Hacker News Reader

Comment by aliasxneo | Hacker News Reader

What if health and liberty to someone looks like them not providing any net positive to society? What compels someone to work 12 hours a day to share those resources with such a person?

View on HN

Some people look to the nice things they have and think to themselves "I want everyone to have these things."

No argument there. The question is whether history shows us that that represents a majority or minority of people.

You’re making a point about loafers but non-wage earners are always going to outnumber wage earners, and able bodied loafers are a minute fraction of who we must provide for (the young, the elderly, students, the disabled, etc)

Sounds like an unhealthy person and situation such that 12 hours of labor is mandatory

Step one would be to help them get into a situation where that wasn’t true

If enough people decide they want to spend their liberty not working, then the 12 hours is a necessity, not something "unhealthy" about the person.

Sounds like you’ve got your world model rock solid

It mostly just feels like basic maths, not really a world model. Productivity is a finite resource. If there's a deficit in productivity, people will necessarily suffer and, in the worst case, die. The problem is world views that suggest giving everyone a free choice that enough people will choose productivity while everyone else chooses leisure. I'd be more apt to believe it if we had evidence of it being a natural outcome.

It doesn't have to be so extreme though. Basic scenario: 20% of everyone's income is taxed and then distributed equally to everyone (no matter what, and without setting any fixed dollar amount), another 10% pays for administrative functions and government stuff except welfare, and the remaining 70% is theirs to do with as they please. What would happen? Would everyone quit their job? I don't think so, because 70% is a lot. Some people with jobs that pay so poorly their 70% is less than everyone's average 20% would quit, but that's good, because those were zombie jobs.

I'd be fine with this so long as people who didn't contribute any taxes couldn't vote. Otherwise you're just signing up for those who choose to work to get exploited by the leisurely.

Are there historical examples of this ever happening in any significant numbers? This idea that people en masse just won't work and live off of the state where opportunities for work are reasonably available seems more like a boogeyman than a real thing. (obviously, if work is not really available, I can see this happening, but I wouldn't describe the people unable to find work as "leisurely" in that case)

How much is "none"? Exactly $0.00? Can someone who donates $0.01 to the government every year vote?

“I need the world to comfort my fears”

You’re correct. A society filled with people with this view can’t work

Reply on news.ycombinator.com