"You guys need to get a union!"

[Sissy Brown Short Shorts]

Yesterday I pulled up to a resi to deliver a treadmill. Honked, consignee came out and met me on the street. He offered to help only to warn he had injured his wrist. I said, "Don't worry about it" and started dragging the monster with "mechanical-lift only" stickers plastered on the sides up his steep steps with a little help from him. Once we got the damn thing to his porch he said, "I can't believe they have you guys delivering this -- that's freight! Think about your back!" "You're telling me, brother! Unfortunately UPS has had us carrying up to 150lbs since the mid-90s."

He exclaimed, "You guys need to get a union!" I laughed, "We've got one -- we're Teamsters." He shook his head, "It sounds your leadership is distracted."

What he should have said is “Sir, I apologize for being a lazy sack of and next year when I make my sixth attempt at my New Years resolution to lose weight, I will go to the store myself and lug it home.”

 

[Whither]

I'm a philisophical absurdist myself. What do you think is the best path to a worker free world? And what would people do with themselves without some work to apply themselves to?

I think we need two things to make this happen. First, a practically infinite source of free energy. Second, some sort of automated, absolute control over matter (like replicators from Star Trek). Then, when we meet those two conditions, we will have new, existential problems to deal with.

Until those two conditions are met, we are stuck with what we have, and I'm hoping not to devolve to a point where actual slavery becomes an acceptable option again. In the meantime, I do agree that everyone should fight and scrap for every penny they can get for their efforts. Negotiation and objective self-evaluation are skills everyone needs to develop.

My disdain for wage labor is not disdain for labor itself. The problem is not that we must exert ourselves to survive. The problem is we have become dependents of an inhuman system. We exert ourselves for ends (and via means) not established by us and our efforts are exploited through and through.

I'm no fan of automation. I agree with the notion that humans use tools, and machines use humans.

I wouldn't claim to know the path to a world beyond wage labor. But I do think, perhaps nostalgically, that it has to depend on workers fighting and scrapping for as much as they can, and then fighting and scrapping for even more to the point of bankrupting the system ... of course, were this successful, we would certainly be faced with new, existential problems.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

My disdain for wage labor is not disdain for labor itself. The problem is not that we must exert ourselves to survive. The problem is we have become dependents of an inhuman system. We exert ourselves for ends (and via means) not established by us and our efforts are exploited through and through.

I'm no fan of automation. I agree with the notion that humans use tools, and machines use humans.

I wouldn't claim to know the path to a world beyond wage labor. But I do think, perhaps nostalgically, that it has to depend on workers fighting and scrapping for as much as they can, and then fighting and scrapping for even more to the point of bankrupting the system ... of course, were this successful, we would certainly be faced with new, existential problems.

I'm not sure why you think the "system" is inhuman. It wouldn't exist if it didn't fill our needs, it was created by humans, and humans have come up with technologies and rules, let's say, to improve the efficiency of the system, or overcome the challanges created by changing conditions. Maybe the problem isn't that the system is inhuman, but that it is all too human, and can certainly be a reflection of the darker aspects of human nature.

The "system", whether you call it government, capitalism, wage labor, etc, is simply a word to encapsulate a particular type of human relationship. None of those systems exist apart from the humans involving themselves in it. Saying that we are dependent on a system is the same as saying that we are dependent on each other, which is both absolutely true, and absolutely terrifying.

As civilization has evolved, individuals have had to become specialized to, perhaps, an unnatural degree, because the exploitation of resources has to become more and more efficient. It simply takes too long to become proficient at any one thing for any one person to be able to hope to master more than a few crafts. It is a natural function of our limitations to rely on others to provide for the products and services we want and need.

You can lessen that dependence by continuing to learn more, or learn to live with less. We have as much control over the system as we have over other people, which is why using the government to force people to act a certain way seems so attractive, but it generally ends in disaster. The only part of the system we have control over is ourselves. To fix the system we must take responsibility for improving ourselves. The fact that we are free to do this is a great thing, not everyone throughout history, or even alive today, has or had that freedom. It's not easy, but it is that simple.

