Author Topic: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com  (Read 26716 times)

Torran

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« on: August 02, 2014, 05:00:31 AM »
I read this and thought of mustachianism.

Many interesting ideas here, including the questioning of work as a virtue in itself.

Also the choice line: 'Are people working so many hours because we’ve just somehow independently conceived this desire for lattes and Panini and dog-walkers and the like, or is it that people are grabbing food and coffee on the go and hiring people to walk their dogs because they’re all working so much?'

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/01/help_us_thomas_piketty_the_1s_sick_and_twisted_new_scheme/

RFAAOATB

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 654
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #1 on: August 02, 2014, 04:30:13 PM »
Is there any way out of this on a macro level?  On the micro level I would guess the best thing would be to so rich that your children can afford to be anything they want to be.

The knitter

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 119
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #2 on: August 02, 2014, 05:08:11 PM »
Great piece.

His solution could have easily been: stop spending so much money. Then you can do work that matters without worrying about your debt.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #3 on: August 02, 2014, 06:47:52 PM »
This is the best link I've yet encountered on this forum.  Almost every paragraph made me stop and consider for a while before moving on.  Lots of good stuff there. 

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2344
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2014, 06:59:10 PM »
I'll have to disagree with you guys. Salon is a rag, and this article is pretty boring and uninteresting. Platitudes and bullshit.

By the way, he gets the situation in the USSR completely and entirely wrong. Buy the paper, show up to work, read the paper, do a little work, take a long lunch... no, no, no. Wake up hung over, get drunk, amble in to work whenever, drink more, pass out, wake up, drink more, pass out, wake up, amble home, drink more, hit your wife for asking where the paycheck is, go to sleep.

If you think I'm kidding, you can go fuck yourself. This was absolutely endemic. Let me give two examples.

The people who decided who gets bonuses for the quarter / year / whatever rotated in and out. One time, it was my mother's turn to go. Name - decision? - bonus. Next. Name - decision? bonus. Next. Name - decision? bonus. Bonus? But he comes in only half the time, and is drunk off his ass when he does. They told her (translated, of course): "But he has to get his bonus, otherwise he may feel worthless."

Short story number two. When my parents were getting married, people expressed their condolences to my dad because my mom once said that she wouldn't put up with a guy drinking his paycheck away. People including women.

At one point, the government instituted a limit on how much spirit you can buy. This meant that any time someone had to call a handyman of some sort, they usually paid in bottles of vodka instead of cash. Nearly every blue-collar worker was an alcoholic, and many white-collar workers too; they just usually handled it slightly better.

sirdoug007

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 585
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Houston, TX
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2014, 10:25:14 PM »
This really resonates with what I see as one of the most compelling reasons to achieve financial independence. Once you are FI you can finally do  that meaningful work that we want to do but doesn't pay worth a shit! 

In MMM's own case it's taking care of his boy and doing carpentry.  They don't pay you shit for either of those actually useful jobs.

In the meantime we sit in front of computers and do busy work that has negligible impact on the only two things that really matter: bringing joy or easing suffering.

Ian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2014, 11:51:03 PM »
If you think I'm kidding, you can go fuck yourself. This was absolutely endemic. Let me give two examples.
Could you also give some kind of source? I am inclined to agree with your statement that the article's perspective on the USSR was overoptimistic, but I'd rather base that opinion on more than anecdotes.

Having said that, I don't think this example was central to the article.

Lyssa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 483
  • Location: Germany
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #7 on: August 05, 2014, 01:36:12 AM »
I honestly can't believe people are still talking about the great economic achievements of communist countries...

Regarding alcoholism: "drunk like ten Russians" has not become a common expression in the middle of Europe for no reason at all.

And what Graeber calls "leisure" the Eastern Germans summarized as: They are pretending to pay us, so we are pretending to work.

Those systems did not fall apart for no good reason at all.

Also, I find the article has a huge undercurrent of complainypants-attitute:

"Well, the casual explanation is always consumerism. The idea is always that given the choice between four-hour days, and nine or ten-hour days with SUVs, iPhones and eight varieties of designer sushi, we all collectively decided free time wasn’t really worth it."

No, not collectively. A huge majority? Yes, indeed. And this is there decision. I find it crazy, take a different path and that is my decision.

"And then, finally, there’s the obvious question of cause and effect. Are people working so many hours because we’ve just somehow independently conceived this desire for lattes and Panini and dog-walkers and the like, or is it that people are grabbing food and coffee on the go and hiring people to walk their dogs because they’re all working so much?"

As somebody working 50-60 hours and doing my own cleaning and laundry I feel I can answer that one for you: People are seeking convenience and will find justification for it. My work week is no walk in the park but I don't even begin to compare to my paternal grandparents who run a small farm, raised eleven children and did all the chores in and around the house without any electrical appliances. Not producing consumer goods or rendering services does not necessarily lead to a life of leisure. Quite the opposite. And please keep in mind: There is no early retirement option in communism or homestead farming. Only western capitalism has created the possibility for decades of leisure or freely chosen activities for anybody else but the nobility. If people choose to travel that road is up to them.

