Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Pointedstick »

Maddy wrote:Well, let me pose a question. Who is it, REALLY, who wants to be relieved from the burden of work? For all I can tell, it's coming mainly from the young, elitist, college-educated, technologically-oriented crowd. It's these people that seem to be drawn to the vision of a fully-automated future and the prospect of never having to work. To me, it's an obvious example of shitting where you sleep; it's these very people and their obsession with technology that have turned the work world into something that is repugnant even to them.
The problem is that small towns are a dead-end. They are economically underwater, spending money to consume the industrial/technological products produced by the rest of society, but without producing much or any of their own with which to earn the money to pay for their consumption. The factories are gone, victims of cheaper labor elsewhere, so there's no manufacturing. Agriculture is all done by faraway megacorporations, so they don't really sell much if any food (and the small farmers who remain exist mostly because of subsidies). Most services produced are consumed locally, not exported. On that note, small towns have virtually zero cultural or artistic output that can be exported, and there is no tourism. So where are the moneymaking industries that attract outside wealth and provide small-town residents with the incomes necessary to import goods and services from elsewhere?

Ironically, small towns already largely subsist on UBI/CD income; we just call it "Social Security." Retired and disabled people living in small towns are instrumental to bringing in much-needed cash to provide purchasing power for everyone else. Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP, and all the other programs help, too. They already constitute a crude UBI/CD for economically underwater parts of the country.

Small-town living may be more satisfying, but it's not a future that humanity can look forward to. Modern material goods and services are too strong a lure. Once you have factory-made clothing and motor vehicles and coffee and air conditioning and power tools and cell phones and internet access and fresh out-of-season fruits and vegetables, you don't want to give them up. Nobody does. And to consume them, you need to be economically valuable, beyond the level of being a waiter, housekeeper, or supermarket checkout clerk.

Modern productive work is indeed largely soulless and dehumanizing, but this isn't some new revelation; people have known about this for centuries. It was articulated by Marx, Veblen, and many other intellectual giants before our grandparents were born.

But there's no going back without losing almost everything. The entire world relies on industrial/technological productivity, despite its fundamentally alienating character. We need alienating industrial farming or else billions of people will die. We need alienating industrial manufacturing or else the flow of goods ends. We need alienating white-collar work for our telecommunication infrastructure and all the bureaucracy that supports everything else. Etc.

We have to accept this and move forward; that's the philosophical underpinning of UBI/CD. Since we can't all go back to living in small towns without a massive reduction in both population and standard of living, how do we prevent the fruits of all our productivity from accumulating at the very top and provoking a revolution that kills us all? And since the entire developed world has been moving in the direction of direct payments and subsidies anyway, how can we streamline this system?
Last edited by Pointedstick on Tue Dec 13, 2016 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Pointedstick »

TennPaGa wrote:[For me, PS has raised a number of important cultural questions:

1. Are the productive willing to bestow a meaningful UBI/CD on the non-productive members of society?
2. Will the cure be worse than the disease? That is:
---- 2a. Will too many "productive" people opt out via the UBI/CD?
---- 2b. Will recipients of the UBI/CD be ultimately unhappy, depressed, etc. because of a lack of meaning in their lives due to a lack of useful work?
Bingo. Those are the main issues.
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by I Shrugged »

TennPaGa wrote: 1. Are the productive willing to bestow a meaningful UBI/CD on the non-productive members of society?
2. Will the cure be worse than the disease? That is:
---- 2a. Will too many "productive" people opt out via the UBI/CD?
---- 2b. Will recipients of the UBI/CD be ultimately unhappy, depressed, etc. because of a lack of meaning in their lives due to a lack of useful work?
1. No
2. Yes
2a. Yes
2b. Yes
Simonjester wrote:
1. depends on the details, if it is the vote buying, poorly thought out and negative consequence generating mess all the current handout systems are then NO. if it is designed properly and willing to be fixed when parts of it inevitably go wrong then possibly YES
2. (a and b) probably not i would expect a bunch of new and useless careers to pop up like professional gamer to fill any productivity and depression hole that follows a UBI/CD
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5078
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Mountaineer »

TennPaGa wrote: For me, PS has raised a number of important cultural questions:

1. Are the productive willing to bestow a meaningful UBI/CD on the non-productive members of society?
2. Will the cure be worse than the disease? That is:
---- 2a. Will too many "productive" people opt out via the UBI/CD?
---- 2b. Will recipients of the UBI/CD be ultimately unhappy, depressed, etc. because of a lack of meaning in their lives due to a lack of useful work?
Work like you don't need the money. Love like you've never been hurt. Dance like nobody's watching. Satchel Paige

If this is the mindset, there is hope no matter what. If it is not, we are ultimately doomed, no matter what. If one works for others, it is just a job. If one works for ones self, it will not much matter the system one works within. It is all a matter of attitude, self-respect, self-confidence, self-motivation, love of God and neighbor. One can always create useful work, but most do not understand that freedom to do that is always there, no matter what.
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help. Psalm 146:3
User avatar
Maddy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1694
Joined: Sun Jun 21, 2015 8:43 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Maddy »

Pointedstick wrote: Agriculture is all done by faraway megacorporations, so they don't really sell much if any food (and the small farmers who remain exist mostly because of subsidies).
I'd take strong exception to that statement. I'm surrounded by rural agriculture and have yet to even hear of a small farm that's getting a government subsidy. There are a few pocket-change-type grants out there for projects involving novel organic methods and such, but in terms of actual subsidies--nothing. To the contrary, all that's talked about among the producers in this rural county are how the supply curve is being manipulated by (heavily subsidized) Big Ag and how foreign competitors (also heavily subsidized) are able to bring their product to U.S. markets for a mere fraction of the cost of producing the same product here. The data seems to confirm the fact that, by and large, the recipients of government subsidies are the large agricultural conglomerates. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/daniel-kr ... 17869.html

The story is much the same for small industry and retail. They're constantly being burdened with new regulations and mandates that push their operations to the brink.

So when it's claimed that rural communities are inherently unproductive and that they need the Walmarts and Monsantos to do what they're unable to do for themselves, it's worth thinking about what's the chicken and what's the egg.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Pointedstick »

If that's a mischaracterization, then I apologize. And needless to say, I strongly oppose subsidies for big businesses, especially if the small ones are left out in the cold.
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by I Shrugged »

I read these two quotes on someone's blog.

By Bertrand Russell, from his writing Conquest of Happiness
There are those to whom a meal is merely a bore; no matter how excellent the food may be, they feel that it is uninteresting. They have had excellent food before, probably at almost every meal they have eaten. They have never known what it was to go without a meal until hunger became a raging passion, but have come to regard meals as merely conventional occurrences, dictated by the fashions of the society in which they live. Like everything else, meals are tiresome, but it is no use to make a fuss, because nothing else will be less tiresome....


The human animal, like others, is adapted to a certain amount of struggle for life, and when by means of great wealth homo sapiens can gratify all his whims without effort, the mere absence of effort from his life removes an essential ingredient of happiness. The man who acquires easily things for which he feels only a very moderate desire concludes that the attainment of desire does not bring happiness. If he is of a philosophic disposition, he concludes that human life is essentially wretched, since the man who has all he wants is still unhappy. He forgets that to be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness.
When man no longer has to struggle (work) to make a living, he will become profoundly unhappy. That is my opinion, as I know I have expressed many times here without providing much argument. I know I should try, but I don't have any. It's just... obvious, to me.

You know how you wake up on Saturday to a six inch snowfall? You go out and fight mother nature to clear your driveway and sidewalk. It's hard, it's miserable. It's cold and windy. When you fling the snow, it hits you in the face. Your cheeks are red, your fingers are going numb. You persevere and get it done. You go back inside, sit down with a cup of coffee. You feel good. Very good. You accomplished something that feels primal. Survival. That's right, you braved the elements, and you succeeded. Satisfying.

That's all I got. But you know the feeling, right?
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5078
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Mountaineer »

I Shrugged wrote:I read these two quotes on someone's blog.

By Bertrand Russell, from his writing Conquest of Happiness
There are those to whom a meal is merely a bore; no matter how excellent the food may be, they feel that it is uninteresting. They have had excellent food before, probably at almost every meal they have eaten. They have never known what it was to go without a meal until hunger became a raging passion, but have come to regard meals as merely conventional occurrences, dictated by the fashions of the society in which they live. Like everything else, meals are tiresome, but it is no use to make a fuss, because nothing else will be less tiresome....


