than we were 50 years ago. People aren't working in factories to put bread on the table, people are working in offices to pay for their next new car or big screen TV.
My goal is to make as much money as I can as fast as I can so that instead of trying to become the next billionaire, I can stop working and become the next great thinker. I value knowledge and happiness over money.
People buy things they can't afford, with money that they don't have, to impress people that they don't like
I realized I could live off of $25000/yr and maintain a modestly comfortable lifestyle at the same time. I am on track to retire before I am 40. Anyone can do it.
Can I just say that I love Charles Bukowski? If you've never read him go buy his books now. There's so much humanity in there. Some will think he's a downer or depressing, but I think he's genius. His life reminds me of this quote by Hokusai:
When I was 50 I had published a universe of designs. But all I have done before the the age of 70 is not worth bothering with. At 75 I'll have learned something of the pattern of nature, of animals, of plants, of trees, birds, fish and insects. When I am 80 you will see real progress. At 90 I shall have cut my way deeply into the mystery of life itself. At 100, I shall be a marvelous artist. At 110, everything I create; a dot, a line, will jump to life as never before.
>>You know my old saying, "Slavery was never abolished, it was only extended to include all the colors."
Some people balk at the idea of "wage slavery," primarily because they think it is so different from the traditional slavery that it should not be called that.
But the question is, if you are doing something and the alternative is starvation and death, are you really a free human being? If you think about it for a while, the answer becomes clear: you are not free. Sure, you have the freedom to switch from one slave-owner to another, but at no point in the process do you have real freedom.
1. Many people are horrified by the thought of not being a simple worker bee. They say they want change, but they don't. They want the security of someone else taking care of them. The reason wealth exists is because there are people that cannot live this way, and thus, make their own way. You cannot fault hard working business owners because their employees put themselves in a place to require said employment in order to sustain a life they consider normal.
2. There will always be wealth. If the US gave up capitalism in favor of socialism, the money would be placed in the hands of the whole, and in this case, the government. At that point, the government has the money and the power. We're screwed.
3. Life is suffering. There is no perfection on this realm. Solve this problem and another will follow. This is a symptom of life in samsara. Bukowski recognized this, which is why he talked of a simple life without possessions. If you truly want to break free of 'the man,' you'll have to life a life defined by something other than money, objects, and achievements. For most of us, this is nearly impossible. Middle ground is an illusion.
>They want the security of someone else taking care of them.
Performing a job, even a "simple worker bee" job, is still a job, not charity. As a worker, you perform a function, and the company pays you for your time/expertise/ideas/efforts/output/etc. What the hell part of that is charity, or being "taken care of"?
I find your implication that the employer is somehow doing the employee a favor by paying them for their work baffling and wrong-headed.
Governments always have all of the money. They issue it, and they define it by only accepting their type of money in order to pay their taxes. They hold that value by being strong enough and/or well-connected enough to defend themselves from physical threats from inside and out, and enough to extract taxes and fees from individuals in order to pull that money back out of circulation. In order to do this, they have all the guns.
Government has all of the money and all of the guns. We're already screwed. What we need to focus on is making the government help us structure a better society - a kinder, safer, braver, smarter society. The further we get from that ideal, the closer we get to a world where we will again remember that money can't save you from the people with all the guns. Khodorkovsky thought money was worth something.
I would reframe #1 in terms of acceptable risk. If you're very risk-averse - for example, if you're raising a family and it is absolutely unacceptable to you to fail financially - then it's difficult to justify giving up the security of regular employment.
Life is suffering? I find that to be overly pessimistic. Life is not simple and there will be sorrow. However, there will be joy as well. "Suffering" is a very strong word to use. There is happiness and there is sorrow. To expect only happiness is not pragmatic, but to expect only sorrow is unfortunate.
Life can be beautiful, even if it is not always so.