 

[Whither]

I'm not sure why you think the "system" is inhuman. It wouldn't exist if it didn't fill our needs, it was created by humans, and humans have come up with technologies and rules, let's say, to improve the efficiency of the system, or overcome the challanges created by changing conditions. Maybe the problem isn't that the system is inhuman, but that it is all too human, and can certainly be a reflection of the darker aspects of human nature.

The "system", whether you call it government, capitalism, wage labor, etc, is simply a word to encapsulate a particular type of human relationship. None of those systems exist apart from the humans involving themselves in it. Saying that we are dependent on a system is the same as saying that we are dependent on each other, which is both absolutely true, and absolutely terrifying.

As civilization has evolved, individuals have had to become specialized to, perhaps, an unnatural degree, because the exploitation of resources has to become more and more efficient. It simply takes too long to become proficient at any one thing for any one person to be able to hope to master more than a few crafts. It is a natural function of our limitations to rely on others to provide for the products and services we want and need.

You can lessen that dependence by continuing to learn more, or learn to live with less. We have as much control over the system as we have over other people, which is why using the government to force people to act a certain way seems so attractive, but it generally ends in disaster. The only part of the system we have control over is ourselves. To fix the system we must take responsibility for improving ourselves. The fact that we are free to do this is a great thing, not everyone throughout history, or even alive today, has or had that freedom. It's not easy, but it is that simple.

Now we are getting philosophical haha.

I think we disagree re: the influence/control a society (call it a way of life, culture, etc) exercises over its members. Yes, of course, capitalism, government, etc would not exist without our participation or, perhaps more accurately, our resignation and our thwarted sense of dignity. At the same time it is not as if any of us has enjoyed great latitude to live otherwise and it is certainly the case that we have been shaped, molded, and trained to an extensive degree by these forces -- from birth onward. The whole is more decisive than the parts that constitute it. As with the force of gravity, the whole sets the parts into an orderly motion.

What I mean is we are not independent atoms in a vacuum. No different than ancestors, we are born into a complex set of circumstances that we did not set into motion and did not choose. In order to survive, we must mostly reproduce those circumstances. Take for example the advent of industrialization/capitalism. Based on history, it seems that the people who have found factory life, the life based on commodity production/capital accumulation (the life we inhabit to the Nth degree now), the most intolerable, and mounted the greatest resistance to it, are the first generations exposed to it. Of course their resistance was not successful, or was co-opted, e.g., the communist/socialist states. Later generations adapt: what else is there do after defeat? Obviously we are highly adaptable creatures. For better and, perhaps, worse.

As a final analogy, ways of life are like languages. Strictly speaking people don't 'invent' languages, and consider how well invented languages have been adopted, e.g., Esperanto. Pretty similar to the case of 'intentional communities', communes, and the like. However. By speaking and writing, people do change languages -- largely as an unintended consequence, and largely the changes are superficial. We might not understand all that the kids are saying, but we recognize the tongue. Me, I'm foolish enough to seek a new 'language' because I don't find this one terribly free. I see no better path toward that than simply drifting. I understand that reaching it is unlikely and as far from my control as yours and the next person.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Now we are getting philosophical haha.

I think we disagree re: the influence/control a society (call it a way of life, culture, etc) exercises over its members. Yes, of course, capitalism, government, etc would not exist without our participation or, perhaps more accurately, our resignation and our thwarted sense of dignity. At the same time it is not as if any of us has enjoyed great latitude to live otherwise and it is certainly the case that we have been shaped, molded, and trained to an extensive degree by these forces -- from birth onward. The whole is more decisive than the parts that constitute it. As with the force of gravity, the whole sets the parts into an orderly motion.

What I mean is we are not independent atoms in a vacuum. No different than ancestors, we are born into a complex set of circumstances that we did not set into motion and did not choose. In order to survive, we must mostly reproduce those circumstances. Take for example the advent of industrialization/capitalism. Based on history, it seems that the people who have found factory life, the life based on commodity production/capital accumulation (the life we inhabit to the Nth degree now), the most intolerable, and mounted the greatest resistance to it, are the first generations exposed to it. Of course their resistance was not successful, or was co-opted, e.g., the communist/socialist states. Later generations adapt: what else is there do after defeat? Obviously we are highly adaptable creatures. For better and, perhaps, worse.