The human animal, like others, is adapted to a certain amount of struggle for life, and when by means of great wealth homo sapiens can gratify all his whims without effort, the mere absence of effort from his life removes an essential ingredient of happiness. The man who acquires easily things for which he feels only a very moderate desire concludes that the attainment of desire does not bring happiness. If he is of a philosophic disposition, he concludes that human life is essentially wretched, since the man who has all he wants is still unhappy. He forgets that to be without some of the things you want is an indispensable part of happiness.
When man no longer has to struggle (work) to make a living, he will become profoundly unhappy. That is my opinion, as I know I have expressed many times here without providing much argument. I know I should try, but I don't have any. It's just... obvious, to me.

You know how you wake up on Saturday to a six inch snowfall? You go out and fight mother nature to clear your driveway and sidewalk. It's hard, it's miserable. It's cold and windy. When you fling the snow, it hits you in the face. Your cheeks are red, your fingers are going numb. You persevere and get it done. You go back inside, sit down with a cup of coffee. You feel good. Very good. You accomplished something that feels primal. Survival. That's right, you braved the elements, and you succeeded. Satisfying.

That's all I got. But you know the feeling, right?
There are no free lunches, behavior has consequences. I think those are universal truths. Bertrand Russell, an atheist, your post above, the Buddha, and Genesis 3:17 get at the same idea. It is man's destiny to struggle, persevere, look for sunshine in a cloudy sky, and ponder why ... people just differ on the reasons. Gotta go now, my wife is calling. ;)

Gn 3:17 And to Adam he said,
“Because you have listened to the voice of your wife
and have eaten of the tree
of which I commanded you,
‘You shall not eat of it,’
cursed is the ground because of you;
in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life;
18 thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you;
and you shall eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread,
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
for you are dust,
and to dust you shall return.”

The world is full of suffering. Birth is suffering, decrepitude is suffering, sickness and death are sufferings. To face a man of hatred is suffering, to be separated from a beloved one is suffering, to be vainly struggling to satisfy one's needs is suffering. In fact, life that is not free from desire and passion is always involved with suffering. Gautama Buddha
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help. Psalm 146:3
User avatar
dualstow
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 15288
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2010 10:18 am
Location: searching for the lost Xanadu
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by dualstow »

I wouldn't say I struggle, and I have to say I'm quite content.
I realize that there are those who never come to terms with retirement. They get bored. I don't think I'll have that problem, come 2035.


Mountaineer, I love Bertrand Russell, and have that paperback.
WHY IS PLATINUM UP LIKE 4½% TODAY
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Pointedstick »

TennPaGa wrote:
I Shrugged wrote:When man no longer has to struggle (work) to make a living, he will become profoundly unhappy. That is my opinion, as I know I have expressed many times here without providing much argument. I know I should try, but I don't have any. It's just... obvious, to me.
On some level, this seems right.

OTOH, if this is true, why does man expend so much effort eliminating the need for his own work, or the work of others? Hell, we've got a whole discussion group here whose focus, when you get down to it, is how to best practice sit-on-your-ass capitalism.
Why do our bodies crave sugar when eating too much of it makes us fat and sick? I think what's going on is that our natural biological cravings don't comport well with the modern world. In prehistoric times when we evolved, sugar was rare and eating some gave you an energy boost. And sugary fruits co-evolved with herbivores and omnivores; we eat their sweet and tasty flesh, and help them reproduce by passing their seeds through our digestive systems and depositing them somewhere else. But today we have so much sugar available that indulging our natural craving for it is destructive. We now need to practice self-control.

Perhaps it's the same thing with work avoidance.
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5078
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Mountaineer »

Pointedstick wrote:
TennPaGa wrote:
I Shrugged wrote:When man no longer has to struggle (work) to make a living, he will become profoundly unhappy. That is my opinion, as I know I have expressed many times here without providing much argument. I know I should try, but I don't have any. It's just... obvious, to me.
On some level, this seems right.

OTOH, if this is true, why does man expend so much effort eliminating the need for his own work, or the work of others? Hell, we've got a whole discussion group here whose focus, when you get down to it, is how to best practice sit-on-your-ass capitalism.
Why do our bodies crave sugar when eating too much of it makes us fat and sick? I think what's going on is that our natural biological cravings don't comport well with the modern world. In prehistoric times when we evolved, sugar was rare and eating some gave you an energy boost. And sugary fruits co-evolved with herbivores and omnivores; we eat their sweet and tasty flesh, and help them reproduce by passing their seeds through our digestive systems and depositing them somewhere else. But today we have so much sugar available that indulging our natural craving for it is destructive. We now need to practice self-control.