#1 is flat out wrong. THERE IS NO SECURITY! Is mcdonalds right? paying people so little that they need another job to not be out on the street? How is that TAKING CARE of employees? Before you say mcdonalds is an exception, theres so many others so dont give me the bullshit about wealth exists because blah.
I support and understand what he's saying, but I think too many times we set up this false choice between "pursuing our dreams" and "working for the man"
There's honor -- and authenticity -- in making choices for your life that involve working in the system.
I used to look down on those who worked jobs they hated and would say things like "That's just not for me. I don't know how you can do it." until one day somebody took me aside and pointed out what an insulting and condescending attitude I had. I was being a jerk, a well-paid, able-to-pick-what-I-want-to-do jerk. Other people did not have the same lives or face the same choices as I did. I should respect their uniqueness and decisions -- even if they loudly and publicly complained about them.
I have learned that for myself it is too easy to go off on a wild tangent about how one lifestyle is so much better than another, talking about slavery and such, just like in this letter. Basically I was being a judgmental prick, substituting my values for other people's and then declaring that my choices and values were best for everybody.
I finally realized that the quality of life is something each of us owns through our own personal choices.
You know, I don't see the career ascent about forgetting my own life. I see it as a way I can do good for this world. If I have people under my span of control, I can impart what I believe to be good in this world as a part of my leadership and management style.
I also want to be a motivational speaker when I 'grow up'. I came from humble beginnings. Some people's talks have really changed my life. In order to give those talks and be invited to speak, yes you have to ascend the established social order.
Am I wasting my life by working a lot? No. The things I work so hard for have real effects in this world. My mom has been working for over 40 years of her life. If I do things right, she'll be able to retire eventually. Do I work harder than other people do for the same, or less, compensation? I'm sure I do. But you know what, you have to make the best of the situation you're in.
They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work.
I do love my job, though there is so much more I want to do with my life - so much more I could do that (as far as I can tell) would really help humanity. Unfortunately I'm locked into working because of student loans and overall cost of living. I try to do work in my free time but sadly 3 hours a night does not build a company with enough revenue to grant me freedom.
By the time I've earned enough from my job to afford not having a job I worry I'll have moved on to a different life stage where kids will take up my evenings.
I know I'm not the only talented, driven 20-something in this situation and with student loans recently so high, it is a pity to think that overall out generation will have fewer who are able to make their ideas real because of it. Thanks to YC for offsetting that effect and helping us believe we can "get free".
I've been at my current full-time job a bit over a year. The previous six years were a mix of freelance, contract, and startup work -- sometimes full-time, sometimes way-more-than-full-time, and sometimes not at all... but usually part-time.
There are some things I like about the current job, and if I stick around at least another six months, I'll likely play a key role in overhauling the front end of a major automaker's website using state-of-the art. Not a bad feather to stick in a cap.
On the other hand, the chances that I'll do anything else in the meanwhile seem pretty slim. I notice in the last year alone, my energy for original/personal projects is diminished, I feel less creative/thoughtful in general -- and arguably even less interesting than during the aforementioned freelance period. I do feel, as Bukowski put it, somewhat emptied out by my work.
It's possible what I really need is a different full-time gig, since I have been in some full-time situations that felt energizing. But I'm starting to be convinced that when I'm hiring myself out part-time, I stay more personally grounded and sharper as far as my general skills and strength in the field goes.
Unfortunately, steady skilled part-time employment seems to be considerably more difficult to find than full-time.
i sold my startup about 3 months ago, and immediately starting looking for another job. after a couple months, a couple interesting but-not-exciting offers, and one interview process that ended in me not getting an offer, i finally took a worthy vacation. while on a boat in the caribbean, a couple things occurred to me: (1) i really don't need to work for the next ~10 years (2) in that time, i will likely stumble on another opportunity similar to the previous one, which has afforded me this financial freedom (3) i am way more interested in learning, exploring, and art than a "real" job, even a job like my previous one, that i particularly enjoyed. (4) i am very fortunate to be in this position, and i really don't want to waste it.
so i've been giving this topic some serious thought. to work or not to work? that is the question.
