Here's an interesting opinion piece from the New York Times which asks the question whether or not working is necessary anymore.
I'd never thought of it in those terms, but we must admit that the information age has made it more and more acceptable to work in non-traditional ways. Many of those who have left the work force aren't destitute. They've found other ways to support themselves besides a traditional job, and the wealth of the nation keeps on growing. As the author points out, when a nation has the kind of wealth we have, even a slight increase (as we're experiencing now) is still a tremendous amount of money and will still leave us far wealthier in the future.
There are, however, costs for supporting ones self through what might be called "non-work," but they are mostly societal issues. But, with the breakdown of the traditional family and the remarkable rise in the number of people whose personal interactions are virtual, it may be that we're quickly establishing a new, and far different, society anyhow. And, it may be that neither political party or ideology has caught up with that new reality.
What do you think?
" Those riches mean that we can probably find ways to subsidize through public means and private a continuing decline in blue-collar work. Many of the Americans dropping out of the work force are not destitute: theyre receiving disability payments and food stamps, living with relatives, cobbling together work here and there, and often doing as well as they might with a low-wage job. 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.) "
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/o...?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130224&_r=0
I'd never thought of it in those terms, but we must admit that the information age has made it more and more acceptable to work in non-traditional ways. Many of those who have left the work force aren't destitute. They've found other ways to support themselves besides a traditional job, and the wealth of the nation keeps on growing. As the author points out, when a nation has the kind of wealth we have, even a slight increase (as we're experiencing now) is still a tremendous amount of money and will still leave us far wealthier in the future.
There are, however, costs for supporting ones self through what might be called "non-work," but they are mostly societal issues. But, with the breakdown of the traditional family and the remarkable rise in the number of people whose personal interactions are virtual, it may be that we're quickly establishing a new, and far different, society anyhow. And, it may be that neither political party or ideology has caught up with that new reality.
What do you think?
" Those riches mean that we can probably find ways to subsidize through public means and private a continuing decline in blue-collar work. Many of the Americans dropping out of the work force are not destitute: theyre receiving disability payments and food stamps, living with relatives, cobbling together work here and there, and often doing as well as they might with a low-wage job. 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.) "
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/o...?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20130224&_r=0
