Hacker News Reader

Comment by nico_h | Hacker News Reader

Heck, even if you made that proposition to a fast food worker that he could do meaningful work instead of smelling like fried stuff all the time and always be worried about working enough hours for a crappy boss and no future, or to a janitor that he could help someone instead of cleaning pee all day, maybe they would do that instead. Maybe even to an office drone, who knows.

Right now people work because otherwise they die, socially in civilized continental Europe, possibly literally in "modern" America (and possibly the UK).

View on HN

if you made that proposition to a fast food worker that he could do meaningful work instead of smelling like fried stuff all the time and always be worried about working enough hours for a crappy boss and no future, or to a janitor that he could help someone instead of cleaning pee all day, maybe they would do that instead

Are you saying that making food for people is meaningless? That cleaning doesn't help anyone?

Humans are always going to regard someone as being "at the bottom", just because that's how we think.

I'm saying that churning out barely edible mater for a highly structured organization that pays you less that living wages and provides no benefits of any kind (maybe a free meal once in a while?) and treat you less well that the consumables that comes in, is not something that people aspire to.

If you want to meaningfully feed people, I believe it's called working at a soup kitchen. Usually staffed by volunteers. The reward for most meaningful work is often only in the human element. It sure ain't in the pocketbook.

Working in the fast food industry is not "making food for people," it's being a cog in a machine that transform the maximum amount of uncaring for its employees and products into the maximum of profits.

Janitorial work is necessary but not paid in proportion to the social good it provides.

And I take offense at your comment about "Humans are always going to regard someone as being "at the bottom", just because that's how we think.", it's not human nature, it's a social construct.

How meaningful are jobs that could fairly easily be automated out of existence if we didn't feel the need to occupy every human?

The reason those jobs haven't been automated is because automating a job is an expensive and difficult process, not out of charity for the people doing those jobs.

I've often thought about how meaningful my own work is, in the sense that: what if people just didn't buy my company's stupid product? Would anybody be worse off? Not really.

The only meaning I've found is the satisfaction of doing my job well, on its own terms - whether that's sweeping the floors at a burger joint, or making software builds.

> Heck, even if you made that proposition to a fast food worker that he could do meaningful work instead of smelling like fried stuff all the time and always be worried about working enough hours for a crappy boss and no future, or to a janitor that he could help someone instead of cleaning pee all day, maybe they would do that instead. Maybe even to an office drone, who knows.

You imply that being a fast food worker, janitor, or "office drone" is not meaningful work. To many people it is. Your comment comes across as demeaning.

I'm willing to give GP the benefit of the doubt and was only speaking of the people who don't like, or are not suited for, those positions. I think there's enough people that fit that description in any reasonably sized profession to make it a valid statement in that context.

Almost by definition, there are aspects of work that you don't like. The trick is to find meaning in your work so that you have the strength to complete it.

The post seems to be suggesting that we should just eliminate all of the "least desirable" jobs, which is a fine idea as long as you realize that the next tier of jobs will then immediately become the "least desirable".

No it's just saying some people aren't happy with it and could do something else. Let's not focus on that bit, hey? Let's talk about the main point?

Everyone could be happier doing something else. The main point is: if you want other people to maintain the apartment building where you live, drive you around on the bus, grow your food and deliver it to the supermarket - you need to be prepared to do something useful in return.

"Being" a fast food worker, a janitor or "office drone" is not socially nor financially rewarded to a measure commensurate with the toll exerted on the soul or body of the human _occupying the function_.

Also, you're not your job, you're employed, however tenuously by the fast food industry.

As I said in another comment, "being" a fast food worker is not "feeding people". Working in a soup kitchen is feeding people.

The janitorial function is a necessity in any specialized society which doesn't reward you for cleaning after yourself.

And you really have never heard of someone in an office job that is soul sucking? Like say people organizing layoffs, or accepting/denying coverage at HMO, or call center employees trying to ensare retiree into getting extra fees for services they never use etc...

Don't you think society would be better served if these kind of jobs could not find warm bodies because there was more morally satisfying and equally (or better) financially rewarding proposition around?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com