As a final analogy, ways of life are like languages. Strictly speaking people don't 'invent' languages, and consider how well invented languages have been adopted, e.g., Esperanto. Pretty similar to the case of 'intentional communities', communes, and the like. However. By speaking and writing, people do change languages -- largely as an unintended consequence, and largely the changes are superficial. We might not understand all that the kids are saying, but we recognize the tongue. Me, I'm foolish enough to seek a new 'language' because I don't find this one terribly free. I see no better path toward that than simply drifting. I understand that reaching it is unlikely and as far from my control as yours and the next person.

You seek a new way of being, but making it happen is out of your control? That sounds self-defeating. Do you even have an idea what this new way would look like?

Where you seem to see yourself as a victim of circumstance, I see myself as a beneficiary of opportunity. I don't have to spend hours every day obtaining and purifying my own water. I don't have to rely on my own pitiful ability to grow food. Those two things right there make me more free than most people who ever lived. But it goes on. We can get just about anything we want, just about whenever we want. It's a fantastic time to be alive. We are literally limited by our own imaginations, and our willingness to put in the effort to achieve.

Whatever system we live under, lest we choose to live in solitude, will necessarily be obligative to some degree or another. There's just no way around it. I would prefer to live in relationship with my fellow humans in such a way as we all have as much freedom to choose the level of obligation we will tolerate, what specific obligations we will accept, and how we will meet those obligations. As long as we live and interact with other people, that is the closest to true, individual freedom we can hope for. But I am always willing to entertain alternatives.

 

[PT Car Washer]

You seek a new way of being, but making it happen is out of your control? That sounds self-defeating. Do you even have an idea what this new way would look like?

Where you seem to see yourself as a victim of circumstance, I see myself as a beneficiary of opportunity. I don't have to spend hours every day obtaining and purifying my own water. I don't have to rely on my own pitiful ability to grow food. Those two things right there make me more free than most people who ever lived. But it goes on. We can get just about anything we want, just about whenever we want. It's a fantastic time to be alive. We are literally limited by our own imaginations, and our willingness to put in the effort to achieve.

Whatever system we live under, lest we choose to live in solitude, will necessarily be obligative to some degree or another. There's just no way around it. I would prefer to live in relationship with my fellow humans in such a way as we all have as much freedom to choose the level of obligation we will tolerate, what specific obligations we will accept, and how we will meet those obligations. As long as we live and interact with other people, that is the closest to true, individual freedom we can hope for. But I am always willing to entertain alternatives.

Are you high?

 

[zubenelgenubi]

Are you high?

Nope. If you have a specific critique about any part of what I wrote, I am interested to read it. I'm putting my perspective out there, what's yours?

 

[Boywondr]

Nope. If you have a specific critique about any part of what I wrote, I am interested to read it. I'm putting my perspective out there, what's yours?

Someone drank his milkshake.

 

[DELACROIX]

CEO David Abney's total annual compensation: (14,600,000)

James P Hoffa's annual salary:
(372,489)

Do the Math...Abney makes slightly less than in a week than what Hoffa makes in an entire year...



(N U friend friend Said)..Keep it simple guys...

 

[Poop Head]

CEO David Abney's total annual compensation: (14,600,000)

James P Hoffa's annual salary:
(372,489)

Do the Math...Abney makes slightly less than in a week than what Hoffa makes in an entire year...



(N U friend friend Said)..Keep it simple guys...

Look at what the rest of the board made. Maybe they should trim some of their pay to satisfy Wall Street?? Hahahahahha jkjk

 

[Federal Reserve Chairman]

What he should have said is “Sir, I apologize for being a lazy sack of and next year when I make my sixth attempt at my New Years resolution to lose weight, I will go to the store myself and lug it home.”

You should have said eat this: .

 

[Weaver]

What he should have said is “Sir, I apologize for being a lazy sack of and next year when I make my sixth attempt at my New Years resolution to lose weight, I will go to the store myself and lug it home.”

Cute. If everyone just went to the store themselves and stopped orderings things online you wouldn't have a job.