Why do people work?

[Dis]

and this thread fails to mention an important aspect of the work force.

labour unions.

You see as in the original post the owners have all the power. They know you have to eat and pay rent. So you will work for almost anything to be able to eat. The employer is not in that position. They know there are 100 other suckers out there that will work for almost nothing so they can buy some bread to eat.

labour unions help balance out this power difference. Sure they are corrupt now days, but they still serve a purpose.

[Flubber]

Tripledoc

we work in the present system mainly because it was really the only system available to work in right now. Its all well and good to think about other systems where your time is not "apropriated" by someone for profit but that doesn't pay the rent.

As to why we have our current system,that would require an indepth look at the history and evolution of capitalsim versus other possible systems and is far beyond both my abilitiea and inclination to perfom competently.


I do however reject most of your main thesis. I am paid for my time based on what I am willing to accept for my time. I do not expect to share in the profit with the providers of capital and I likewise continue to expect to be paid even if our business does a loss.

I do agree on your point on currency. It is self evident that "money" has no value other than that which people choose to give it as a medium of exchange. My employer could give me a bar of gold each week or a cow and a sack of flour but I just think that would make the bus ride home too difficult

[Dis]

also I think we kind of "evolved" into this system for a reason. People are not equal. Some people just have inferior genetic makeup (note this is not based on race). This explains why some immigrants can come to american and become rich, and other are doomed to working manual labour jobs that many people do not want to work. Note: just because I use the word immigrant, do not take that as racist- immigrants come from all areas of the world.

Capitalism is "natural". It is only natural for some humans to dominate other humans. There are those born to lead, and those born to serve.

But there are other forces at work. The servants can band together and become more poweful than the individual. Hence labour unions. But this involves a small sacrifice of personal freedom. But in many cases the servants do not band together and will always be less powerful than the leaders.

I believe capitalism does represent human evolution at work. It isn't fair, far from it in fact. But nature is not fair as well.

[Az]

If I graduate, and continue studying and get into research, I would definetly work if I didn't have too. If the job is fun, why not work. ( that's why I don' understand Rogan Josh's argument. )

[Flubber]

Dissident

I don't agree that it is necessarily genetics, since training and upbringing/opportunity are major factors as well, but I do agree with the (pretty obvious I think) assertion that not all people are of equal abilities. Hence, some will lead and some will follow.

The objection of some, however is with the massive appropriation of wealth by the "leaders" where the richest 1% control some crazy-high proportion of the wealth.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Docfeelgood
Spend nine months getting out and the rest of your life TRYING to git back in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And he wants to know why we go to work

No secret here......................a piece of human flesh no bigger than your hand!!!!

I think Doc has hit a point right on the head there. You hate it when you are in it, but when you are out of the loop you are buggered. I accept both points here, I certainly think the world of work has a lot of improvement to do, in terms of the rights of the lower end worker and when you see how much the men at the top get? I know for a fact in my company that his wages would have paid all the people who were laid off in my company for several years There needs to be change.

[Solly]

Why? His job was more valuable.

I think we should put all these commie-whiners in positions of high authority for a while and see how they cope.

[Saras]

I'm an investment banker and I work because:

I make a decent amount of money that I can spend on my family or invest for their future;
I help other people make money;
I help clients achieve their goals/dreams;
I make things happen, like changing landscapes of industries;
I create markets, like local currency bonds.

It's just too much fun to miss

[Ben Kenobi]

"People are not equal. Some people just have inferior genetic makeup (note this is not based on race). This explains why some immigrants can come to american and become rich, and other are doomed to working manual labour jobs that many people do not want to work. "

-Dissident

So if you fail, is it because you have bad genes? Success takes hard work, and some luck, like being in the right place at the right time. Success has nothing to do with genes. We can't change the size of the bucket we get- but we certainly can do quite a bit with what we have.

I say this as someone with what Darwin would call, 'inferior genetic makeup,' and I do just fine, thank you very much.

People are equal in value, though not equal in capacity. We are measured on what we do with what we start with, not on how we match up to everyone else.

[orange]

obiwan - i would argue that we SHOULD be measured on that, but are we really? I'd say no...

[Solly]

We have no way to measure what we start with, though.

[Tripledoc]

I can see there is a danger in doing away with the capitalist system, because then the dominance would not be based on accumulated capital but on intangibles such as race or class - possibly. At least that is what history tells us.

But history tends to confuse stalinism with communism and nazism with fascism. We are strangely immune to the fact that capitalism equates with slavery in the minds of many.

Nevertheless if one believes life to hold greater significance than freedom then the capitalist system of government is the best - because it hopefully refrains from direct violence against its own citizens - or at least employs violence to a lesser degree.

[Dis]

obiwan it really depends on what you call success.

My argument was based on leaders and workers. You can still be just a "worker" and be successful. But you aren't likely to be a leader who owns lots of capital.

I admit I have no leadership qualities. I tried that in the navy and I just didn't have it. Thusly that was one of the reasons I got out. There was no hope for advancement. But I do like to think I can be successful as a worker. Will I ever own large amounts of capital? Not likely.

And I used the word inferior a bit too loosely. I just used the word to illustrate there can be vast differences between people.

Also another problem I did not touch on was inherited wealth. There are many who inherit vast amounts of wealth who did not earn it. I certainly don't like the goverment taxing most of it, but do these kids really deserve all that wealth? This essentually can lead to a situation where unqualified people are in a position of power- like President Bush

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Boddington's
Why? His job was more valuable.

I think we should put all these commie-whiners in positions of high authority for a while and see how they cope.

At over £8 million a year when the company is cutting back? I sincerely doubt it, a lot of these higher managers just justify their own positions and spout bullsh*t...as I say, try working in the real world and see what goes on. They make decisions, it's the people at the bottom who are squeezed to breaking point for their fat bonus.

[Ben Kenobi]

"obiwan - i would argue that we SHOULD be measured on that, but are we really? I'd say no..."

I don't think I said that we are the ones doing the measuring. I was thinking of someone who does have a yardstick to measure this kind of thing.