I found it interesting that he compared the loss in jobs and decline in economic growth to achieving a utopian society where no one has to work full time. What I believe the author leaves out is the sense of wealth that some people crave. So people trying to out class each other by buying more and more extravagant luxury goods, might put a wrench in his idea.
"A World Without Work" seems like a really interesting take on employment, but also a new take on societal expectations as a whole. I think Douthat has a great point about our (even slow) growth ensuring a brighter future in 2050, but I still think that jobs provide more than just income. For many, careers offer as much enjoyment (or utility) as pure leisure. A sense of purpose and meaning in the workplace can be as satisfying as "hunting by morning," although that does sound pretty fun. All in all, this article was definitely one of the more interesting ones I have seen in a while!
I found the article to be interesting as it makes sense that people are less inclined to work considering its not as necessary with the use of government food stamps and medicare. This raises the question of whether government aid on such a large scale is a good idea, as the article says jobs provide security, social interactions, and various other benefits.
Of course one could also argue that these government programs are vital to the well being of millions so I doubt there will be any big cuts to them for the time being. So perhaps we should focus on educating our workforce more so they are able to obtain better paying jobs or other means of promoting the workforces capabilities.
When I read this article, I question myself whether it is the people actually learning to live with less or the people making an excuse when they say they are fulfilled and satisfied. As time passes, it seems that people tend to live richer lifestyles, whether they grow richer or poorer. The article repeatedly says USA's wealth is our main economic strength but I am pretty sure that is only the case because we have tools to keep the debt from hurting us. We repeatedly raise the debt ceiling every time it is necessary and when someone asks how we could do such a thing, it's because we have no other optimal option. I still don't fully understand how we can grow even richer by 2050 even with a weak economic outlook but I know that it won't necessary mean good for our economy.
I liked how the article mocks the old utopians as "prescient" because technically, yes America is now a place where work is part time and lesiure is primary for the blue collar workers. However, it is because of their lack of fulfillment and the ease at which through togetherness they are able to get through. But, it will affect the nation's GDP because all the unemployment will be hurting businesses. AP Micro Sahil Parikh
Modern technology has effected unemployment in two ways. One, it makes certain jobs that were once important obsolete. Two, it makes living on the cheap easier. With just a cell phone, you can have access to the world's supply of information. Machines also makes certain goods cheaper. The internet has also made temp work easier. A unemployed person can create a good website for someone over a weekend and get paid for that. As I understand this trend, as human labor is becoming less and less necessary, the costs of the fruit of that labor is going down. As people have less jobs to do, they'll start to need jobs less. Leisure time will become an even bigger part of our society.
I feel like the author of this article is alluding to a change in how to create a better standard of wealth. Rather than focusing on the quantity of money, the author highlights the eventual quality of life. It seems like an ideal scenario, having less hours and an overall happier life, and is something that I believe will gradually come into place. I thought it was interesting how the author criticized both sides of the political spectrum with the statement, "By historical standards their lives are more comfortable than the left often allows, and the fiscal cost of their situation is more sustainable than the right tends to admits. (Medicare may bankrupt us, but food stamps probably will not.)"
It is interesting to see that instead of blue collar workers, the upper class is putting in overtime hours. Overtime has become a sign of job security and wealth rather than what is has traditionally been because of the volatile job market.
It is interesting to see that instead of blue collar workers, the upper class is putting in overtime hours. Overtime has become a sign of job security and wealth rather than what is has traditionally been because of the volatile job market.
I found it intriguing just how much work has declined over the years. It's also interesting how this scenario is quite similar to the utopia Karl Marx envisioned. The only difference is that in today's society, the decreasing work hours is starting from the bottom up. In fact, working many hours is more characteristic of the very rich. Although it's great that many more people are able to have standards of living without standard employment and without working under a boss, there may be consequences for a society that operates in such a fashion.
Aditya I find this article very interesting because it points out a key irony in today's society, and the thoughts of the people in the past on the future vs what is actually happening now. It makes sense that rich people would work more to get more money, and that the poorer people work less. However, the reason for this is the poor job market that exists, and this is something that was not expected to happen. It is also important to not that a utopian society will be hard to obtain.
This article was very iteresting. I think that this idea of a declining amount of work for all people might sound like a good idea, but really isnt. If nobody were to have to work, there would be so many problems. First of all, apprececation for what you have would never exist. Also, the people that work help create all the things necessary to enjoy free time. If nobody worked, nothing could be produced and there would be a lack of goods and services available for everyone. I think that work is an essential part of every persons life, if they like it or not.
I found it interesting that he compared the loss in jobs and decline in economic growth to achieving a utopian society where no one has to work full time. What I believe the author leaves out is the sense of wealth that some people crave. So people trying to out class each other by buying more and more extravagant luxury goods, might put a wrench in his idea.