It's actually a lot more. 4.31% per year is likely what the US government reports. They traditionally under report inflation (although to a greater degree over the past 20 years). The bundle of goods used to measure inflation does not include housing and energy, which have been the primary sources of rising living costs (not to mention medicine, which I only just considered).
> In 1969, publisher John Martin offered to pay Charles Bukowski $100 each and every month for the rest of his life, on one condition: that he quit his job at the post office and become a writer.
this makes me think of basic income, which might be one approach to ending wage slavery:
I don't happen to believe the wage system is slavery (I do happen to believe we have a modern slavery system, but that's another story)
"They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work." But then why don't the slaves leave? Unlike in the past, nobody is holding a gun to their head. One possibility, probably popular among entrepreneurial types, is the slaves don't leave, because they don't think they can leave. It's a problem that is easily solved! All the boring types need is a little bit of education, for them to learn that leaving is possibility.
But maybe, what scares us a little bit, is that maybe the slaves don't want to leave. They value that security that the boring life brings them (that is why they complain "it ain't right" - because they have lost something they really valued). This is the really scary thing, because we don't want to be boring but we could see ourselves making the same choice. At the same time we don't understand the choice of the slaves to not leave, we identify with it at a level that we maybe can't explain. But is it a wrong choice? Who are we to judge others for choosing security over wealth or self-exploration? Maybe we are at a knife edge- a little bit less motivation here, a marginal preference there, a taste of failure here, and we, too, would pick security over wealth (of money, of intellect, of experience). I think that the strange paternalistic attitude of the passage is a result of the fear - the fear of that condition.
Django unchained briefly visited that idea when Leonardo pondered why don't the slaves revolt or leave? The slave has nowhere to go.
Wage slavery, the term, was coined when industrial jobs were coming on to the scene in the north and there was still slavery in the south. Groups of laborers in these new factories soon went on protest. They self-described their situation as being similar to slave work/living standards but with a wage. Basically what we today would call inhumane.
This sentiment never diminished but instead was overwhelmed by the dominance of industrialized work in this format. Their protest fell on deaf ears because now all the jobs offered were like that and unions decided to fight for better working conditions instead of the system at large. Which leads us to today.
It's hypocritical when employees lambaste labor movements but will gladly partake the fruits of better wages and working standards.
It seem human nature will put up with a lot of things. An anthropological account i read: The anthropologist visited some area around Tibet. The system in place there required newly married women upon marriage to leave their husbands and work for the lord of the area, often as a concubine. After a year or so she would leave but not to return to her husband but instead go to a work camp where she would serve as a comfort girl. After that she returned.
The obviously shocked anthropologist asked why did people put up with this arrangement? It seems the reply was a "that's the way it was" sentiment.
You can easily leave, but you want to eat. You want to have a place to live, and in a nice neighborhood. You want to be transported to other places. You want to have internet access, to have TV, to have cell phone, to wear nice clothes, etc.
You can not do all of it on your own. Other people have to do it for you. But why other people would do it for you? They don't know you and have no obligations towards you and have no desire to work for you just because you're such a nice person. And even if they wanted, there's a scarcity of resources and time, why would they choose you? You have to offer them something. Like work for them in return, to do something they want but can't or won't do. Of course, you can't work for every person that participated in making your cellphone personally - that's where the money comes in.
Now when you talk about leaving - you can mean giving up all goods that our civilization gives us, sever your links with the mutual work exchange system and do it on your own. You can do that. But do you really want to? Your clothes, food and shelter would suck huge time. A simple caries may kill you. Your life would be brutal, miserable, full of pain and short (at least compared to what the civilization could give you). Is it worth it?
