Home More advice General Knowledge
Lets say everyone had access to food, medical care, education and housing. Instead of working a whole year, everyone would only need to work like 4 to 6 months, so there is a job for everyone.
Any interesting theories or ideas on this and how people would react to a world like this?
I understand what ur saying but missing my point, my point is instead of requiring people to know MS Office, accounting & public relations all in one job description then have 3 separate people doing their own job that way all know what they are actually doing and they dont hv to lie about claiming they know all of the specified demands just to get that interview to get that job that pays what ever it does. If a boss is looking for a secretary to answer phone, fax, email & all the admin requirements plus deal with accounting and public relations but is only willing to pay the min wage for it which i know in NY is 7 dollars an hour then they shouldnt expect the people to be motivated to want that job or do it with great pleasure. That is my point in this. Yes people want the job, not everyone knows all of MS Office, some will know word for emailing & basic navigating the web for research...and of course basic admin qualifications like faxing, answer calls & such but when you throw in accounting & PR presentations how on earth can they be required to also know those! That is work in 3 separate fields that I have heard people complaining about...they do it because they can why get 3 separate people to do what 1 can on min wage too...
I know this first hand I had my own business so i am speaking from experience...I couldnt afford hiring anyone so I did the admin work, and the accounting & my ex did the pr work, advertisement & made sure had our company on every free site we could add our corp's name. If I had extra money i would have hired people to do all that so I could focus on the real work...now after moving abroad & loosing everything I find myself looking for work & it isnt easy with the no end demanding companies out there expecting the most for the least. I understand both sides, dont get me wrong, but if companies that could afford 3 people to work specifically on their work rather then having to be split 3 ways doing work for 3 people then the work or project in ur case would go quicker & all would be happier!! That is what I was trying to say. If one does the research, the other types it all up while the third presents it, u hv team work!! Less stress on one persons shoulders, and more smiles on a job well done is all i am saying! Now how many people would have more opportunities to work? 3 vs.1 no one has to actually lie about what they really know bcz they are focused on 1 thing & know it well! Here perfect example, I just yahoo mail looking for jobs... companies requirement... For admin work mind you!
Now of all these requirements, i may hv 3 1. languages 2. 5 years experience 3. admin work (including word but not the whole MS Office including outlook prog...so I am screwed having to let it go. Another thing that screwed me over is the whole military issue...i wasnt in the military here as well! Another thing I never really learn accounting, I used basic quick books to deal with invoices, and receive payment then print them up a receipt with our Heading on it & business ID number. That isnt accounting, its basic Admin work!
So...I loose another job offer.
Now if they required less, like basic emailing, faxing & answering calls, another language & 5 years experience for an admin job minus the accounting and military then I would be sending my resume...but i am not a liar so I cant do that...and I hv no job...(in case ur wondering why i dont know ms office, its bcz i never had any intention of working as an admin so the basic emails on outlook express & typing things on word is all I needed. just explaining!)
You seem to imply that if people were to be (perhaps) less greedy, and willing to settle for less, then there would be enough jobs to go round and everybody would just work shorter days, weeks, or whatever to earn enough MONEY.
.
Fact is all justifiable profit making work is in principle a method of achieving (at least partial) self sufficiency by ones own labours - towards making some sort of less valuable "raw material" into a more valuable modified product.
.
There is nothing to stop someone who has not been given a cushy paid job to do by an employer, getting out there to do some self-employed work (just like all our ancestors had to do before money was invented). Someone who has not got a job can get out there and either trade their skills and labout to a customer base that they build up for themselves, or just use cheap available raw materials to create something more valuable to themselves and others:
.
e.g. growing food on an allotment or small-holding; rearing livestock; cutting and collecting wood for fuel, creating artistic works e.g. by writing books, painting decorative pictures, carving sculptures; collecting and recycling rubbish; etc..
.
There is an almost endless variety of things that the unemployed can do in the manner of a "cottage industry". They just need the will to get stuck in and achieve something.
.
Our ancestors did not live off the fruits of well paid jobs, they supplied their own "... basic needs ..." by their own labour and ingenuity. Those who are willing to settle for "basic needs" only, need only follow their example. .....
.
..... Trouble is the average long-term unemployed person these days is very rarely willing to put in the hard work and long hours necessary to make any sort of self sufficiency plan viable. They would rather wait for a nice easy part time employment option without too much work, but plenty of money in return for doing next to nothing.
Best wishes - Majikthise. .
sad but true...people are too greedy to just settle for a little when they can have a lot more... another thing that would say is why should I care about someone else...if they dont want to work why should i limit myself...
Personally...I wish corporations would demand less & pay more so there would be more opportunities for those that want to work more but dont hv the nec requirements to even try applying.
