[WARNING - SATIRE]
Left wing blogger Idiot/Savant has called for teams of bum wipers to wipe bums for people not working (otherwise known as bums).
"The greatest obstacle to my freedom is that I have to brush my teeth, wash my clothes, and wipe my bum. These are all activities that severely impact on my time, and thus my freedom, and so the government needs to do something about it. Otherwise, I am not free."
Idiot was last seen negotiating with his mother to continue to wash his clothes and prepare his meals, but hadn't solved the bum wiping issue.
However, the Freedom Consulting Group, a group of beneficiaries on multiple benefits and various ACC compensation schemes video conferenced in from the third hole of the Western Pines Golf Club with some very good suggestions.
"Some of our members don't wash. This frees up a considerable amount of time, and keeps annoying social workers well away. In fact, one guy I knew used it to support a compensation claim that he suffered from incurable halitosis and a sweat disorder and can no longer engage in physical labour. It's a life time condition and leaves the field of recreational blogging wide open."
Idiot has demanded a bum wiping tax fund is established, where people that want to work, and earn high wages would pay a surcharge to employ professional bum wipers to enable his freedom.
"Of course I'm going to work, but it will be doing something I really enjoy. Quite frankly, I don't enjoy washing my clothes, brushing my teeth and wiping my bum. And if I did enjoy it, I certainly would expect to be paid a lot more money for such demeaning work. Some kind of Universal Benefit."
Sorry, Idiot. That was my immediate reaction to the general impression your post gives me. Let's see what you really said about work:
it's fundamentally about who is making the decisions: time spent doing what I want to do versus time spent doing what other people want me to do. And only during the former am I really free. Every moment I spend working to pay the rent is thus a very real intrusion on my liberty. Which is why they call it wage slavery...
and I/S adds:
and [as for paying rent], this is why most of us work. Yes, its nice if you love your job. But most of us are only in it for the money, and would much rather be doing something else.
and his solution:
Let's start with a 35-hour week. Beyond that, we should be moving to replace the benefit and pension system with a Universal Basic Income. A universal payment given to every adult regardless of circumstances. Not only would this give us time (in that people could choose to take that six months off, or even not to work if they were content to do without luxuries); it would also permanently remove the employers' boot from our neck.
Both Liberty Scott and MacDoctor debate the reality with the financial aspect of creating a society that can choose not to work and point out the differences between slaves and wage earners are far more substantial than the socialist slogans Idiot espouses. So there is little to add in that regard.
Just one brief point about Idiot's comment "Let's start with a 35 hour week": What cheek! No, that's not a start. That's a continuation. It reeks of "what ever have employers done for workers."
Last year the minimum amount of paid leave for workers rose one week to more than 5 weeks per year. That's four weeks annual leave and a swag of public holidays. Prior to that, additions to penalty rates for working on holidays added so much expense that some cafes don't bother opening on a public holiday. The ones that do typically have a service surcharge of 10 to 20%, and they are being abused for it. The minimum wage increases and abolition of the youth wage are seen as socialist victories.
So, it's not a start. The current situation is obviously not good enough for socialists, but they can at least pay heed to previous gains, because those gains are under very real threat as businesses may not survive the next year, which means jobs will not survive either. Then there will be many people on Idiot's Universal Benefit, and we will see how New Zealand prospers.
Getting distracted. Back to my main point. In this whole discussion about wage slavery is a general disdain for work, and a general belief that ones world will be better living in some kind of garden of Eden with nothing much to do, and more time on ones hands. And look where that got us.
Tied in with Socialism is a general disdain for a work ethic, and a failure to understand the redeeming value of work.
Instead of Idiot arguing to improve choice in terms of career and opportunity, he ends up arguing for freedom as being free not to work. That is not freedom. That is an enticement to sloth. It is the siren call of laziness and decadence. It is self destructive hedonism.
If we are to value people, we are to value the work they do, irrespective of the wage they earn and the fee they are paid. If we are to value ourselves, it is to undertake our duties and responsibilities in work more than in play.
Generally, the left and right wing have similar goals, just the means differ. Here is a good example of how this happens.
Liberty Scott on tax slavery
MacDoctor dishes out the medicine
Idiot/Savant: Time and Freedom
Left wing blogger Idiot/Savant has called for teams of bum wipers to wipe bums for people not working (otherwise known as bums).
"The greatest obstacle to my freedom is that I have to brush my teeth, wash my clothes, and wipe my bum. These are all activities that severely impact on my time, and thus my freedom, and so the government needs to do something about it. Otherwise, I am not free."
Idiot was last seen negotiating with his mother to continue to wash his clothes and prepare his meals, but hadn't solved the bum wiping issue.
However, the Freedom Consulting Group, a group of beneficiaries on multiple benefits and various ACC compensation schemes video conferenced in from the third hole of the Western Pines Golf Club with some very good suggestions.