You can also talk about being essentially a parasite - not contributing anything and putting the surrounding people before the choice of giving you stuff for nothing or watching a disturbing picture of you slowly and painfully dying in their front porch. In our modern society, you can pretty safely bet most would choose give you something in order to avoid that. But is that really what anybody would want to be, given a choice?
You can also do worse - you can take weapons and threaten to harm your neighbors unless they work for you. If you demands are modest enough, they may choose to comply instead of creating a security layer that protects against you, since it'd be cheaper. But is it a really moral choice for anyone? If being slave is bad, how about being an enslaver?
If you have another alternative to participating in mutual work exchange system - what is it? How does it compare on outcomes and on morality?
I think it's more a metaphorical "leave", as in "leave the rat race". Most people know they can leave their job, but leaving a chosen career path is a lot harder, especially for a less educated person, and particularly for blue collar workers.
What are they supposed to do? Quit without savings and try to change careers?
(That's the feeling, anyways. Not sure what the answer is.)
"A man can never drink his fill by waiting in line for the tap"
That quote motivates me everyday, because it reminds me that the things I want in life will never be achieved by working at a place in any capacity where the choice of my continued employment lies in the hands of any one person.
"They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work."
I suspect the author is being intentionally misleading regarding the costs of staying alive. It doesn't take $20,000/year. More like $5,000, and even that is being generous.
Early Retirement Extreme and other books cover this in more detail, of course.
I do agree with the overall sentiment of his article, but the concept that the current state of affairs is some kind of intentional conspiracy is incorrect. People like the security of being indebted and forced to work, it seems. They are not forced into such a life.
[+] [-] blackhole|12 years ago|reply
What is the point of existence if we never get around to experiencing it?
"It's not the things we do in life that we regret on our death bed, it is the things we do not." - Randy Pausch
[+] [-] _delirium|12 years ago|reply
A Scandinavian psychologist somewhat recently proposed a typically Scandinavian reversal of this: he suggested people should work to age 80, but work proportionally less in all the years up to there. Basically redirect the pension system to subsidize more early-age vacation and less pension.
edit: http://cphpost.dk/business/researcher-advocates-25-hour-work...
[+] [-] rollo_tommasi|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] medell|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hoffcoder|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ececconi|12 years ago|reply
I also want to be a motivational speaker when I 'grow up'. I came from humble beginnings. Some people's talks have really changed my life. In order to give those talks and be invited to speak, yes you have to ascend the established social order.
Am I wasting my life by working a lot? No. The things I work so hard for have real effects in this world. My mom has been working for over 40 years of her life. If I do things right, she'll be able to retire eventually. Do I work harder than other people do for the same, or less, compensation? I'm sure I do. But you know what, you have to make the best of the situation you're in.
I was recently invited to give my first talk. Here is the abridged executive summary: http://www.evernote.com/shard/s34/sh/9a92bf45-27e1-4470-be7e...
[+] [-] nnoitra|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] zobzu|12 years ago|reply
Same for startups ;-)
[+] [-] kh_hk|12 years ago|reply
It is not about the things we do not do, it is about having had enough.
[+] [-] gbog|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] curiousfiddler|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] giantSlayer|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] pinaceae|12 years ago|reply
once you realize that work by definition is your life, you'll take it more seriously, especially if it is harmful to you. you do not have to swallow each and every bullshit thrown at you, this is your life. you want to travel, experience other cultures? use work to reach this goal. nothing shows you other cultures like working with them directly, on the ground. lots of consulting gigs allow you to do this.
i also don't get this inherent fear that seems prevalent in US corporate culture. well, i fundamentally understand, in Europe you can't get fired on a whim, but over here in US I see this amazing mindset around CEOs and how people behave around them. Massaging emails until they definitely won't cause a ruckus, filtering, keeping silent. Why? Because CEO.
your work time is your life time. treat it as such.
coincidentally the people I have met that have understood this seem to have great careers. they go all in and are not driven by fear. my first boss called this mindset "scheiss di ned aun", viennese for "don't shit yourself". life's too short to be afraid of suits and orgcharts.