I always hear friends complain this, they search the engines, looking for work, things always start off sounding like there is hope to the job offer, then they finish reading all the things that company demands, and wind up getting so frustrated bcz they may hv 70% of the requirements & the 30% that they dont have is what is needed & they wind up getting discouraged while giving up!
To me, if I was the Ceo of a company, I would demand less of one person so there are more opportunities for more people to get more jobs. Yeah, that would mean loosing more money on pay roll but hey guess what if u hv more people on the pay roll, that gets the job done faster, makes people happier to be more satisfied, and actually want to apply themselves more for being successful!
Again, all in all it always comes down to greed & money...why take 3 people to do a job that 1 person can do pay less & have that person exhausted while thinking about quitting every other day.
life sux.
It'd be screwed. Imagine the greed people will have. We learn strength by fighting for what's right and we learn to appreciate ourselves by seeing our accomplishments. If we had easy access to everything, we'd be blinded by what we have and would only want more. The homeless woman on the street wont have to worry about anything again. What she gets the basic needs free, it may teach her to appreciate everything. Before you know it, some of us will be over the appreciation and sinking in the greed. To want more, to have more. I think we would loose what it feels like to have the weight of the work around your shoulders. You have everything important free. You don't need to do much to make you and your family happy. The one thing that it will probably teach you is there is more to life than having everything. There's no point of having basic needs if you have no family or friends. That won't happen anyways, this life is meant to be difficult to help you physically and mentally. You know the feeling you get when you complete an enormous task? That " I'm so proud of myself" feeling. Well that won't mean anything no more. And that would suck, because it's one of the best feelings.
I don't like the sound of that idea. Those basic needs must be provided some how, so the gov't ends up providing them from our tax dollars. Now you have communism/socialism where my hard earned money is being used to pay for bums (which is happening too much already). I'm fine with a bit of gov't assistance, and my family has had to take advantage of it during extremely hard times (food stamps when I was young, disability before my mom died of cancer). But for the US they need to be reformed. The Welfare system is all screwed up (you loose your Welfare if you work to much, so now there is no point in working :P). Along with Medicaid and Medicare. People who are not citizens of the USA and who have never paid taxes to support these programs are getting to take advantage of it, and mooch off it for most of their lives. Gov't providing basic needs for you does not fix anything. It makes people weak and dependent on everyone else to provide for them, while they learn no skills of their own - thus making them nothing but a leach on society.
Lets pretend this world would exist. In this world, the population would be exploding (fewer people dying) AND the population would be getting older, because with health care and food people would be living longer. The resources in this world would run out. The world's natural resources are not infinite. There's a very good reason that when the population explodes in the animal kingdom, the population is cut down by famine. There is no way for this utopian world to work. In many developed countries where there is food and health care, the population is getting older and people are having fewer children (look at Italy for example). This is a serious problem for the Italians because their workforce is going down. The U.K. and the U.S. don't have this issue because of immigration. But the immigration is coming from places where people dont have food and health care, but they do have a very young population. Utopia is a nice idea, but it just doesnt work in the real world. Unless we could somehow create worlds.
I don't think it would work very well. These days, money has far more importance to some than the idea of allowing everyone to have jobs or basic needs fulfilled without requiring government assistance. It's sad, but people are greedy, and some people seriously don't want to work for what they have. The world, unfortunately, isn't a place where everyone would look out for their neighbour or friend. It's always a case of "what do I need and want?"
In technical terms a place where everyone has the basic needs met would be nice, however. This would mean no homeless people, or a lot less. This would help a lot of people who constantly struggle to make ends meet.
The problem with settling for less qualified employees is they can't do the job. Where I work we have went around and around with that until the owners asked me write up a couple short test to see if people actually do know the software they claim to know, and that we need them to know. We don't expect everyone to be pro's with the software, and not require some training, but we need them to know the basics. If you hire unqualified workers, its a huge waste of money for the company. Not only do you have to pay the while they learn, but pay someone else to spend 2x the time on a project to show them how its done.
Well, I agree with you that people will get older and this will increase population. But the countries that have the largest population increases are poorer countries. It is a fact that the better the lifestyle and higher the education of people, the less children they have. And yes this will lead to there being more older people. But as most of the world has a lot of unemployment (40% in South Africa) there are enough people to fill in these gaps.
Thanks for your input.
I guess you are right, people won't take action themselves. They will rely on government to provide for them. The overall trend of answers here proved it, as most of the others spoke of it purely as government providing for people.
There are some people that would want more for less, I saw you said work, and I think to some people, that is a four letter word, IE bad word.
oops sorry for the long response...:P Didnt notice how long that was til i sent it..:)
Its sad but I don't think people wud settle for that, most wud want more
