As explained in the article Learning Careerism As A Moral Reward System; our society, specifically our education system teaches and prepared us for a careerist lifestyle. Or simply put, working for money is considered success in our societies.
But not only does it teach us to work for currency. Just as we are put down in school for having poor grades, in society we are put down and even ridiculed, almost as criminals, for having low paid jobs, and even more so for having no paid job at all.
This video shows how people are eager to help someone until people assume they are homeless, and that the homeless are also more eager to help people in need:
We live in a society where those with the most important jobs to our survival work long hours, often 
physically tiring and are not paid very much. There are only a few kinds of workers that we really need, farmers/food producers, construction/manufacturers, delivery, maintenance/repair, and public services such as hospital workers and good police.
As time goes on there is more automation, so there are less jobs available but more people and so more food, building, maintenance, healthcare, and so on is required. However farmers are being paid less as time goes on, many selling their farms to get a different job, as their valuable work doesn’t even pay the bills. Construction workers, store workers, repair services and delivery are often paid low or minimum wage. Construction or farm work is much physically harder than sitting in an office trading stocks, yet those people are praised because they make more money.
There are often stories of fire-fighters and medical workers on strike because they are on a low wage or have poor quality working conditions, but these are the true heroes of our society, these people save us from death. Farmers, medical workers and fire-fighters should be the highest rewarded and praised workers of society, not some of the least.
We should also give more credit to those who are building and maintaining places for us to live comfortably in.
It is shameful that the harder a job is, the less money the workers will make, and those who make the most money in society actually have the easier jobs and often work the least.
In our society even these workers that we require for survival are not made a priority, money is. We are taught that if we work hard we can get a good job, and a good job pays well, most people still believe this and look up to those with ‘well-paid’ jobs and look down on those with a low paid job or those who are considered poor.
The truth is that in almost all cases the LESS-ethical the persons job, the more money they will earn. We could consider the most ethical of all work to be charity work, helping those with less, yet most of this work is either volunteer work or paid minimum wage. Those without jobs at all are looked down on, even when they volunteer to do charity work. Looked down on by those who mess around with numbers to make bigger numbers (trading stocks and shares), or managers; people who make sure that other people work so that they can take a larger cut.
Our parents tried to teach us good ethics and morals, but then they told us to obey at school, which taught us that these twisted careerist ideologies were moral and ethical.
Those without any paid employment, often also without any debt are sometimes homeless, and our society also tells us that they are homeless because they are drug addicts or alcoholics, and therefore we should not help them, even though many of these people are not drug-addicts or alcoholics, and if they are, it is often a sickness that is created by the world they live in, they simply didn’t have enough money or got kicked out by an ex-partner. Relationship breakdown and illness can happen to anyone.
So we have those who work very unethical jobs making ridiculously high amounts of money, those looked down on for having low paid work, even though it is physically more productive, those who are ridiculed for not having a ‘paid’ job or claiming some kind of state benefit, and then the homeless who cannot even apply for many kinds of state benefits or most jobs because they cannot complete the forms without a valid address, and often an email address or phone number; sometimes even the phone number must be a landline number, and of course to apply for a job most of the time these days a printed Résumé/CV is required.
Amnesty international reported that approximately 3.5 million people in the U.S. are homeless, many of them veterans. It is worth noting that, at the same time, there are 18.5 million vacant homes in the country.
AP also reports that nearly 1 in 2 Americans have fallen into poverty.
CBS News reports that “According to a new report out this past week, poverty in America has reached its highest level since 1965″.
So as a whole this brings up a question, apart from a few specific careers, is paid work ethical? How many ethical jobs do you know that are helping people to survive or live comfortably and are not profiting some corporation, or share holders, sat back, relaxing, watching the money you make entering their bank accounts.
When we do get paid, a high percentage of that money gets cut to go to government as income tax, however we give them another chunk of money from VAT, another tax, then depending on where you live there are multiple other taxes such as state tax, council tax, road tax, import tax, property tax, inheritance tax, and so on…
Click for larger image
Share on bebo- Blog this!
- Bookmark on Delicious
- Share on dzone
- Share on fark
- Share on faves
- Share on FriendFeed
- Tip on Hyves
- Share on identica
- Share on linkagogo
- Share on Linkedin
- Share on mrwong
- Share via MySpace
- Share on netvibes
- Share on nuJIJ
- Share on Orkut
- Share on Posterous
- share via Reddit
- Share this on sphinn
- Share on technorati
- Tumblr it
- Share on vkontakte
- Share on xing
- Buzz it up
- Subscribe to the comments on this post
- Print for later
- Bookmark in Browser
sending...
Excellent article. Growing up on a farm - I could see how growing foods and raising animals yielded a comfortable life for my grandparents, and in my lifetime, roles have been reversed.