EricL

  • Guest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #8 on: August 05, 2014, 03:02:58 AM »
I'll have to disagree with you guys. Salon is a rag, and this article is pretty boring and uninteresting. Platitudes and bullshit.

By the way, he gets the situation in the USSR completely and entirely wrong. Buy the paper, show up to work, read the paper, do a little work, take a long lunch... no, no, no. Wake up hung over, get drunk, amble in to work whenever, drink more, pass out, wake up, drink more, pass out, wake up, amble home, drink more, hit your wife for asking where the paycheck is, go to sleep.

If you think I'm kidding, you can go fuck yourself. This was absolutely endemic. Let me give two examples.

The people who decided who gets bonuses for the quarter / year / whatever rotated in and out. One time, it was my mother's turn to go. Name - decision? - bonus. Next. Name - decision? bonus. Next. Name - decision? bonus. Bonus? But he comes in only half the time, and is drunk off his ass when he does. They told her (translated, of course): "But he has to get his bonus, otherwise he may feel worthless."

Short story number two. When my parents were getting married, people expressed their condolences to my dad because my mom once said that she wouldn't put up with a guy drinking his paycheck away. People including women.

At one point, the government instituted a limit on how much spirit you can buy. This meant that any time someone had to call a handyman of some sort, they usually paid in bottles of vodka instead of cash. Nearly every blue-collar worker was an alcoholic, and many white-collar workers too; they just usually handled it slightly better.

I thought you were being unduly harsh.  But this guy is really smoking crack. 

The Falcon

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 100
  • Location: Sydney
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #9 on: August 05, 2014, 04:08:51 AM »
Gimp is on the money..just look at the male life expectancy for gods sake. I've read very similar accounts by émigrés ...people were drinking anything...if you had access to a lab for pure alcohol you were particularly lucky.  No risk, no reward, no choice...what's the damn point.

Kriegsspiel

  • Guest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #10 on: August 05, 2014, 03:59:11 PM »
This really resonates with what I see as one of the most compelling reasons to achieve financial independence. Once you are FI you can finally...

Doug, doug, doug. At first, I thought we were on the same page after gimps heart/liver-warming description of Soviet life; barely able to wait to hit FI, so that we can descend into a life of full blown alcoholism. I mean, imagine a life where you don't have to work at a job in order to BUY alcohol, meanwhile getting IN THE WAY OF DRINKING that very same alcohol! Finally, a way out of life's most hellish bind!

Quote
... do  that meaningful work that we want to do but doesn't pay worth a shit!

Then I finished your sentence, and saw that you are not one of the enlightened few. Alas.

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2344
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #11 on: August 05, 2014, 09:49:04 PM »
Could you also give some kind of source? I am inclined to agree with your statement that the article's perspective on the USSR was overoptimistic, but I'd rather base that opinion on more than anecdotes.

Having said that, I don't think this example was central to the article.

No reason to trust a random guy on a forum, but usually this is called a primary source. In this case, I am the source. Was born there. Saw some shit... left, thankfully. Shitty, dirty country. It's a lot better these days as people transition into American-style functional alcoholism. Don't fool yourself, Joe Six-pack is an alcoholic, but he drinks after work, and wakes up sober enough to drive legally. It's a lot better than that other thing.

Middlesbrough

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 268
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #12 on: August 05, 2014, 10:08:17 PM »
This really resonates with what I see as one of the most compelling reasons to achieve financial independence. Once you are FI you can finally...

Doug, doug, doug. At first, I thought we were on the same page after gimps heart/liver-warming description of Soviet life; barely able to wait to hit FI, so that we can descend into a life of full blown alcoholism. I mean, imagine a life where you don't have to work at a job in order to BUY alcohol, meanwhile getting IN THE WAY OF DRINKING that very same alcohol! Finally, a way out of life's most hellish bind!


That was just what I needed tonight. I have took note and stopped drinking liquids while reading this forum for this very reason here. My computer would be trash by now.

sirdoug007

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 585
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Houston, TX
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #13 on: August 06, 2014, 09:46:02 AM »
This really resonates with what I see as one of the most compelling reasons to achieve financial independence. Once you are FI you can finally...

Doug, doug, doug. At first, I thought we were on the same page after gimps heart/liver-warming description of Soviet life; barely able to wait to hit FI, so that we can descend into a life of full blown alcoholism. I mean, imagine a life where you don't have to work at a job in order to BUY alcohol, meanwhile getting IN THE WAY OF DRINKING that very same alcohol! Finally, a way out of life's most hellish bind!

Quote
... do  that meaningful work that we want to do but doesn't pay worth a shit!

Then I finished your sentence, and saw that you are not one of the enlightened few. Alas.

You mean you don't consider drinking to unconsciousness meaningful work?  I can assure you it does not pay very well ;)

MooseOutFront

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 506
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Texas
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #14 on: August 06, 2014, 11:22:44 AM »
I honestly can't believe people are still talking about the great economic achievements of communist countries...

Regarding alcoholism: "drunk like ten Russians" has not become a common expression in the middle of Europe for no reason at all.

And what Graeber calls "leisure" the Eastern Germans summarized as: They are pretending to pay us, so we are pretending to work.

Those systems did not fall apart for no good reason at all.

