This was pretty much what set me on the path to radicalisation.
The system felt so unfair and then to learn that there were people who could do exactly this just because they were born into a family with large capital it was infuriating.
this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2025
287 points (93.6% liked)
Memes
46028 readers
2470 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
That's why I dislike these kinds of memes that say, "Oh, I shouldn't be working all day; I should be living a life of leisure and free to create".They feel like the conservative strawman of the "lazy leftist who just envies the rich".
Living as the meme describes inherently requires the exploitation of labor. Unless a society becomes technologically advanced enough to achieve fully automated post-scarcity, meeting a person's needs still requires a certain amount of human labor. The issue under capitalism is that some people do live as the meme describes, and they do so by exploiting the labor of others through capital. As a result, the rest of us struggle even more.
Hey want to throw up? Here's a Koch heir using daddy's blood money to be a pretend "creative."
One doesn't even get to focus on paying just for oneself.
One has to pay for Zuck/Bezos/Musk/Cook/Trump first.
Has there ever been a time in human history where we were just allowed to exist for our passions and not work for survival? Our economic system definitely has its flaws, but this meme paints with too broad strokes.
You don't work merely for your own survival under capitalism, most of your labor goes to supporting the capitalist class (and bombing foreigners to keep resources cheap so those capitalists can make even more money).
Half a century ago, working in a grocery store was enough to buy a home, raise a family, and put a kid through college. The job did not get less productive, if anything each worker produces more than ever with automation, but a greater share goes to the capitalist class, both through stagnant wages and increasing costs.
If we're talking specifically about art, historically, there was the patronage system where wealthy people would pay artists that they liked to largely just spend their days painting whatever they liked. It wasn't something every artist could take advantage of (Van Gogh died a poor pauper because his paintings basically didn't sell at all until after his death, for example), but it did exist.
Also, genuine question if anybody knows, what about the philosophers of old? Did they get paid as teachers of their school of theory or something?
It's not like there was ever a time when people simply didn't work at all, but there is a large portion of the population today who don't feel like their work is anything other than busywork with no reason to it, and that makes them miserable even doing something that they love. There are people out there who love picking up garbage for a living because they know that they're doing something that makes a difference.
Yeah, childhood.
We've basically conquered scarcity at this point in history. There's really no reason people shouldn't have all their basically necessities provided today, but bcz of greedy assholes, they're always in search of more money, so we don't get that.
There's still a lot of actually important work that needs doing, like solving world hunger, poverty, and homelessness (which unfortunately most countries aren't paying people to do, except for a few), but for the most part this quote is spot on:
I don't think regulators are a good example for something we have too many people doing, but otherwise, this is great
think about whatever it was they were thinking about before someone came along and told them they had to earn a living.
This right here moved me. Not just because it's so spot on, but because I don't even remember what I was thinking about back then.
I reverse engineered this, by thinking about what I would do if I was in the Pokemon world, since whatever economic system Pokemon has means that 10 year olds can support themselves with hobby income while traveling the world, and basically every adult makes their living through their special interest. So now I'm working towards becoming a wetland ecologist, and it's led to uncovering tons of nostalgic memories from field trips and stuff in elementary school
As a kid, a friend asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I said I wanted to be an inventor, like Gyro Gearloose.
He said: That's not a job.
"inventor" is definitely a job, if you're already rich 🙁
Greedy assholes definitely ruin a lot for all of us.
The Renaissance was a time of a vast labor shortage. This allowed workers to demand higher wages, and it also allowed leisure time to study new things and make new art.
This is true also when you have strong unions to bargain for good benefits. Still, you need to do some work, as opposed to the message of the meme "you have to pay for being alive".
Unions are a band aid solution to capital exploitation.
it's still in their best interest to oppose automation so members can continue to work pointless jobs for a wage.
Fight Club told that when man were hunter/gatherers we spend twenty hours a week working so it must be true.
