Should People Have to Work?

[Morrovvind]

Thanks sukeban, you bring up many interesting points

 

1. Who will be the core that controls everything

2. What will their moral position be?

3. What will humans turn to with no work?

 

I have many ideas for the last question. Water sports, mountain climbing, video games, space exploration, sky diving, there's way too much to do to ever get bored haha. From personal experience I don't need or want to work 3\4 of the best years of my short life away at a job that means very little to humanity, but I have to anyway.

 

But I would happily volunteer the same amount of time if I got to live in a world where the basic needs were provided to all.

 

EDIT: Thanks TRoaches, very insightful

Edited June 13, 2013 by Morrovvind

[JimboUK]

Very good replies, TRoaches and Colorwheel. Your insight, TRoaches, is incredibly clear and concise.

 

The lack of empathy, in my opinion, is more of a lack of vision. Has anyone here heard of Maslow's hierarchy of needs? Imagine the 7 billion or however many people there are now, as having many more inventors due to receiving basic needs to live and an education. The technological prowess of the human race would increase many times over, allowing for more benefits for all.

 

It would be more interesting to live in a cooperative society as opposed to a competitive society simply because of the implications of how we would think. Instead of competing and watching our fellow human fall, we try to raise them up because our group is only as strong as its weakest member, realizing that it could have been us born in their shoes.

 

That is not how humans work, without an incentive many would do nothing. Advances in technology have not been driven by altruism, they've been driven by a desire for profit or on occasion war. Trying to impose a system that denies human nature will not end well, look at how backward and unpleasant communist countries become. We already produce enough food to feed to worlds population, why don't we? because it would mean us in the first world having less and the first worlds population won't tolerate that. We are who we are, no amount of technology will change that.

[colourwheel]

The topic title "Should People Have to Work?" kinda leaves it ambiguous. Taking in concideration even if people don't "have" to work and there will be those who "need" to work, there will always be those who "want" too regaurdless of having or the need to....

 

There are people in this world who are wealthy beyond belief who will never ever "have" to work a day in their life even in preservation to keep their families well provided. Then have to ask yourself.. "why do they still work?" The answer is pretty simple if you ask me.... Humans by nature, we are born greedy and selfish creatures. It's human nature questing for power, glory, and wealth. It's human nature to procreate. Humans have the instinctive need to spread their genes even when there is no logical reason or need to....

 

Humans thrive on greed and selfishness as sad as it may seem. Everyone tries or wants to be the better person than the person next to them, whether they admit it or not...

Edited June 13, 2013 by colourwheel

[Beriallord]

 

Who is going to harvest the food, build the shelters, educate people, build the vehicles for transportation, etc? Why should those people have to work when most others would get a free ride? I'm not living and working just to carry others on my back.

 

Every other creature on this planet has to do something in order to survive, and we humans are no different in that regard. I'd prefer a society where people pull their own weight. If we allow society to be comprised of a bunch of lazy sloths who don't want to work, then where would we end up? Why would anyone care about trying hard?

Do you believe all jobs contribute equally to today's society? What if my job was an "account holder" and I collect interest off a large sum of money and your job (barely making ends meet) was to flip burgers which, on occasion I came to buy and eat, driving an expensive Lamborghini and wearing a super rich clothes made from sweat shops. Would you be opposed to a future where robots were burger flippers (and field harvesters, shelter builders, etc)?

 

EDIT: most vehicle factories are automated now with very little human interaction

 

Capitalism is setup in a way where the people who are the most driven toward personal gain are the ones who are the most successful. The ones who wake up in the morning who are motivated 100% with every fiber of their being to do anything they can that day to make as much money as they can, at all costs, or at anyone's expense. You need drive, and you need brains. One without the other will get you nowhere. All of the richest people in America have that drive. The subjective "importance" of someone's specific job doesn't matter in Capitalism. Has no relavence at all to the wage someone makes. Do I think its fair? No. But life isn't fair.

 

Also most people have a limit to the amount of empathy they have toward others. At some point anyone will draw the line and say "not my problem". For example, I can't cure world hunger, so I'm not even gonna try. And if I'm not trying then I'm not caring either. But if I happen to personally find someone who was hungry and needed food, then I'd probably help them.

 

A future where robots do all the manual labor and crap jobs seems unrealistic, although I guess it could be possible. The problem with robots doing those jobs is that robots are more expensive than humans for most things. Robots like in automotive plants do very heavy lifting, or are programmed to do repetitive precision tasks. Which makes those robots cheaper and more efficient than humans doing those roles.

 

I think human society would stagnate if it ever got to the point where robots are working to feed everybody.

Edited June 14, 2013 by Beriallord

[Maharg67]

Technological change creates pressure for social, economic, change. It was such changes that created early capitalism from the ruins of late royal, nobility, controlled society economy. It will not just be human choice that forces change but the pressures of new rising technologies and their growing impact on the world. As for being in control of such forces, such as some kind of conspiracy, that would be amazingly difficult to attain and to maintain.