[+] [-] goggles99|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Casseres|12 years ago|reply
My goal is to make as much money as I can as fast as I can so that instead of trying to become the next billionaire, I can stop working and become the next great thinker. I value knowledge and happiness over money.
[+] [-] Afforess|12 years ago|reply
I realized I could live off of $25000/yr and maintain a modestly comfortable lifestyle at the same time. I am on track to retire before I am 40. Anyone can do it.
http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/02/22/getting-rich-from-...
[+] [-] mikegagnon|12 years ago|reply
People are still working in factories to put bread on their tables. There is a huge amount of poverty in the world.
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty
[+] [-] tankbot|12 years ago|reply
When I was 50 I had published a universe of designs. But all I have done before the the age of 70 is not worth bothering with. At 75 I'll have learned something of the pattern of nature, of animals, of plants, of trees, birds, fish and insects. When I am 80 you will see real progress. At 90 I shall have cut my way deeply into the mystery of life itself. At 100, I shall be a marvelous artist. At 110, everything I create; a dot, a line, will jump to life as never before.
Never stop learning, folks.
[+] [-] enraged_camel|12 years ago|reply
Some people balk at the idea of "wage slavery," primarily because they think it is so different from the traditional slavery that it should not be called that.
But the question is, if you are doing something and the alternative is starvation and death, are you really a free human being? If you think about it for a while, the answer becomes clear: you are not free. Sure, you have the freedom to switch from one slave-owner to another, but at no point in the process do you have real freedom.
[+] [-] nhangen|12 years ago|reply
1. Many people are horrified by the thought of not being a simple worker bee. They say they want change, but they don't. They want the security of someone else taking care of them. The reason wealth exists is because there are people that cannot live this way, and thus, make their own way. You cannot fault hard working business owners because their employees put themselves in a place to require said employment in order to sustain a life they consider normal.
2. There will always be wealth. If the US gave up capitalism in favor of socialism, the money would be placed in the hands of the whole, and in this case, the government. At that point, the government has the money and the power. We're screwed.
3. Life is suffering. There is no perfection on this realm. Solve this problem and another will follow. This is a symptom of life in samsara. Bukowski recognized this, which is why he talked of a simple life without possessions. If you truly want to break free of 'the man,' you'll have to life a life defined by something other than money, objects, and achievements. For most of us, this is nearly impossible. Middle ground is an illusion.
[+] [-] blottsie|12 years ago|reply
Performing a job, even a "simple worker bee" job, is still a job, not charity. As a worker, you perform a function, and the company pays you for your time/expertise/ideas/efforts/output/etc. What the hell part of that is charity, or being "taken care of"?
I find your implication that the employer is somehow doing the employee a favor by paying them for their work baffling and wrong-headed.
[+] [-] AznHisoka|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pessimizer|12 years ago|reply
Government has all of the money and all of the guns. We're already screwed. What we need to focus on is making the government help us structure a better society - a kinder, safer, braver, smarter society. The further we get from that ideal, the closer we get to a world where we will again remember that money can't save you from the people with all the guns. Khodorkovsky thought money was worth something.
[+] [-] brianpgordon|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vendakka|12 years ago|reply
Life can be beautiful, even if it is not always so.
[+] [-] eli_gottlieb|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hnnnnng|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pond_lilly|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] DanielBMarkham|12 years ago|reply
There's honor -- and authenticity -- in making choices for your life that involve working in the system.
I used to look down on those who worked jobs they hated and would say things like "That's just not for me. I don't know how you can do it." until one day somebody took me aside and pointed out what an insulting and condescending attitude I had. I was being a jerk, a well-paid, able-to-pick-what-I-want-to-do jerk. Other people did not have the same lives or face the same choices as I did. I should respect their uniqueness and decisions -- even if they loudly and publicly complained about them.