Also, I find the article has a huge undercurrent of complainypants-attitute:

"Well, the casual explanation is always consumerism. The idea is always that given the choice between four-hour days, and nine or ten-hour days with SUVs, iPhones and eight varieties of designer sushi, we all collectively decided free time wasn’t really worth it."

No, not collectively. A huge majority? Yes, indeed. And this is there decision. I find it crazy, take a different path and that is my decision.

"And then, finally, there’s the obvious question of cause and effect. Are people working so many hours because we’ve just somehow independently conceived this desire for lattes and Panini and dog-walkers and the like, or is it that people are grabbing food and coffee on the go and hiring people to walk their dogs because they’re all working so much?"

As somebody working 50-60 hours and doing my own cleaning and laundry I feel I can answer that one for you: People are seeking convenience and will find justification for it. My work week is no walk in the park but I don't even begin to compare to my paternal grandparents who run a small farm, raised eleven children and did all the chores in and around the house without any electrical appliances. Not producing consumer goods or rendering services does not necessarily lead to a life of leisure. Quite the opposite. And please keep in mind: There is no early retirement option in communism or homestead farming. Only western capitalism has created the possibility for decades of leisure or freely chosen activities for anybody else but the nobility. If people choose to travel that road is up to them.
Nice post.  Thanks for sharing your perspective.  Coming from the land of bald eagle screeches, it's easy to dwell on the bad parts of western capitalism while losing sight of the freedom it allows those that are fortunate enough to be able to take it.  Like most on this forum for example.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23248
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #15 on: August 06, 2014, 11:37:05 AM »
This is the best link I've yet encountered on this forum.  Almost every paragraph made me stop and consider for a while before moving on.  Lots of good stuff there.

+1

Some cool points and an interesting perspective.  I don't think the article is pushing communism in any real way, and people on here are missing the main thrust of the article by focusing on that passing reference.

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #16 on: August 06, 2014, 11:43:38 AM »
No reason to trust a random guy on a forum, but usually this is called a primary source. In this case, I am the source. Was born there. Saw some shit... left, thankfully. Shitty, dirty country. It's a lot better these days as people transition into American-style functional alcoholism. Don't fool yourself, Joe Six-pack is an alcoholic, but he drinks after work, and wakes up sober enough to drive legally. It's a lot better than that other thing.

I was born there too... The country wasn't quite as shitty as you describe. The system was fatally flawed (long list of reasons) and that's why it collapsed, but it had some pleasant aspects as well. Job security, low prices etc.

sheepstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2417
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #17 on: August 06, 2014, 12:11:25 PM »
The discussion of hours is interesting because over on the thread debating teachers' pay, one of the big points that keeps getting brought up is how few hours teachers (supposedly) work.  The response is not that hours worked don't determine the value of the work and shouldn't determine its payscale, but that teachers work more hours than one would imagine.*

Similarly, a union I'm involved with often gets criticized for exorbitant annual wages and the defenders always bring up that these are for working an extreme number of hours.  People cling to the 8-hour (and 12-hour...) workday because it's still the easiest way to defend your pay. 

What I wonder about is the mentality that makes people think other people's labor ought to basically be free.  Looking deeper into the article it seems to offer some answers to this, though not with examples I would immediately think of.  It's not just the ubiquity of "bullshit jobs" which people may unconsciously be aware of but also the idea that if work is enjoyable it's not worth paying for, which I see a lot.

*Ha, and I thought of this before getting to the part of the article that talks about teachers.

PloddingInsight

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 320
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #18 on: August 06, 2014, 12:46:30 PM »
Could you also give some kind of source? I am inclined to agree with your statement that the article's perspective on the USSR was overoptimistic, but I'd rather base that opinion on more than anecdotes.

Having said that, I don't think this example was central to the article.

For what it's worth I know a guy who is very well-traveled internationally and spent a couple years in Russia.  His description pretty much matches the one offered by gimp.  My friend is an enthusiastic drinker but he was blown away by the massive alcoholism in Russia.

SisterX

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3035
  • Location: 2nd Star on the Right and Straight On 'Til Morning
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #19 on: August 06, 2014, 02:16:27 PM »
Could you also give some kind of source? I am inclined to agree with your statement that the article's perspective on the USSR was overoptimistic, but I'd rather base that opinion on more than anecdotes.

Having said that, I don't think this example was central to the article.

For what it's worth I know a guy who is very well-traveled internationally and spent a couple years in Russia.  His description pretty much matches the one offered by gimp.  My friend is an enthusiastic drinker but he was blown away by the massive alcoholism in Russia.

My Russian-born friend won't say much on specifics about her childhood in Russia except that "It's a shithole.  What a horrible country.  There's a reason Russians drink so much."  And considering that this is the country which has a huge problem over the drug krokodil, I believe it. 

gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2344
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #20 on: August 06, 2014, 03:11:07 PM »
I was born there too... The country wasn't quite as shitty as you describe. The system was fatally flawed (long list of reasons) and that's why it collapsed, but it had some pleasant aspects as well. Job security, low prices etc.

There are some really, really amazing parts. Palaces in St Petersburg. Museums. Vast tracts of wilderness.