 

The Communist Chinese State knows this and this is why it is concerned about the 800,000,000 or so of its people who still dwell in poverty. It knows that the worst thing it can do is to give those people a glimpse of hope, of a better life, but fail to give it. People with out hope tend not to rebel but people who feel cheated of a unfilled promise, do, for they are given a visible goal to achieve.

 

Wether we work or not depends on our changing attitude to work, as a society and as individuals, but also on possibilities given to us by new emerging technologies (many of which have yet to arise or to become publically known). There may also arise conflicts, even wars, in future as the pressures of change work on the world as we know it. Please do not scoff for many wars in the past were largely caused by such pressures of change including World War One.

 

My hope is that we humans would grasp the promise of technological change to make a 'fine new world' where people can work just three days a week, or less, to earn their way. People would still be doing something to help carry society. As for welfare I think it must come but that does not have to mean passive, dependency causing welfare; welfare recepients could also be doing something for society such as useful volunteer work or one day a week work so they can keep at least part of their welfare payments. There will always be those who have to be cared for totally.

 

Our approach to work must change to keep up with a changing world and I hope the change will be for the good of all.

[rizon72]

I think people should work, as it give us an appreciation of what is needed to do something. When we take something for granted, it becomes lost. There are a lot of people who probably have no idea how to grow a crop, herd animals, or hunt if our society collapsed. They no longer appreciate what is required to have the food at the supermarket, ready for them to buy whenever they want it.

 

Just because science can make it possible, doesn't mean we should do it.

[dave1029]

Right now, it's awful. Machines are forcing people out of work. But in 50 years, humans will have to do very little. We will probably have a large network that gives instructions to machines to deal with the necessities of humans. Think FFXIII, except we build and control the Fal'cie. So eventually machines will automate repairs/replacements, delivery, blah blah blah. Think even further and machines will be fully functional AI's. That's when things get scary. Will they accept being slaves? Hard to say, but they might find that, that is their purpose in life and go along with it. To sum things up, assuming we don't blow ourselves up, there will be a day in which no humans will have to work. The only thing left to do would be to invent new technology, and those jobs would be filled by great people who don't find it to be a job. They want to make the world a better place and are generally altruistic. Reading a few of the arguments, there will be a time when everyone can have everything. You should see some of the stuff we, as a civilization, are building. Power will be the first step, (one nuclear fusion plant could power the entire world), advanced agriculture and bioengineering for food. Theoretically we could be many times more efficient with agriculture as we are now. So I fully believe one day, nobody will be denied anything, and classes will be based on appearance, intelligence, and political status, rather than money.

 

TL;DR- Eventually nobody will have to work.

[dave1029]

I think people should work, as it give us an appreciation of what is needed to do something. When we take something for granted, it becomes lost. There are a lot of people who probably have no idea how to grow a crop, herd animals, or hunt if our society collapsed. They no longer appreciate what is required to have the food at the supermarket, ready for them to buy whenever they want it.

 

Just because science can make it possible, doesn't mean we should do it.

They don't appreciate it because it is trivial to do with machinery. Also nothing will ever be "lost". Wikipedia is an ever-growing archive of everything humans have ever done, and how to do it.

[McclaudEagle]

To be honest, the idea that humanity would be able to avoid working for the rest of our existence is not an appealing concept. Colourwheel said that people who are rich work because of greed, however, that's not actually the case most of the time. I've been unemployed for quite some time, and I can tell you that life gets very slow and boring after a while of spending everyday out of work. Most people who are officially retired go back to work, such as in small shops, because spending every day in retirement out of work is incredibly boring. I've always been against the constant automation of jobs.

 

Many people would like to see soldiers replaced with robots to "save soldier lives". This is counterproductive as most soldiers are doing it because it's a job, and it pays. Robots also wouldn't be capable of human emotion, which would make war less horrific for those commanding the robots.

 

If humans never needed to work again, I would guarantee that the human race would become a lazy, selfish, slobbish species that wouldn't be able to plug in a lightbulb, let alone do other complex things that might be needed if technology suddenly failed. You can already see it with some rich spoiled people, many of them don't even have a clue how to use a washing machine. That would be the route humanity would end up going if such a thing happened.

 

Money can only get you so far. Even with millions, you'd probably still get bored, and be interested in looking for work.

[TRoaches]

I've always been against the constant automation of jobs.....

 

If humans never needed to work again, I would guarantee that the human race would become a lazy, selfish, slobbish species that wouldn't be able to plug in a lightbulb, let alone do other complex things that might be needed if technology suddenly failed. You can already see it with some rich spoiled people, many of them don't even have a clue how to use a washing machine. That would be the route humanity would end up going if such a thing happened.

Isn't a washing machine an example of technological automation replacing what was once a manual job and a source of employment? If you oppose the automation of jobs then you should be paying someone to hand wash your laundry in a tub.

Edited June 17, 2013 by TRoaches