"Some of our members don't wash. This frees up a considerable amount of time, and keeps annoying social workers well away. In fact, one guy I knew used it to support a compensation claim that he suffered from incurable halitosis and a sweat disorder and can no longer engage in physical labour. It's a life time condition and leaves the field of recreational blogging wide open."
Idiot has demanded a bum wiping tax fund is established, where people that want to work, and earn high wages would pay a surcharge to employ professional bum wipers to enable his freedom.
"Of course I'm going to work, but it will be doing something I really enjoy. Quite frankly, I don't enjoy washing my clothes, brushing my teeth and wiping my bum. And if I did enjoy it, I certainly would expect to be paid a lot more money for such demeaning work. Some kind of Universal Benefit."
Sorry, Idiot. That was my immediate reaction to the general impression your post gives me. Let's see what you really said about work:
it's fundamentally about who is making the decisions: time spent doing what I want to do versus time spent doing what other people want me to do. And only during the former am I really free. Every moment I spend working to pay the rent is thus a very real intrusion on my liberty. Which is why they call it wage slavery...
and I/S adds:
and [as for paying rent], this is why most of us work. Yes, its nice if you love your job. But most of us are only in it for the money, and would much rather be doing something else.
and his solution:
Let's start with a 35-hour week. Beyond that, we should be moving to replace the benefit and pension system with a Universal Basic Income. A universal payment given to every adult regardless of circumstances. Not only would this give us time (in that people could choose to take that six months off, or even not to work if they were content to do without luxuries); it would also permanently remove the employers' boot from our neck.
Both Liberty Scott and MacDoctor debate the reality with the financial aspect of creating a society that can choose not to work and point out the differences between slaves and wage earners are far more substantial than the socialist slogans Idiot espouses. So there is little to add in that regard.
Just one brief point about Idiot's comment "Let's start with a 35 hour week": What cheek! No, that's not a start. That's a continuation. It reeks of "what ever have employers done for workers."
Last year the minimum amount of paid leave for workers rose one week to more than 5 weeks per year. That's four weeks annual leave and a swag of public holidays. Prior to that, additions to penalty rates for working on holidays added so much expense that some cafes don't bother opening on a public holiday. The ones that do typically have a service surcharge of 10 to 20%, and they are being abused for it. The minimum wage increases and abolition of the youth wage are seen as socialist victories.
So, it's not a start. The current situation is obviously not good enough for socialists, but they can at least pay heed to previous gains, because those gains are under very real threat as businesses may not survive the next year, which means jobs will not survive either. Then there will be many people on Idiot's Universal Benefit, and we will see how New Zealand prospers.
Getting distracted. Back to my main point. In this whole discussion about wage slavery is a general disdain for work, and a general belief that ones world will be better living in some kind of garden of Eden with nothing much to do, and more time on ones hands. And look where that got us.
Tied in with Socialism is a general disdain for a work ethic, and a failure to understand the redeeming value of work.
Instead of Idiot arguing to improve choice in terms of career and opportunity, he ends up arguing for freedom as being free not to work. That is not freedom. That is an enticement to sloth. It is the siren call of laziness and decadence. It is self destructive hedonism.
If we are to value people, we are to value the work they do, irrespective of the wage they earn and the fee they are paid. If we are to value ourselves, it is to undertake our duties and responsibilities in work more than in play.
Generally, the left and right wing have similar goals, just the means differ. Here is a good example of how this happens.
Liberty Scott on tax slavery
MacDoctor dishes out the medicine
Idiot/Savant: Time and Freedom
Yes, it seems many socialists enjoy being lazy and want everyone else to enable their laziness. When it comes down to it, those such as Idiot would prefer to born into a wealthy family with hordes of servants (slaves?) that indulge their every need and want. Failing that, they will reorder society to get the same thing.
ReplyDeleteI thought they already had, Lucyna.
ReplyDeleteHa. Seems like a really bright idea...OK, sarcasm off.
ReplyDelete11 December 2014 - after its crushing election victory two weeks ago, the Socialist Paradise Party passed legislation under urgency to provide for a Universal Benefit of $20,000 per year to every adult aged between 18 and 65. The Prime Minister in a press conference said, "This is a historic day. Now people can pursue their dreams and ambitions, they're no longer slaves of their bosses..."
Six months later, at a WINZ office in Auckland...
"Next!"
"Hi, my name's Joe Bloggs..."
"Make it quick! My two hours for the week finish in five minutes."
"My Universal Benefit isn't enough!"
"What do you mean, it isn't enough?"
"I went into the supermarket. Loaves of bread are going for $1,000 each, when there are any!"
"Well, what do you expect? You think the bakers want to be at work?"
"Umm..."
"Is there anything else?"
"I guess no--"
"Next!"
Meanwhile, at a market garden near Christchurch...
"Hi Frank. I'm here to buy some vegetables," said Bob.
"Ok. How would you like to pay for those?"
Bob pulled out his wallet.
"I'm sorry," said Frank, "we don't accept Monopoly money."