But that's true about most any country. I've found beauty in 49 states and even New Jersey made the list. Haven't been to Hawaii yet.

Job security was a good thing, unless you were trying to accomplish something. Can't fire someone who's drunk at work, let alone just sleeping or not doing much. Stabbing your boss might do it. Or telling the wrong political joke. Yeah, it's cool that you can't be fired for being drunk, but you can be jailed (or, in earlier parts of history, summarily executed or sent to forced labor camps) for making the wrong joke to the wrong person. Did I say "can?" I meant to say, "nobody knows what happened to my mother's grandfather, they never heard of him after he got sent to a camp." So I guess it also helps to have job security if you're not a journalist. Or too smart. Or in charge of anything.

Low prices were fixed by the government, which worked well in theory, but in practice production and distribution was controlled by the government which was not always efficient, or fast to react to changes, and often made omissions because controlling the entire country is a lot of work. This led to things like, say, waiting in line for four hours to buy some boots, because this is the only time this year they're on sale. (On sale, to you fine readers, means "available to be bought" not "on discount".) Low prices, for things you can buy.

My parents never had red meat - or even pink meat - until only a couple years ago, when I was cooking for them. You don't trust meat that was in a deep freeze for 20 years. You cook that shit until it's the color and taste of a hockey puck.

People walked around with bags called "avoska", roughly translated to english, "maybies" or "hopefullies", as in "maybe hopefully something will be being sold on my way home from work that I need, and then I can buy it and carry it home."

But yes, it's very impressive how Russia was able to steal nuclear secrets and cobble together their own bombs, eventually surpassing the US in most powerful warhead detonated. Military spending was not something they cheaped out on, unlike, say, proper food distribution. You remember the US's "Star Wars" program under Reagan? Major investments by the government into things like computers, which translated very well into commercial success and economic growth. Russia, a tiny country by population in comparison, spent as much on actual hardware - weapons, tanks, etc. That was the final nail in the coffin that caused the USSR to collapse. Brilliant move, by whoever designed the strategy. So I guess life was good if you were on the military or political dole, as long as you didn't, you know, get shot.

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #21 on: August 06, 2014, 04:18:05 PM »
I assume you wrote the reply above for the benefit of Americans. I already know about it... It wasn't really that easy to get shot or sent to political prison from 70-ties onward. You had to do something really substantial. What usually happened is loss of job and any privileges. I had a pretty happy childhood there in during the 80-ties. My parents, both engineers, did well under that system and continued to do well under capitalism as well. The latter allows for all the freedom (to succeed or fail), but it's more stressful as well.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #22 on: August 06, 2014, 06:32:20 PM »
While I'm enjoying the discussion of life in Soviet Russia, that's really not the point of the article.

The main point of the article is really much more closely related to the MMM blog's whole point, that there is happiness to be had by working less and instead focusing on the more important things in life.

I enjoyed the description of how the industrial revolution promised vastly reduced amounts of labor from the workforce, and how American anarchists were agitating for a reduced work week (35 hours!) as a result, but were overruled by American socialists who wanted more money for being more productive instead of less hours to do the same amount of work.  I thought that whole discussion was reflective of the problems most people here experience today, when choosing how long to work and how to retire and how to value your working years vs free time and what is really "enough".

That sort of subtlety, with a bit of a historical slant, echoes throughout the entire piece.  Totally worth a read, if you have a few minutes.

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/01/help_us_thomas_piketty_the_1s_sick_and_twisted_new_scheme/

Ian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 364
  • Location: South Korea
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #23 on: August 07, 2014, 02:35:09 AM »
Thanks to those who gave responses, but the disagreement here is part of the reason I was interested in something more academic than a primary source. When you're comparing such contentious issues as standard of life, I find numbers are usually best.

Having said that, I agree with Sol that this is a tangent. If anyone wants to reply to me on this, feel free to send a message so I don't distract from the main point of the article any further.

Torran

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 370
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #24 on: August 07, 2014, 02:35:26 AM »
Interesting stuff... my focus was more on the parts of the article covering our attitudes to work/time - really interesting to hear people's own experiences of Russia and the reality of life there.

Personally I found I defnitely agreed with his opinion that really meaningful, valuable work is not often paid well - i.e the attitude that the intrinsic 'goodness' of the work should mean that you do it regardless of pay. Which sounds great, in an idealistic sort of way, because ofcourse if I didn't have to pay my rent I would love to do valuable work for no cash.

However in my own life, I've moved from social work and school work into a pretty meaningless admin role, and I'm now earning almost twice as much, for a much easier desk job, as I was earning when I did really difficult, stressful but very meaningful work. I guess that's life - but I liked to see this being articulated and questioned.

(For the record I'm still not earning very much! Haha. But this forum certainly helps to keep that minimal cash under control).

AlanStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3187
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #25 on: August 07, 2014, 07:09:36 AM »
very interesting article, not sure I agree with it all but still thought provoking.

WRT jobs and pay rate: is this not subject to supply/demand and ability to replace the worker? 

BS jobs: could the real purpose of some of these jobs be to cover someone-else's ass?  someone 'needs' those vision statements to demonstrate that the company is forward looking and has goals of how they will make more money in future.  that or they are 'needed' as marketing BS "we here at Initech value all peoples and respect all opinions."

