# To Work or Not To Work.....



## Anathema (Aug 4, 2015)

....THAT is the question.

Here is the scenario.....

Option A:  You are provided with a sufficient financial endowment to ensure that you are capable of living your chosen lifestyle for the rest of your life BUT you cannot hold any meaningful job to increase your lifestyle or bring in additional money. You may partake in hobbies or interests of your own but they cannot create any physical or intellectual property for distribution to othesr.

Option B:  You can be guaranteed to work for the rest of your life but your income is liminted to only whatever level your physical and mental skills can directly earn for you.

To Work or Not to Work..... You Decide.


----------



## dannyboys (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> ....THAT is the question.
> 
> Here is the scenario.....
> 
> ...


You're a fucking idiot.
What does this have to do with 'Current Events'?
Let me guess. You're either a LIB or a Libertarian. You are presently fucking stoned.
What's the matter? Got tired of jacking off?
Oh ya. One last thing........you're on permanent ignore.


----------



## Pete7469 (Aug 4, 2015)

Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.


----------



## blastoff (Aug 4, 2015)

Option C:  Can't I just live on government handouts instead?  It just seems like it'd be easier that way.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> ....THAT is the question.
> 
> Here is the scenario.....
> 
> ...


 
I'll take Option A.

I'm not driven, and my kids are both very well off and self sufficient.


----------



## Anathema (Aug 4, 2015)

Pete7469 said:


> Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.



How many people do you know who can live the lifestyle they would truly prefer when they retire. I sure don't know many.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Option A:  You are provided with a sufficient financial endowment to ensure that you are capable of living your chosen lifestyle for the rest of your life BUT you cannot hold any meaningful job to increase your lifestyle or bring in additional money. You may partake in hobbies or interests of your own but they cannot create any physical or intellectual property for distribution to othesr.



Why not have both?


----------



## dannyboys (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.
> ...


I do.
Eat anything I want. Go anywhere in the world I want. Spend as much on my hobbies as I want. Live in whatever home I want. Drive my 2004 'Mass' wherever/whenever I want. (I should not have spent the $ on the 'Tubi' package last year!)
 And all I had to do was get a good education, which meant I could get a good paying job. I went to work every work day. I didn't blow money on booze and drugs. I never got into any kind of trouble with the law. I tithed and gave to charities and did volunteer work. And now I still have money left over to help those less fortunate.
Pretty fucking simple really.
I have ZERO tolerance for anyone who has no conscious, no morals. All the money in the world can't buy these basic qualities.


----------



## Bonzi (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.
> ...


 
I think I could.  I only need telephone, internet and a nearby free tennis court.


----------



## Anathema (Aug 4, 2015)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Why not have both?



Part of the concept is to see how people consider their financial livelihoods....

For example, the only reason I work for a living is because otherwise my bills go unpaid. Without a job I'm homeless, starving and have nothing to wear. I don't even have a means of transportation if I don't have a job. Offered the opportunity for Option A, I'd take it in a nanosecond. It would offer me the opportunity to do many of the things I LIKE to do, rather than the work I HAVE to do.

On the other hand, my father would likely have selected Option B, because he had that sort of driven personality where he just couldn't stop. He worked overtime long after he and my mother no longer needed that extra money or his job needed the extra time. In fact he took on extra responsibilities at work just to fill that extra time. He would not have truly been content if he'd lived long enough to actually retire.


----------



## DrDoomNGloom (Aug 4, 2015)

The part of the equation I am not seeing discussed is what % of wages do you get to keep with plan B.

As an intelligent individual I would think one would always opt for plan A.

Seems like the reason most of us work is so we can have a lavish lifestyle.

When given a choice most people want to benefit from the fruits of their own labors without being tied to a class.

I would like to think that this is one of the reasons for failing unions in our current society.


----------



## DrDoomNGloom (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.
> ...



Has no bearing on their earning capacity or lack there of. more like poor planning in life for retirement ...............