"What? This is perfectly valid legal tender!" exclaimed Bob.
"Listen, mate," replied Frank, "my family lives off what I grow here. I'm not about to give it away to someone who has nothing to show for his time. Have you got anything else you can pay with?"
"Uh..."
"Feel like working in my fields?"
"Not reall--"
"Fine. Then how about we stop wasting each other's time. Goodbye."
All that work put into such a wonderful comment, with no thought of payment.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure the taxpayer owes you something. Can you just ask IRD for a credit perhaps?
It can only get worse, KG.
ReplyDeleteI think what is also corrosive is it encourages the notion that people get wealthy through luck - which of course encourages many on low incomes to gamble. Lotto is seen as the panacea to their woes, and it's seen as "fair" because it is purely a game of chance (regardless of the infinitesimal odds). Lotto facilitates the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to charities than anything else.
ReplyDeleteTaking risks with business, working hard and progressing yourself and the like are thought of with disdain, something "try hards" do, or it was because of "luck".
Nice humour Zen!
ReplyDeletePedantically though, I think the minimum paid leave was only raised to 4 weeks, and staff only get paid for a public holiday if they normally worked on that day (there are issues around workers with irregular scheduled hours).
The universal basic income is an interesting issue - I understod it was based on the principle that every human should receive (just) enough cash from the state to ensure they had a dignified human life. That is, could afford food, power, etc but not playstations perhaps; unless they're in prison ;)
So, UBI because of the dignity of each human, rather than a hatred of work. And of course, the vast majority of people would still work to avoid boredom, and to top up their wages to have a better lifestyle. Much the same way many pensioners keep working after 65 to afford better things. The pension keeps them alive (just), but if you want to visit people, go out to plays, etc you want a bit more cash!
That's the flaw with Mr Gronk's friendly farmer - Frank's family would not be living off what he grew, but off the UBI. The veges he sold would be a top up.
Would be interesting to see the numbers about what proportion of the workforce would have to keep working to ensure such a UBI scheme didn't result in $1,000 loaves of bread. The baker would have to be paid more to entice them to work, so bread would cost more, but then people would save by not paying for tut they didn't really need (which would now be in the $200 shop, not the $2 shop). It all comes down to the balance between the amount paid out in UBI to each person, and the higher wages paid for essential jobs like nurses.
Sorry to drag the humour down with serious thunking ;)
No probs, Squaredrive. The humour is only meant to open up the discussion to serious thinking.
ReplyDeleteI was not totally adverse to a UBI, but for totally different reasoning behind it than where Idiot is heading.
Now, having been alerted to the opportunity to misuse the concept of a UBI, I will remain quiet until I can present an argument that explains my idea, and the pre-conditions required for this to work.
I am also very keen on flat tax, however (maybe, possibly, not definitely), I could consider a compromise by having a significant tax free threshold on income tax. That's almost effectively a UBI.
@ZenTiger: Thanks for the compliment. But I don't suppose I deserve payment for post-prandial ramblings on blogs, and I'm not in NZ any more anyway. I doubt the IRS would have any more sympathy for bloggers than the IRD, though the way the present Administration here seems to be throwing money around like water, who knows. But I digress.
ReplyDelete@Squaredrive and Zen: I'll readily admit that my scenarios were extreme (a bit of a reductio ad absurdum, if you will). I was responding to the notion that people deserve something of value for doing absolutely nothing. A wise man once remarked that those who don't work shouldn't eat. Which makes perfect sense to me. My friendly farmer (*laughs*) will have put labour into the running of his business, and in that universe will probably have spent time planting, tending and harvesting them himself, when he would (most likely) much rather have been doing other things. Bob was implicitly expecting that he should reap the benefits of Frank's labour, not his own.
My scenario was also designed to suggest that if a UBI scheme worked as intended, it would end up as a catastrophic failure. I'm too young to remember this for myself, but I'm told that during the 1980s the Eastern Bloc economies tanked, with even basic items hard to come by for the common people, and those countries are still paying the price (no pun intended).
I guess my real problem with the concept of a UBI specifically so people can take large amounts of time off is that it legitimises bludging and creates an injustice against those who do productive work.
For the same reason (and others), I don't approve in principle of any Government scheme to give people money when they could reasonably be earning it. Here, I'm referring specifically to cash handouts, as opposed to tax rebates, tax-free thresholds, subsidies of particular goods or services (health and education come to mind), etc.
I'll hasten to add that I have absolutely no problems with provision of money, or goods and services, to those who, for whatever reason, can't work. Now, whether the Government is the best institution to do that, I'm not convinced...but that's a whole nother discussion and I don't want to thread-jack.
I'll also say that I believe very firmly that employees should be given reasonable time off, and should be paid enough for their efforts that they can provide for themselves and a reasonable number of dependents, and actually enjoy the free time they get. This, for me, is not a matter of "basic human dignity" so much as one of justice: after all, "those who work deserve their pay."