Basenji

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Location: D.C.-ish
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #26 on: August 07, 2014, 07:32:55 AM »
Quote
What I ended up concluding is that working class people hate the cultural elite more than they do the economic elite—and mind you, they don’t like the economic elite very much. But they hate the cultural elite because they see them as a group of people who have grabbed all the jobs where one gets paid to do good in the world. If you want a career pursuing any form of value other than monetary value—if you want to work in journalism, and pursue truth, or in the arts, and pursue beauty, or in some charity or international NGO or the UN, and pursue social justice—well, even assuming you can acquire the requisite degrees, for the first few years they won’t even pay you.

Best explanation I have ever heard.

Quote
So I think we need to start by redefining labor itself, maybe, start with classic “women’s work,” nurturing children, looking after things, as the paradigm for labor itself and then it will be much harder to be confused about what’s really valuable and what isn’t.

Glorious, will never happen, but glorious idea...

dcheesi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #27 on: August 07, 2014, 08:01:59 AM »
With regard to the Communist societies, I think the implicit suggestion in the article is that they would have been better off just acknowledging leisure as a benefit, rather than pretending to value work. But that seems unrealistic to me; if they'd done that, then no one would have even *pretended* to work, and things would have gone to hell much faster. Without the real economic incentive to work, it was necessary to push intrinsic motivations instead, including making work itself a virtue.

sheepstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2417
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #28 on: August 07, 2014, 09:17:18 AM »

WRT jobs and pay rate: is this not subject to supply/demand and ability to replace the worker? 


It does seem you'd have to do some economic engineering to change, for example, the higher value/satisfaction = lower wage conundrum.  And economic engineering seems dangerous. 

But interestingly public opinion hasn't caught up with this yet in the case of the example and public opinion is used as a blunt instrument to argue some wages should be lower.  For example when our public transportation workers went on strike I saw a lot of arguments that it was ridiculous that someone driving the trains would get more money than someone who designed the stations.  A union I'm involved with was discussed in a major news article and the reporter mentioned that some union members earned more than the CFO of the company.  When I pointed out that the designer/CFO jobs were more desirable (and might have more competition), people were really surprised.

While I'm generally a free market type there are areas where I don't think it works.  For example at my job we have to keep up safety standards despite the fact that administration doesn't care about them or want to spend resources on them.  I don't think it makes sense to wait until they've lost their competitive edge due to several fatal accidents for the market to take care of it.  In our case I see a union as being one way to solve it.  I know that we just can't get competent people at the rate the employer wants to pay so I don't have a problem with a labor monopoly that forces them to keep up minimum standards for the work.

Similarly for teachers' unions / dept of ed.  I don't think the importance or quality of education is best decided by popularity.

I know a level of trust in your fellow citizens is important.  I just know that everyone is swayed by talking points and propaganda.  It would be nice if we could cut out the propaganda all together, but for now I'm happy with escalating the propaganda to pay people what I think are reasonable wages.

EricL

  • Guest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #29 on: August 07, 2014, 10:20:55 AM »
very interesting article, not sure I agree with it all but still thought provoking.

WRT jobs and pay rate: is this not subject to supply/demand and ability to replace the worker? 

BS jobs: could the real purpose of some of these jobs be to cover someone-else's ass?  someone 'needs' those vision statements to demonstrate that the company is forward looking and has goals of how they will make more money in future.  that or they are 'needed' as marketing BS "we here at Initech value all peoples and respect all opinions."

Interesting factoid. The U.S. military now (compared to say WWII or Vietnam), has way way way more senior officers per total force than ever. I'll try to find the documentation (Nords probably knows about this), but the military itself (and not even including all the federal workers and contractors that support the military) is super top heavy with admirals and generals having less power and less ability to run things. I suppose you could argue why we need more senior officers, but talk about BS jobs. One explanation that has been given is that our current society does not allow people autonomy and the chance to make mistakes. So every admiral needs a giant staff of other admirals to cover his ass. And jobs that used to be filled by younger, less senior officers are now filled by more senior officers, like a crazy job inflation trend with everyone getting less and less autonomy. As with all things, the military just reflects the society in general.

I once had to listen to a First Sergeant rant that the Army had 400 General Officers to command 20 Divisions (15-22k troops per depending in the type).  But we only had a fraction of that number of GOs in WW II when we had several times that number of division.  I had to listen because this was in 1986 and I was a snot nosed Private.  Today we have approximately 10 Divisions (likely to shrink) and well over 400 GOs.  Each General not only earns a fat paycheck but in any position is entitled to an aide, a driver, a staff of officers and NCOs, and at higher ranks a security detail.  To go further into detail would derail the discussion.

The discussion in which an American Professor seems to telegraph an intent to join the successors of the Cambridge Five by citing efficiencies in the Soviet economic system.  Every society that ever existed had its virtues.  But plucking a flawed diamond out of the huge Soviet turd and claiming it vindicates that turd is absurd. 

