Re: [pf] Workaholism {OT sorta}

At 01:44 6/4/2001 +1200, Diane wrote:
>"A Stinging Office Memo Boomerangs", by Edward Wong, is a story in 5
April's NY Times.  To me, it is indicative of everything wrong with our
society.  I will never understand why a person wants to live this way,
expect others to live this way and wants to conduct his relationships in
such way.
>
>As for his alleged excuse of growing up on an Oklahoma farm and spending
too many hours riding a tractor, my husband did the same thing -- except he
thought about Sartre, Thoreau and Wittgenstein.  He certainly never molded
it into a work ethic of cracking the whip.
>

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/3142/davdsviewhowliv.html#y1998_024
  but my favourite economist, Keith Rankin, originally on:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Academy/1223/rf_shorts_1998_06juna.html#y199
8_024
 [all on the same line]
   is:

Three Ways of Contributing to Society      (4 June 1998) 

Humankind is a social species, and is implicitly understood as being so by,
I would guess, 95 percent of us. (The exceptions are the extreme
individualist; the sort of people who go to bed with a copy of Ayn Rand
under their pillows.) 

The social good represents the "grand commons" of our species, meaning
everything that is shared (eg resources, cultures, environments,
institutions, infrastructures, science, ideas, ideals). We grow up with the
innate belief that everyone must contribute in some way to the maintenance
of the commons, suspecting - consciously or subconsciously - that if some
are seen to not contribute (free-riding) then others may be tempted to
free-ride also. Societies die when too many people become free-riders. 

In Western and Confucian cultures - eg under the "Protestant Work Ethic" -
the term "contribution" has come to be understood to mean "paid work". In
reality, of course, there are other forms of contribution. In addition,
much paid work does not contribute to any social ends, and may indeed be
socially damaging while serving strictly individual ends. 

For me, there are three broad categories of social contribution. 

The first is socially responsible market production. Here, we must
recognise that the contribution is the "net social product" arising from
the work, and may be unrelated to the efforts, time sacrifices or wages of
the paid workers. We should never regard market incomes as measures of
contribution. Nor should we regard "income tax" as a measure of an
individual's contribution to society. An individual who appropriates an
excessive share of market income will be regarded as having paid more
income tax than persons less able to claim large shares, but may have made
a smaller net contribution. 

The second form of social contribution is non-market production. This
includes a whole range of unpaid activities that take place at global,
national, local and household levels. Raising children is a particularly
important example of a non-market contribution; an example that occurs on
all four levels simultaneously. Each parent, through reproduction, is
creating the future (paid and unpaid) workforce of the world. 

The third form of contribution is "conservation", or "treading lightly".
The purpose of social contribution is to maintain the integrity of the
commons. One way to maintain that integrity is to adopt a lifestyle that,
while not involving any form of measurable production, at the same time
involves no destruction. Leaving the planet as we find it is a form of
contribution. 

Two cricket metaphors are apt here: "A run saved is a run gained", and
"Dropped catches lose matches". Contribution through conservation [good
fielding] is as important as contribution through production [batting]. And
the socially negative by-products of indiscriminate market activity
[dropped catches] tend to far exceed any negative impact arising from those
conservers who add little to the commons that sustain us. 

A welfare system that facilitates a balance of the three different forms of
contribution is more valuable to human society than a system that forces
everyone to contribute through just one of the three forms. Indeed, mass
labour market participation may contribute even less, net, than mass
idleness. 

Variety is the spice of life. Variety of contribution is the means of
safeguarding society.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
sent to Positive Futures list by David.
(David MacClement) davd@ihug.co.nz 
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
************************************************

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.aVx3Cb
Or send an email To: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com
This email was sent to: archive+pfvs@csf.colorado.edu

T O P I C A  -- Learn More. Surf Less.
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose.
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
==^================================================================