----------



## DrDoomNGloom (Aug 4, 2015)

He filled his time because he did not want to be at home ...............


----------



## Anathema (Aug 4, 2015)

DrDoomNGloom said:


> The part of the equation I am not seeing discussed is what % of wages do you get to keep with plan B.
> 
> As an intelligent individual I would think one would always opt for plan A.
> 
> ...



Taxes would be the same as they are in the USA currently. I would think most individuals would choose Option A, but I've seen many choose B when offered a similar opportunity. I would suggest the reason most people work is to pay their bills, and little more than that. I find that most people want to do as little as possible to get by unless they truly believe they can be "rich" by putting in marginally more effort. Most people (including myself) arent interested in putting in the time or effort necessary to be extremely successful.


----------



## Maggdy (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Why not have both?
> ...



Also, in my opinion that sometimes necessary to look to the future, not only the "current events" or "thousands of years ago" should be taken into account. Most people to demand the favorable perspective is. But for this need, must to be the faith. Not very a lot, just little faith, because there is the facts, which can be base.
I not have my computer, I watched this video on my Android mobile-phone and there were tears in my eyes.

Microsoft's Concept of How 2019 Will Look Like - Official Video


----------



## MACAULAY (Aug 4, 2015)

Sir:

It seems to me that the phrase in your post (Subparagraph A)....."your chosen lifestyle"....is a problem for the conundrum you propose.

My "chosen lifestyle" would be along the lines of a rich handsome Hollywood actor, and I would gladly retire if I could promptly receive the "endowment" that will accommodate me.   

Let me "chose my lifestyle" and you provide that endowment I'll need and I will chose A every time.


----------



## FJO (Aug 4, 2015)

Anathema said:


> Pete7469 said:
> 
> 
> > Option A sounds like retirement after completeing Option B. I'll call that Option C and go with that.
> ...



I see one every time I look in the mirror.

Prepared for it by working for an excellent employer for nearly forty years.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 4, 2015)

Well, for those fortunate enough to have the health to enjoy their years past three score and ten, individual personality determines what options will make their lives happy. Not just two silly options, but an infinity of options and sub-options.


----------



## Anathema (Aug 5, 2015)

MACAULAY said:


> Sir:
> 
> It seems to me that the phrase in your post (Subparagraph A)....."your chosen lifestyle"....is a problem for the conundrum you propose.
> 
> ...



That us,exactly what it was intended to imply.


----------



## jwoodie (Aug 14, 2015)

dannyboys said:


> Oh ya. One last thing........you're on permanent ignore.



So are you.


----------



## jwoodie (Aug 14, 2015)

There are too many variables to form a definite conclusion.  A better question would be:  How would winning a $10 million lottery change your life?


----------



## Anonymous1977 (Dec 20, 2015)

Anathema said:


> ....THAT is the question.
> 
> Here is the scenario.....
> 
> ...



Lol...disabled vets would automatically fall under "Option A."  Whoever is jealous of a disabled vet can go ahead and try to get disabled by becoming a veteran  ...jealous punk*ss nuts HAHAHAHA.




-


----------



## Abishai100 (Feb 9, 2016)

*Gender Garage*

Americans love comic books, since they speak to a laissez-faire attitude towards political debates about jurisprudence.  After all, multi-culturalism requires a more relaxed approach to leadership issues.

If we take a look at two special American comic book characters, Ursa (DC Comics), the evil female nemesis of the iconic superhero Superman, and Flash (DC Comics), the super-speedy guy who tackles problems that require attention to time, we find an interesting potential:

*Male vs. Female Dialogue*

Ursa is strong and ferocious (like an evil woman), while Flash is resourceful and clever (like a dutiful man), so pitting them against each other would illuminate interesting notions about human attitudes towards gender-oriented obligations.

Do we look at labor and employment in the same way when we talk about men and women separately?


----------