I have learned that for myself it is too easy to go off on a wild tangent about how one lifestyle is so much better than another, talking about slavery and such, just like in this letter. Basically I was being a judgmental prick, substituting my values for other people's and then declaring that my choices and values were best for everybody.
I finally realized that the quality of life is something each of us owns through our own personal choices.
So I don't do that anymore.
[+] [-] ececconi|12 years ago|reply
I also want to be a motivational speaker when I 'grow up'. I came from humble beginnings. Some people's talks have really changed my life. In order to give those talks and be invited to speak, yes you have to ascend the established social order.
Am I wasting my life by working a lot? No. The things I work so hard for have real effects in this world. My mom has been working for over 40 years of her life. If I do things right, she'll be able to retire eventually. Do I work harder than other people do for the same, or less, compensation? I'm sure I do. But you know what, you have to make the best of the situation you're in.
I was recently invited to give my first talk. Here is the abridged executive summary: http://www.evernote.com/shard/s34/sh/9a92bf45-27e1-4470-be7e...
[+] [-] zoba|12 years ago|reply
I do love my job, though there is so much more I want to do with my life - so much more I could do that (as far as I can tell) would really help humanity. Unfortunately I'm locked into working because of student loans and overall cost of living. I try to do work in my free time but sadly 3 hours a night does not build a company with enough revenue to grant me freedom.
By the time I've earned enough from my job to afford not having a job I worry I'll have moved on to a different life stage where kids will take up my evenings.
I know I'm not the only talented, driven 20-something in this situation and with student loans recently so high, it is a pity to think that overall out generation will have fewer who are able to make their ideas real because of it. Thanks to YC for offsetting that effect and helping us believe we can "get free".
[+] [-] wwweston|12 years ago|reply
There are some things I like about the current job, and if I stick around at least another six months, I'll likely play a key role in overhauling the front end of a major automaker's website using state-of-the art. Not a bad feather to stick in a cap.
On the other hand, the chances that I'll do anything else in the meanwhile seem pretty slim. I notice in the last year alone, my energy for original/personal projects is diminished, I feel less creative/thoughtful in general -- and arguably even less interesting than during the aforementioned freelance period. I do feel, as Bukowski put it, somewhat emptied out by my work.
It's possible what I really need is a different full-time gig, since I have been in some full-time situations that felt energizing. But I'm starting to be convinced that when I'm hiring myself out part-time, I stay more personally grounded and sharper as far as my general skills and strength in the field goes.
Unfortunately, steady skilled part-time employment seems to be considerably more difficult to find than full-time.
[+] [-] djim|12 years ago|reply
so i've been giving this topic some serious thought. to work or not to work? that is the question.
[+] [-] revelation|12 years ago|reply
[1]: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=100%24+from+1969
[+] [-] johnrob|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pdx6|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 20130816|12 years ago|reply
this makes me think of basic income, which might be one approach to ending wage slavery:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income
[+] [-] thinker|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jorgecastillo|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 16s|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dnautics|12 years ago|reply
"They never pay the slaves enough so they can get free, just enough so they can stay alive and come back to work." But then why don't the slaves leave? Unlike in the past, nobody is holding a gun to their head. One possibility, probably popular among entrepreneurial types, is the slaves don't leave, because they don't think they can leave. It's a problem that is easily solved! All the boring types need is a little bit of education, for them to learn that leaving is possibility.
But maybe, what scares us a little bit, is that maybe the slaves don't want to leave. They value that security that the boring life brings them (that is why they complain "it ain't right" - because they have lost something they really valued). This is the really scary thing, because we don't want to be boring but we could see ourselves making the same choice. At the same time we don't understand the choice of the slaves to not leave, we identify with it at a level that we maybe can't explain. But is it a wrong choice? Who are we to judge others for choosing security over wealth or self-exploration? Maybe we are at a knife edge- a little bit less motivation here, a marginal preference there, a taste of failure here, and we, too, would pick security over wealth (of money, of intellect, of experience). I think that the strange paternalistic attitude of the passage is a result of the fear - the fear of that condition.