You know there are still hunter-gatherer societies. You don't have to take Palahniuk's word for it.
I'm a freegan so I'm basically an urban hunter/gatherer.
Part of the reason why the transition to agriculture was so difficult, is because that is true. Agriculture is a lot of work, and requires a lot more labor time than the hunter-gatherer mode of production.
Of course in the long run, agricultural societies end up overcoming hunter-gatherer ones, because they're able to support a much larger population.
If they’re able to support a larger population shouldn’t it average out to less work?
No, because agriculture isn't about minimising labor, it's about maximising the productivity of a given field. While you can sustain more people from a smaller territory, the process necessitates a division of labor where some have to make and fix the tools or tend to the livestock while others cook, till the land or collect and sow the seeds, etc.
It had very little to do with getting an easier life and more with preventing famine by way of ensuring a surplus in foodstuffs.
If the metric is labor time per food produced, agriculture is much more efficient than hunting and gathering. But it requires a ton of startup labor, and waiting months, so it isn't as immediate.
I suppose, but since there's a much more limited supply of gatherable food, there's an upper limit on the time you can spend, and the size of community it can support.
Agriculture doesn't have that upper limit (well, arable land limit but that's still much more), plus it takes a ton of work to sow crops, irrigate water, and wait months for harvest. Much harder than just picking berries for an hour or two a day, which is why the transition to agriculture took so long even after it was discovered.
Harari claims something similar in his book Sapiens, so it might not be so far fetched. However, even then people would have to pay for being alive with their work, even if it's less.
Was talking to a friend about AI and job loss and eventually he says something about "those people in the past talking about reducing the population" unfortunately being possibly necessary... I think he was referring to some things written on the Georgia guidestones, but Jesus fucking Christ...
Essentially "How many people are allowed to live is entirely dependent on how much labor Mr.Money needs."
🤮 🤮 🤮 🤮
innovating or being less wasteful??
(·•᷄_•᷅ )
arguing to reduce the population so the privileged can have even more privilege?
( ˶ˆᗜˆ˵ )
butt in gommunism, you think you'll be a poet, but you'll work in a mine.
in capitalism I wanted to be an astronaut, but now I have a substance abuse problem and write spaghetti code for a corporate machine that would not give a shit if I dropped dead tomorrow.
My mental health increased massively when I stopped being a programmer.
I had to do neurofeedback training to reduce the beta wave amplitude if my brain. They were three standard deviations above normal even when I was having an incredibly calm day.
The neurofeedback clinician had me skip my ritalin for a few days before doing that baseline scan. The day of the scan I felt a calm like nothing I’d felt for months. Even in that state my beta waves were three standard deviations above normal.
The neurofeedback training put a stop to my panic attacks.
Anyway, beta waves are used in logical decision-making (the thing a programmer does 10,000 times per day), and they’re also used in fight or flight response. Good thing to know about how the brain works.
Luckily as a software dev I had the money for the neurofeedback. I spent about $7k on that in total, in chunks of about $1500 at a time.
Shit dude. That would financially ruin me after the first payment. (I don't get paid in dollars nor euros, but the company does.)
What job do you do now? How bad was the pay cut? (Or unexpected pay boost)
Do you still take Ritalin? I've been taking Vyvanse for a year now, switching from a Concerta generic. I'm indifferent, but the lisdexamfetamine lasts wayyy longer. Also I get this strange general sense of "something great is going to happen very soon".
Venlafaxine and Buproprion helped major with anxiety and somewhat with depression. Instead of getting anxious, I now get grumpy.
Before it was "oh shit, oh fuck", now it's "ugh shit, what fucking now"
Saw you were sitting at 0 points. Who tf downvotes someone's thoughtfully written non-hostile comments?
Btw thanks for the brain wave info. I thought that was like, hippie stuff, but no it's like, legit science.
you "only" need to pay for being alive instead of going around hunting all days fighting boars and shits