A philosophical treatise against the practice of forced labor for income. An abridged reading of 'The Abolition of Work' by Bob Black.

Yep, what is work for one person could be play for another.
The monetary system is what forces us to do what we actually don't like doing because you have to participate to survive.
There are a few who actually do enjoy work but they are the exception rather than the rule.
Personally, I don't know anyone who would actually enjoy sitting on their bums and doing absolutely nothing 24/7.

What I actually like is a bit of variety and change now and then, an ideal situation would be where people could choose what job they wanted to do not just once but all the time throughout their lives, take whatever holidays they want whenever they like without repercussions etc

Indeed I like teaching and would do it for free were it not for the fact that I need to make a living.


The idea that everybody would be idle if it were not for the threat of a big stick is perpetuated by people who like to wield a big stick.

I mean, if we had achieved the dream of a four day week in the 1970s what's the worst that could have happened?

20% fall in production and progress.

So WHAT?

So we'd now be just getting into Nokia phones and throwing out our Walkmans fo portable CD players.

I'd exchange a thousand I-pods for Wednesday off for my family and friends and hobbies.

Fuck it!

I only use I-pods back and forwards to work anyway.

I could point out actually that if we abandoned the monetary system at the start of the digital era then we would probably have conquered aids,cholera,typhus,dysentry,polio, ended all war, abandoned fossil fuels and we'd already be terraforming Mars by now.

Sorry I will watch this at a later date because I appear to be missing something, what's wrong with labor for an income?
It's not like you are forced you have a choice, work or you have to go through the hassle of benefits.

simulacra wrote:
Ask these guys.

www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment...offs-of-12-000-staff

Sorry but the only source I could find was the pinko-left Express.

Grr yeh bloody banks why should we have to work when they can make all the money, I expect you think these bankers should be taxed 70% like your pinko, sex addicted buddy in France Monsiyer Hollandaise.

simulacra wrote:
Indeed; I shall inform the sexually addicted Marxist editorial staff at the Express that they should cease their exorbitant claims for higher taxation (so typical of the that paper, as you know). I mean, if upper management can't lay off 12,000 staff while simultaneously raising by 10% their combined bonuses from £2.17billion to £2.38billion without some perverted commie frog like hacks objecting, then the UK is clearly in danger of a Révolution française but one with everone's willies and fannies hanging out. [/fkn mental]

simulacra wrote:

Slipping so soon?

You're clearly deluded sir I suggest you start reading a sensible publication like the Daily Mail or the Economist on such matters.

You clearly can't answer my question hopefully space bandit will still see it when he next logs in to the forum, I hope somebody can answer it's quite an interesting post, I don't think people would have as much time to relax if they didn't work as hard as they can.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2557248...s-7-000-UK-jobs.html

Your sauce, sir.

andyh wrote:
You are so right

Even if there was no monetary system , I guess I'd just be doing what I do on a daily basis . For the fact that because of the monetary system I'm looking into changing jobs to one that is along the same lines , has less challenges and maybe will bore me , but doubling or tripling my wages will be a lure , and there will be better opportunity to break free from the UK

The beauty of it when you see your work as play , it takes the element of "have to" out and replaces it with "want to" .

I'm sorry, but the whole concept is complete bullshit.

There is no possible way we can have the same standard of living as we do today without work. The whole idea is that some people have knowledge that others don't and some people have talents that others don't. As an example: If a square mile of leccy goes down who's going to fix it? I doubt there would be anyone in my area who'd do it. We'd have to pay someone with the skills to come in from a great distance and do it for us. They aren't gonna do it for free. Hell, without the notion of a 'proper job' they might not even do it at all even though they could.

If I wanted a piece of nice furniture then I'd have to get a craftsman in, doubt he'd do it for free. There are many things I like to do and there are many things I can do, not many that I can do to a professional standard and some people wouldn't want my quality of work in some areas, they'd want better. That's why we pay people with the talent for these things.

The whole notion is laughable, this is how jobs and work all came to be. The joiner couldn't butcher a cow, so he did something for a man who could (who then became the village butcher, as he was the best at doing it). Building houses, some are better than others so they help for a fee.

If we're happy to go back to the stone/bronze age then yes, but not a modern era.

Laughable.

SilvaRizla wrote:
G'day SilvaRizla.

Have you heard about 'freeware' applications?

How about Linux?

I AM ALL I AM wrote:
There are always exceptions to the rule, also special cases in times of tragedy. Your example is one project with thousands of volunteers. I don't see many fencing companies putting up free fences, nor gardeners doing free gardening. Nor do I see tailors offering free suits day in day out. I could go on and on and on.

On the whole, a ridiculous notion.

SilvaRizla wrote:
Obsolescence by design is the name of the game
If it doesn't break, you can't mass produce/replace/profit.

Also what are robots doing right now to jobs, not just here but in China.

andyh wrote:
What they aren't doing, is plenty.

People need the services of others. People are selfish. Incentive is required in a lot of cases to get one to help another at the expense of their time, and possible personal cost to them. Its that simple.

You are taught to think that, yes.

lol

Most menial tasks can be automated, many jobs can be eliminated by design and are being done so right now, robots are replacing human labour all over the world, see WUB's post about Google and Foxconn.
Robots are tax deductible so not only do they cost no wages they have asset return value and reduce the tax bill.
Supermarket tills are being automated, call centres automated, petrol pumps automated and on and on and ariston
Tell me again what the incentive here is to keep workers on.

If it IS possible to eliminate all menial tasks other than the ones we choose to do, then why not?

There are so many other areas to which we could apply ourselves.

Then again, that "work ethic" thing that some Northern European countries are so proud of keeps whispering in your ear that while you are painting a Shropshire landscape, you could be digging a ditch and filling it back in again.

And then there is that whole psycho thing that the rich and would-be rich thing have about not being able to relax in luxury unless you can hear the moans of those labouring in hardship. (i.e. the Tory party)

andyh wrote:
You miss the point.