[+] [-] dsbmac|12 years ago|reply
Wage slavery, the term, was coined when industrial jobs were coming on to the scene in the north and there was still slavery in the south. Groups of laborers in these new factories soon went on protest. They self-described their situation as being similar to slave work/living standards but with a wage. Basically what we today would call inhumane.
This sentiment never diminished but instead was overwhelmed by the dominance of industrialized work in this format. Their protest fell on deaf ears because now all the jobs offered were like that and unions decided to fight for better working conditions instead of the system at large. Which leads us to today.
It's hypocritical when employees lambaste labor movements but will gladly partake the fruits of better wages and working standards.
It seem human nature will put up with a lot of things. An anthropological account i read: The anthropologist visited some area around Tibet. The system in place there required newly married women upon marriage to leave their husbands and work for the lord of the area, often as a concubine. After a year or so she would leave but not to return to her husband but instead go to a work camp where she would serve as a comfort girl. After that she returned.
The obviously shocked anthropologist asked why did people put up with this arrangement? It seems the reply was a "that's the way it was" sentiment.
[+] [-] smsm42|12 years ago|reply
You can not do all of it on your own. Other people have to do it for you. But why other people would do it for you? They don't know you and have no obligations towards you and have no desire to work for you just because you're such a nice person. And even if they wanted, there's a scarcity of resources and time, why would they choose you? You have to offer them something. Like work for them in return, to do something they want but can't or won't do. Of course, you can't work for every person that participated in making your cellphone personally - that's where the money comes in.
Now when you talk about leaving - you can mean giving up all goods that our civilization gives us, sever your links with the mutual work exchange system and do it on your own. You can do that. But do you really want to? Your clothes, food and shelter would suck huge time. A simple caries may kill you. Your life would be brutal, miserable, full of pain and short (at least compared to what the civilization could give you). Is it worth it?
You can also talk about being essentially a parasite - not contributing anything and putting the surrounding people before the choice of giving you stuff for nothing or watching a disturbing picture of you slowly and painfully dying in their front porch. In our modern society, you can pretty safely bet most would choose give you something in order to avoid that. But is that really what anybody would want to be, given a choice?
You can also do worse - you can take weapons and threaten to harm your neighbors unless they work for you. If you demands are modest enough, they may choose to comply instead of creating a security layer that protects against you, since it'd be cheaper. But is it a really moral choice for anyone? If being slave is bad, how about being an enslaver?
If you have another alternative to participating in mutual work exchange system - what is it? How does it compare on outcomes and on morality?
[+] [-] scott_karana|12 years ago|reply
What are they supposed to do? Quit without savings and try to change careers? (That's the feeling, anyways. Not sure what the answer is.)
[+] [-] brianpgordon|12 years ago|reply
Hm... abject terror of homelessness.
[+] [-] foobarqux|12 years ago|reply
http://deoxy.org/endwork.htm
http://paulbe.dreamwidth.org/961.html
[+] [-] trustfundbaby|12 years ago|reply
That quote motivates me everyday, because it reminds me that the things I want in life will never be achieved by working at a place in any capacity where the choice of my continued employment lies in the hands of any one person.
[+] [-] alexeisadeski3|12 years ago|reply
I suspect the author is being intentionally misleading regarding the costs of staying alive. It doesn't take $20,000/year. More like $5,000, and even that is being generous.
Early Retirement Extreme and other books cover this in more detail, of course.
I do agree with the overall sentiment of his article, but the concept that the current state of affairs is some kind of intentional conspiracy is incorrect. People like the security of being indebted and forced to work, it seems. They are not forced into such a life.
[+] [-] jusben1369|12 years ago|reply