ReplyDeleteKJL PD 6
Ben Pleat Micro pd 6
ReplyDelete"A World Without Work" seems like a really interesting take on employment, but also a new take on societal expectations as a whole. I think Douthat has a great point about our (even slow) growth ensuring a brighter future in 2050, but I still think that jobs provide more than just income. For many, careers offer as much enjoyment (or utility) as pure leisure. A sense of purpose and meaning in the workplace can be as satisfying as "hunting by morning," although that does sound pretty fun. All in all, this article was definitely one of the more interesting ones I have seen in a while!
Richard Per 6
ReplyDeleteI found the article to be interesting as it makes sense that people are less inclined to work considering its not as necessary with the use of government food stamps and medicare. This raises the question of whether government aid on such a large scale is a good idea, as the article says jobs provide security, social interactions, and various other benefits.
Of course one could also argue that these government programs are vital to the well being of millions so I doubt there will be any big cuts to them for the time being. So perhaps we should focus on educating our workforce more so they are able to obtain better paying jobs or other means of promoting the workforces capabilities.
Jeff C Per 6.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read this article, I question myself whether it is the people actually learning to live with less or the people making an excuse when they say they are fulfilled and satisfied. As time passes, it seems that people tend to live richer lifestyles, whether they grow richer or poorer. The article repeatedly says USA's wealth is our main economic strength but I am pretty sure that is only the case because we have tools to keep the debt from hurting us. We repeatedly raise the debt ceiling every time it is necessary and when someone asks how we could do such a thing, it's because we have no other optimal option. I still don't fully understand how we can grow even richer by 2050 even with a weak economic outlook but I know that it won't necessary mean good for our economy.
I liked how the article mocks the old utopians as "prescient" because technically, yes America is now a place where work is part time and lesiure is primary for the blue collar workers. However, it is because of their lack of fulfillment and the ease at which through togetherness they are able to get through. But, it will affect the nation's GDP because all the unemployment will be hurting businesses.
ReplyDeleteAP Micro Sahil Parikh
AP Micro - PD 6 - MTC
ReplyDeleteModern technology has effected unemployment in two ways. One, it makes certain jobs that were once important obsolete. Two, it makes living on the cheap easier. With just a cell phone, you can have access to the world's supply of information. Machines also makes certain goods cheaper. The internet has also made temp work easier. A unemployed person can create a good website for someone over a weekend and get paid for that. As I understand this trend, as human labor is becoming less and less necessary, the costs of the fruit of that labor is going down. As people have less jobs to do, they'll start to need jobs less. Leisure time will become an even bigger part of our society.
I feel like the author of this article is alluding to a change in how to create a better standard of wealth. Rather than focusing on the quantity of money, the author highlights the eventual quality of life. It seems like an ideal scenario, having less hours and an overall happier life, and is something that I believe will gradually come into place. I thought it was interesting how the author criticized both sides of the political spectrum with the statement, "By historical standards their lives are more comfortable than the left often allows, and the fiscal cost of their situation is more sustainable than the right tends to admits. (Medicare may bankrupt us, but food stamps probably will not.)"
ReplyDeleteI.T.
It is interesting to see that instead of blue collar workers, the upper class is putting in overtime hours. Overtime has become a sign of job security and wealth rather than what is has traditionally been because of the volatile job market.
ReplyDelete- NS, pd. 6
It is interesting to see that instead of blue collar workers, the upper class is putting in overtime hours. Overtime has become a sign of job security and wealth rather than what is has traditionally been because of the volatile job market.
ReplyDelete- NS, pd. 6
I found it intriguing just how much work has declined over the years. It's also interesting how this scenario is quite similar to the utopia Karl Marx envisioned. The only difference is that in today's society, the decreasing work hours is starting from the bottom up. In fact, working many hours is more characteristic of the very rich. Although it's great that many more people are able to have standards of living without standard employment and without working under a boss, there may be consequences for a society that operates in such a fashion.
ReplyDeleteAustin
Period 6 Micro
Aditya
ReplyDeleteI find this article very interesting because it points out a key irony in today's society, and the thoughts of the people in the past on the future vs what is actually happening now. It makes sense that rich people would work more to get more money, and that the poorer people work less. However, the reason for this is the poor job market that exists, and this is something that was not expected to happen. It is also important to not that a utopian society will be hard to obtain.
This article was very iteresting. I think that this idea of a declining amount of work for all people might sound like a good idea, but really isnt. If nobody were to have to work, there would be so many problems. First of all, apprececation for what you have would never exist. Also, the people that work help create all the things necessary to enjoy free time. If nobody worked, nothing could be produced and there would be a lack of goods and services available for everyone. I think that work is an essential part of every persons life, if they like it or not.
ReplyDeleteIsaac p 6