Basenji

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1031
  • Location: D.C.-ish
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #30 on: August 07, 2014, 10:31:01 AM »
I think the job escalation issue is part of the BS jobs issue in the article. I thought it was salient, oh well. It isn't just the military, as I suggested.

dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #31 on: August 07, 2014, 11:45:04 AM »
I can tell you, as a law school grad, that the phenomenon of the better off going into the meaningful law jobs was definitely my experience.  Most of the people I knew who went to work for the public defenders' office or state prosectors' offices, for example, could afford to do so primarily because they did not have student loans to pay off.  Those who had (huge) student loans sought the highest-paying, and incredibly soul-sucking corporate law (bullshit) jobs.

Also, these same people took interesting, non-paying volunteer internships between first and second years of law school (while I, on the other hand, was swabbing hot tar on industrial rooftops trying to make enough money to cover my next year's living expenses).
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 11:46:48 AM by dude »

golden1

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1541
  • Location: MA
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #32 on: August 07, 2014, 12:35:47 PM »
Really good article - I think pulling out his misunderstanding of Russian communist life doesn't take away from some of his other insights in the article - like the idea of bullshit jobs as social engineering and the pitting of one type of middle class job against another type (administrators/bureaucrats vs. teachers).
There are times when I feel like the jobs that pay the most in our society (therefore are valued more) are the ones that remove you farther away from your basic human physical and emotional limits.  Doctors who work 36 hour shifts, businessmen who have to make sociopathic decisions, people who push papers all day long with no underlying meaning.  The jobs where you feel connected to your work tend to pay less even though they are very hard work and can require a lot of hours and education (teachers, social workers)  or if they pay well are considered low status jobs (trades).  I know this is a generalization, but compensation and status of professions seems somewhat arbitrary to me at times. 
« Last Edit: August 07, 2014, 12:37:51 PM by golden1 »

AlanStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3187
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #33 on: August 08, 2014, 04:03:15 AM »
Am wondering how all this applied to engineering jobs (point and click type not choo-choo train type), there are relatively few unions and the govt has minimal direct 'buying' power to arbitrarily affect engineer pay (I understand that doctor specialty pay is very largely set by medicare/medicaid, and lots of lawyers are directly employed by different levels of govt) so it would seem engineering pay is a relatively free market.

It has been my observation that the harder-suckier jobs that require more education/experience pay more, chemical engineers on oil platform's make bank while quality assurance paper pushers dont.  There would also seem to be a correlation between well paying and "useful"; we still use lots of oil after all, and I am glad those aerospaces guys put up the GPS satellites.  So does the authors theory break down here or are engineering jobs/pay rates somewhat uniquely determined (requires education and is free market) and engineering is just a minor exception to a otherwise valid paradigm; or am I 180-deg off coarse & bat$hit crazy?




gimp

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2344
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #34 on: August 08, 2014, 11:30:24 AM »
Yes, the "theory" breaks down here. You know the joke, "how do you know if someone's an engineer" but it's been very hard not to jump in and say: fuck that shit, engineering gets things done and gets paid. Harder engineering gets more things done and gets paid more.

MoneyCat

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: New Jersey
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #35 on: August 08, 2014, 12:18:43 PM »
There really is no correlation between the difficulty of a job and the job's pay.  The real correlation is between how well do you know ownership/management and the job's pay.  That's why useless family members of the company's owner get to have cushy "vice president" jobs where they spend all day drinking in their office and going to parties with clients every night, while Mr. Average Joe slaves away for 60 hours a week making jack squat.  The moral of the story is "Make connections, because it isn't what you know.  It's who you know.  Period."

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #36 on: August 08, 2014, 01:27:37 PM »
So does the authors theory break down here or are engineering jobs/pay rates somewhat uniquely determined (requires education and is free market) and engineering is just a minor exception to a otherwise valid paradigm; or am I 180-deg off coarse & bat$hit crazy?

I think there are always exceptions which do not disprove the rule.

Here's the engineer's explanation.  Plot job suckiness one axis and compensation on the other axis.  Each job plots at some location on this graph.  Fruit pickers, garbage men, and social workers have really shitty jobs with really shitty pay.  Corporate executives, university presidents, and hedge fund managers make big bucks for relatively easy work.  In between there are lots of jobs that are sort of shitty and pay sort of well. 

The general trend is that harder working individuals make less money.  I suppose there are always going to be hard jobs that do pay well, and lots of jobs that pay poorly can be done without trying too hard.

In my office, though, the trend is clear.  Our boss makes four or five times what our technicians do.  Does she work five times as hard?  Does she provide five times as much value to the organization?  Not even close.
« Last Edit: August 08, 2014, 01:57:49 PM by sol »

sheepstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2417
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #37 on: August 08, 2014, 01:48:31 PM »
Thinking about it this morning it occurred to me that we have the ingrained idea that being in charge ought to come with a larger paycheck.  But why?  Typically managers of a software team don't have the up-to-date skills of the programmers themselves.  Ostensibly, there could be more competition for the management jobs.  But people don't like working for someone who makes less than they do.  Plus, having power is a huge perk for some people.  Greater job satisfaction ought to mean less pay according to the new paradigm.

AlanStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3187
  • Age: 44
  • Location: South East Virginia
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #38 on: August 08, 2014, 02:12:01 PM »
So does the authors theory break down here or are engineering jobs/pay rates somewhat uniquely determined (requires education and is free market) and engineering is just a minor exception to a otherwise valid paradigm; or am I 180-deg off coarse & bat$hit crazy?

I think there are always exceptions which do not disprove the rule.

Here's the engineer's explanation.  Plot job suckiness one axis and compensation on the other axis.  Each job plots at some location on this graph.  Fruit pickers, garbage men, and social workers have really shitty jobs with really shitty pay.  Corporate executives, university presidents, and hedge fund managers make big bucks for relatively easy work.  In between there are lots of jobs that are sort of shitty and pay sort of well. 

The general trend is that harder working individuals make less money.  I suppose there are always going to be hard jobs that do pay well, and lots of jobs that pay poorly can be done without trying to hard.

In my office, though, the trend is clear.  Our boss makes four or five times what our technicians do.  Does she work five times as hard?  Does she provide five times as much value to the organization?  Not even close.

Wait but how many independent variables are we dealing with while modeling monetary compensation?  Suckiness, utility, replaceability, unionness, social skillz, location...  I have tried plotting 5d data and it does not work well; IT yells at you for using all the toner.

So maybe over all in the single independent variable world compensation is best predicted by suckiness but within the subset engineering jobs, this brakes down.  am only half convinced of this, I mean, sort of seems like you would need to make some very specific definition of sucky given the WIDE range of compensation for office work.  40k/year for some BS paper pusher vs 40k/two weeks for hedge fund manager, the author says both dont feel like they do anything, right, but the HFM feels (and society (mostly) agrees) entitled to the higher pay because they are far from doing real work?  So are we plotting on some supper shrunk down log scale that includes Cambodian porta potty attendants at one end and pro-quarterbacks with a broken pinky finger one and a half inches to the right?

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #39 on: August 08, 2014, 03:02:56 PM »
Unlike some people here, I'm less upset about the spread of bullshit jobs, or about wage inequality.  If you've ever watched a family of immigrants pick asparagus all day in the hot sun, you have already given up complaining about the price of asparagus at the grocery store.  We need people willing to work hard for minimal pay.  We all benefit from cheap asparagus picked by Hispanic farm workers, from cheap Tshirts made in firetrap factories in Bangladesh, from cheap coffee grown on razed rainforest land.

The American standard of living simply isn't possible for everyone on earth to attain.  We live lives of relative luxury because other people live in poverty.  Yes it's horribly unjust but it is the world we have chosen to build and we are fortunate to be on the right side of the disparity.

Bullshit jobs and poorly paid laborers are two sides of the same coin.  It's kind of hypocritical to bitch about it while simultaneously reaping the benefits.

In that light, the mass alcoholism of former Soviet Russia maybe isn't so bad.  At least people were deliberately harming themselves, rather than being harmed by someone else.

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #40 on: August 08, 2014, 04:06:37 PM »
The American standard of living simply isn't possible for everyone on earth to attain.  We live lives of relative luxury because other people live in poverty.  Yes it's horribly unjust but it is the world we have chosen to build and we are fortunate to be on the right side of the disparity.

It will be fascinating to see Chinese attempt just that in the next 10-20 years. Theoretically their economy ought to be 3x larger than yours.

Beric01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
  • Law-abiding cyclist
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #41 on: August 08, 2014, 05:30:17 PM »
The American standard of living simply isn't possible for everyone on earth to attain.  We live lives of relative luxury because other people live in poverty.  Yes it's horribly unjust but it is the world we have chosen to build and we are fortunate to be on the right side of the disparity.

It will be fascinating to see Chinese attempt just that in the next 10-20 years. Theoretically their economy ought to be 3x larger than yours.

Additionally, as more of this type of labor becomes automated, there becomes little need for cheap labor. It's why once Foxconn goes 100% robotic they can potentially control the global economy. Robots building robots and the future is yours.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #42 on: August 08, 2014, 06:34:02 PM »
Additionally, as more of this type of labor becomes automated, there becomes little need for cheap labor.

Go back and actually read the link in the OP, this is exactly contrary to the whole point of this thread. 

People have been making that claim since the industrial revolution.  Automation will replace cheap labor. We'll all have more leisure time.  When in truth we all work more now than we did after the 40 hour workweek was legislated into existence, and that fact is not an accident.  Our working hours are constructed and manipulated to keep people busy even in the face of ever increasing amounts of automation.  Our society just isn't stable if nobody has to work.  Too many idle hands, too many potential revolutionaries, too much market instability.

So they invented consumerism and rallied behind a mythical notion of American work ethic so that people would WANT to work crazy long hours, and long careers, rather than harvesting the fruits of that automation.  Every year it gets harder and harder to convince them, until eventually some dude named Pete starts a blog that points out how ridiculous it is to be a voluntary slave. 

And here you are on Pete's website failing to grasp the story that created it. 

Seriously, just take ten minutes and read the damn thing.  You'll all be happy you did.

Beric01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
  • Age: 33
  • Location: SF Bay Area
  • Law-abiding cyclist
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #43 on: August 08, 2014, 08:35:07 PM »
Additionally, as more of this type of labor becomes automated, there becomes little need for cheap labor.