Perhaps it's the same thing with work avoidance.
Sweet! ;)
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help. Psalm 146:3
User avatar
Mountaineer
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 5078
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 10:54 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Mountaineer »

TennPaGa wrote:
I Shrugged wrote:When man no longer has to struggle (work) to make a living, he will become profoundly unhappy. That is my opinion, as I know I have expressed many times here without providing much argument. I know I should try, but I don't have any. It's just... obvious, to me.
On some level, this seems right.

OTOH, if this is true, why does man expend so much effort eliminating the need for his own work, or the work of others? Hell, we've got a whole discussion group here whose focus, when you get down to it, is how to best practice sit-on-your-ass capitalism.

Somewhat related:

Researchers have found a troubling new cause of death for middle-aged white Americans
White Americans without a college degree are becoming more likely to die in middle age, reversing decades of progress toward better health...

This week, a pair of economists have advanced a new theory. They suggest that, for many workers, a major shift in the structure of the U.S. economy may have been fatal.

The researchers, Justin Pierce and Peter Schott, found evidence that trade with China has resulted in greater rates of suicide and poisonings (including fatal drug overdoses) after 2000, when President Clinton and Republican lawmakers allowed a major increase in imports.

Pierce and Schott suggest that as competition with Chinese manufacturing forced U.S. factories to close, many of the Americans who were laid off never got their lives back together. Instead, they fell into depression or addiction. White adults, in particular, suffered from the change in policy.
Maybe struggling isn't such a good thing after all.
Struggle does bring death ... and to dust you shall return. Secondly, retirement does not have to bring sit-on-your-ass capitalism. It just brings the freedom to no longer think of what one does as work ... when you enjoy what you do, it is not work. We all have 24 hours (perhaps 16 after sleep) every day to focus on helping others who are not as fortunate as those who have already achieved sit-on-your-assness. Pay it forward.
Put not your trust in princes, in a son of man, in whom there is no help. Psalm 146:3
WiseOne
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2692
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2022 11:08 am

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by WiseOne »

There's a big difference between a well-funded retirement and an unrecoverable job loss.

The loss of manufacturing/blue collar jobs was devastating to the people who had built their lives around them. They'd have the difficult choice of trying to switch to a new career at a point where it's almost impossible to do so (e.g. after 20 years working in a specific position), or moving away from their friend & family support network in hopes of getting a comparable job. Either way, it's not hard to imagine what this would do to people psychologically. The fact that this showed up in mortality statistics just underscores how severe this problem is, and how large the affected population is.

I find it absolutely mind-boggling that liberal people, who are generally sympathetic to the plight of poor, handicapped or otherwise disadvantaged groups, would so callously ignore this particular group of victims. And they're still doing it. I haven't heard a single note of recognition that, well, there are people right here in the US who are in trouble, so maybe we should take some of the attention we've been lavishing on certain minority groups and give them some.
User avatar
Kriegsspiel
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4052
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Kriegsspiel »

