Hacker News Reader

Comment by Havoc | Hacker News Reader

Thats the point - it could be done "easier" via self-help or automated but the law requires job creation. Us privileged people should seriously consider accepting that while it does not make economic sense, it does work from a convenience & social point of view. Both of those are powerful drivers.

View on HN

It would be better just to pay people for nothing rather than requiring them to do useless work.

> It would be better just to pay people for nothing rather than requiring them to do useless work.

You miss my point entirely. It is not useless work. Sure its not economically efficient, but on balance I'd rather have people streamline the refueling process than sit in front of a TV and collect a paycheque.

Why? They could get a hobby or another job. Some socialists argue that employment is morally wrong because it's the equivalent of slavery. I never bought that because we currently need people to work in order for the economy to function. But if working is really unnecessary and force people to work anyways, well what is that?

That's a false dicothomy. If the were not wasting their times on a unnecesary job, there is also a chance that they found a useful occupation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

* dichotomy

And no it is not one. There is a big difference between "economically efficient" and "wasting their times on a unnecessary job", especially in the context of GMI.

>I'd rather have people streamline the refueling process than sit in front of a TV and collect a paycheque.

You make it look that these two are the only alternatives when they are not (e.g. people could also be studying or actively searching for a job). Pretty much the definition of false dichotomy isn't it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com