Go back and actually read the link in the OP, this is exactly contrary to the whole point of this thread. 

People have been making that claim since the industrial revolution.  Automation will replace cheap labor. We'll all have more leisure time.  When in truth we all work more now than we did after the 40 hour workweek was legislated into existence, and that fact is not an accident.  Our working hours are constructed and manipulated to keep people busy even in the face of ever increasing amounts of automation.  Our society just isn't stable if nobody has to work.  Too many idle hands, too many potential revolutionaries, too much market instability.

So they invented consumerism and rallied behind a mythical notion of American work ethic so that people would WANT to work crazy long hours, and long careers, rather than harvesting the fruits of that automation.  Every year it gets harder and harder to convince them, until eventually some dude named Pete starts a blog that points out how ridiculous it is to be a voluntary slave. 

And here you are on Pete's website failing to grasp the story that created it. 

Seriously, just take ten minutes and read the damn thing.  You'll all be happy you did.

I did read the article and I don't think it's contradictory. I'm sure there will be other BS jobs created to fill the void and hours won't lessen, but we ARE seeing more innovation in manufacturing happening right now, which will replace manual labor. Read this article on Foxconn.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8433
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #44 on: August 08, 2014, 10:10:18 PM »
I did read the article and I don't think it's contradictory. I'm sure there will be other BS jobs created to fill the void and hours won't lesse

I see I misunderstood.  When you said there would be reduced need for cheap labor, I thought you meant we would employ fewer poorly paid laborers.  The point of the article, which you seem to have acknowledged, is that reducing the need for cheap labor never decreases our utilization of cheap labor.  We'll always find shitty jobs for poor people to do, and some way to keep everyone working.

Factory jobs turned into "information service" jobs.   Single income households became dual income households.  Full time jobs became multiple part time jobs.  We're really good at keeping people running on that treadmill one way or another, despite the extraordinary increases in productivity due to automation and industrialization.

Albert

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1244
  • Location: Switzerland
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #45 on: August 08, 2014, 11:53:56 PM »


People have been making that claim since the industrial revolution.  Automation will replace cheap labor. We'll all have more leisure time.  When in truth we all work more now than we did after the 40 hour workweek was legislated into existence, and that fact is not an accident.  Our working hours are constructed and manipulated to keep people busy even in the face of ever increasing amounts of automation.  Our society just isn't stable if nobody has to work.  Too many idle hands, too many potential revolutionaries, too much market instability.

That is probably true, although it's not true that all of us work more than 40 years ago. I read recently that Swiss are working on average 10 hours a week less than in the late 60-ties. Not a lot of early retirees, but a lot of people working part time voluntarily.

dcheesi

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1309
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #46 on: August 10, 2014, 02:09:50 AM »
The American standard of living simply isn't possible for everyone on earth to attain.  We live lives of relative luxury because other people live in poverty.  Yes it's horribly unjust but it is the world we have chosen to build and we are fortunate to be on the right side of the disparity.

It will be fascinating to see Chinese attempt just that in the next 10-20 years. Theoretically their economy ought to be 3x larger than yours.
Actually my understanding is that China isn't trying to provide first-world standards to all of their people, only to the subset of families that are designated urban dwellers. People whose families are from rural areas are denied many of the benefits that the city dwellers get, and in fact are usually forbidden from taking up permanent residence in the cities; instead, they are treated like migrant workers, housed in dormitories while they work for money to support their families back home.. They are essentially second class citizens, and they provide the cheap labor that Chinese factories depend on.

sheepstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2417
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #47 on: August 25, 2014, 04:43:31 PM »
Thought this was interesting and somewhat related.  Multi-million-generating non-profit Superbowl asks musicians if they'd like to pay to be the halftime show.
http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/nfl-super-bowl-rihanna-coldplay-katy-perry-20140819
If bands with huge built-in audiences don't have leverage, how can the average individual?

Less

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 178
  • Age: 37
  • Location: New Zealand
    • Journal
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #48 on: August 25, 2014, 06:48:32 PM »
"work is a value in itself. It creates discipline, maturity, or some such, and anyone who doesn’t work most of the time at something they don’t enjoy is a bad person, lazy, dangerous, parasitical."

Ha. Loved this line.

dude

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2369
Re: 'Who Gets Rewarded by our Economy?' - Salon.com
« Reply #49 on: August 26, 2014, 07:51:17 AM »
The American standard of living simply isn't possible for everyone on earth to attain.  We live lives of relative luxury because other people live in poverty.  Yes it's horribly unjust but it is the world we have chosen to build and we are fortunate to be on the right side of the disparity.

It will be fascinating to see Chinese attempt just that in the next 10-20 years. Theoretically their economy ought to be 3x larger than yours.

"Fascinating" -- I say more like terrifying.  The rate at which our planet is being degraded is rising exponentially, and the rise of China's and India's middle classes is likely the hastening of our eventual extinction.  We are setting into motion forces over which we have absolutely no control and only the slightest comprehension.  I'm glad I'll be dead in 30-40 years (and that I didn't add any powder to the population bomb).

 

Wow, a phone plan for fifteen bucks!