Rhett Butler might argue the same points, from the other side of the aisle.
WiseOne wrote:The loss of manufacturing/blue collar jobs was devastating to the people who had built their lives around them. They'd have the difficult choice of trying to switch to a new career at a point where it's almost impossible to do so (e.g. after 20 years working in a specific position), or moving away from their friend & family support network in hopes of getting a comparable job. Either way, it's not hard to imagine what this would do to people psychologically. The fact that this showed up in mortality statistics just underscores how severe this problem is, and how large the affected population is.
"I pity him because he ought to be dead and he isn't. And I have a contempt for him because he doesn't know what to do with himself now that his world is gone."
"If you had your way all the decent men in the South would be dead!"
"And if they had their way, I think Ashley's kind would prefer to be dead. Dead with neat stones above them, saying 'Here lies a soldier of the Confederacy, dead for the Southland' or 'Dulce et decorum est' or any of the other popular epitaphs"
"I don't see why!"
"You never see anything that isn't written in letters a foot high and then shoved under your nose do you? If they were dead, their troubles would be over, there'd be no problems to face, problems that have no solutions. Moreover, their families would be proud of them through countless generations. And I've heard the dead are happy. Do you suppose Ashley Wilkes is happy?"
...
"Well, perhaps not as happy as they might be, because they lost all their money."
He laughed, "It isn't losing their money, my pet. I tell you it's losing their world- the world they were raised in. They're like fish out of water or cats with wings. They were raised to be certain persons, to do certain things, to occupy certain niches. And those persons and things and niches disappeared forever when General Lee arrived at Appomattox. Oh Scarlett, don't look so stupid! What is there for Ashley Wilkes to do, now that his home is gone and his plantation taken up for taxes and fine gentlemen are going twenty for a penny? Can he work with his head or his hands? I'll bet you've lost money hand over fist since he took over that mill."
I find it absolutely mind-boggling that liberal people, who are generally sympathetic to the plight of poor, handicapped or otherwise disadvantaged groups, would so callously ignore this particular group of victims. And they're still doing it. I haven't heard a single note of recognition that, well, there are people right here in the US who are in trouble, so maybe we should take some of the attention we've been lavishing on certain minority groups and give them some.
"... People like them are worth helping. But Ashley Wilkes- bah! His breed is of no use or value in an upside-down world like ours. Whenever the world up-ends, his kind are the first to perish. And why not? They don't deserve to survive because they won't fight- don't know how to fight. This isn't the first time the world's been upside down and it won't be the last. It's happened before and it'll happen again. And when it does happen, everyone loses everything and everyone is equal. And then they all start again at taw, with nothing at all. That is, nothing except the cunning of their brains and strength of their hands. But some people, like Ashley, have neither cunning nor strength or, having them, scruple to use them. And so they go under and they should go under. It's a natural law and the world is better off without them. But there are always a hardy few who come through and, given time, they are right back where they were before the world turned over.
User avatar
Pointedstick
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 8883
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2012 9:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by Pointedstick »

WiseOne wrote:There's a big difference between a well-funded retirement and an unrecoverable job loss.

The loss of manufacturing/blue collar jobs was devastating to the people who had built their lives around them. They'd have the difficult choice of trying to switch to a new career at a point where it's almost impossible to do so (e.g. after 20 years working in a specific position), or moving away from their friend & family support network in hopes of getting a comparable job. Either way, it's not hard to imagine what this would do to people psychologically. The fact that this showed up in mortality statistics just underscores how severe this problem is, and how large the affected population is.

I find it absolutely mind-boggling that liberal people, who are generally sympathetic to the plight of poor, handicapped or otherwise disadvantaged groups, would so callously ignore this particular group of victims. And they're still doing it. I haven't heard a single note of recognition that, well, there are people right here in the US who are in trouble, so maybe we should take some of the attention we've been lavishing on certain minority groups and give them some.
Well some did, but they didn't meet with a lot of success among their peers unfortunately:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/15/us/po ... inton.html
Sounding like a frustrated Cassandra, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. lamented last week that Hillary Clinton had not done enough to reach white working-class voters in the presidential campaign. Even more egregious to Mr. Biden, some fellow Democrats had concluded that blue-collar whites were not even worth pursuing.

“I mean these are good people, man!” Mr. Biden exclaimed in an interview on CNN. “These aren’t racists. These aren’t sexists.”

[...]

Mr. Vilsack, a former Iowa governor, had tried to push Mrs. Clinton, a longtime ally, toward focusing more on rural America, but his pleas fell on deaf ears. He was just as exasperated over what he described as his party’s decades-long pattern of neglect of many of the voters he spent eight years working with in his cabinet post.

“Rural America is 15 percent of America’s population,” Mr. Vilsack said. “It’s the same percentage as African-Americans; it’s the same percentage as Hispanics. We spend a lot of time thinking about that 15 percent — and we should, God bless them, we should. But not to the exclusion of the other 15 percent.”
Perhaps this debate about UBI/CD is really yet another proxy battle for what to do about the Americans who are economically struggling--which leads to social struggle and the emergence of underclasses.
User avatar
I Shrugged
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2153
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2012 6:35 pm

Re: Is work ethic genetic or cultural?

Post by I Shrugged »

I got a chuckle out of Biden's qualifiers that they are not racists or sexists. :)

Will the first perfect person please step forward?
Post Reply