Glad to see many people taking to urban farming to grow food in cities - the movement is slowly taking hold. Hope that in a few short years people with look at the banksters and wall st. gangters in the same vein they currently see the homeless at.
Congrats to Aaron Jackson for his insight into the changing landscape and mindset of America
Your article is horrible.
1. “We live in a society where those with the most important jobs to our survival work long hours, often physically tiring and are not paid very much. There are only a few kinds of workers that we really need, farmers/food producers, construction/manufacturers, delivery, maintenance/repair, and public services such as hospital workers and good police.”
Really? so what about the innovators here? construction/manufacturing… ok so what is there to construct now a days without educated architects and engineers (relatively high paying jobs) for the designs? Delivery… not efficiently possible without HIGH PAID engineers in the first place. Repair… what is there to repair if there is no incentive for engineers and scientists to innovate? If all the money is gonna go to those unskilled labor, then there would be no innovation.
2. “As time goes on there is more automation, so there are less jobs available”
Really? Automation has lead to the creation of many jobs. There would be no Jobs in IT or for machine operators. Also without automation EVERYTHING would be more expensive since mass production would be a lot harder (which would make even more americans fall below the poverty line)
3. “It is shameful that the harder a job is, the less money the workers will make, and those who make the most money in society actually have the easier jobs and often work the least.”
haha what?? answer this question. IF you grabbed those workers that supposedly have the harder jobs and put them in the jobs of those that have the “easier job” how would they fare? How would these construction workers and farmers do if you put them in a laboratory and asked them to do research? How would they do managing pension funds for retired people?
Now grab the people that work in the labs, the scientists, engineers, and also the other “easier” jobs that you talk about and put them in construction or farming. It would take them a week perhaps to get up to speed?
Have you heard of supply and demand? It applies to labor here… these “harder” jobs (which are not even harder, they are just more physically draining) can be done by more people as they do not require as much skill and specialization as the “Easier” jobs. When more people can do the same job, how can you call that easier than one that takes years of studying? Do you only consider physical work to be hard work? What about the hours of study and research requried by scientists and Phds? You would be surprised if you heard the actual number of hours that people in wall street actually work (I do agree with you though that they make way too much money for what they actually add to society, this only goes to wall street people though)
3. “The truth is that in almost all cases the LESS-ethical the persons job, the more money they will earn. ”
4. “Looked down on by those who mess around with numbers to make bigger numbers (trading stocks and shares), or managers; people who make sure that other people work so that they can take a larger cut.”
your making math sound like its something that people just use unethically. As if there was no skill involved in it. There is actually a lot of thinking and it requires knowledge that the “harder” job people will probably never obtain. People that are good at math challenge their brains. Managers are needed because sometimes it is impossible for one person to do all of the jobs that a team needs to succeed. So let me get this straight, you are complaining about managers, is it a better option for them to just not hire people at all? So no jobs created?
First of all grammatically incorrect. What are these unethical jobs supposedly?
5. “So as a whole this brings up a question, apart from a few specific careers, is paid work ethical? How many ethical jobs do you know that are helping people to survive or live comfortably and are not profiting some corporation, or share holders, sat back, relaxing, watching the money you make entering their bank accounts.”
Ok so first your assuming that profiting corporations, share holders, etc. is unethical. I agree that profits to corporations can be exesive but they are providing goods and services for everyone to benefit from. 2nd you’re making it sound like they’re work is really easy because they are in an office when in reality is much more intellectually challenging (which in a modern world is clearly more important) than physical work. How supposedly is the money you earn entering their bank accounts? judging by your statement “trading stocks and shares” you clearly don’t know how the financial world works.
I know many of these jobs. Take any college major, then think about the people that go on to do important research in each one of those fields. That is an important job for each one of those fields.
About more americans falling into povery: this is tricky, because you are looking at it in relative terms. Meaning that you think that people are worse off than before because more are falling under the poverty line. If you look at it from an absolute time frame of reference, people in 1965 had no computers, and countless other advantages that have improved the quality of life since that year. So what are you arguing for? is your goal for people to make the same amount of money (you care more about pay equality) or do you care about driving innovation and imporving the daily lives of humanity as a whole?
“looked down on for having low paid work, even though it is physically more productive”
-I guarantee that middle income people today live better healthier lives than those in 1965. Why do I quote this? because the people that supposedly are being physically more productive (like farmers and construction workers) did not drive any of the innovation and intellecual advancement necessary for this to happen.
I recommend you take some basic economics clases before you keep writing things like these. It is good that you are writing articles, but you you need to stop being so blind to the forces that truly advance humanity. What is more important, humanity’s intellectual advancement or income equality? Should we really be looking at other people to gauge the quality of our lives?
Firstly you totally didn’t get some of what I said so some of the arguments don’t even stand.
Secondly you are suggesting that money is required for human survival.
Thirdly you are arguing that I am complaining about innovation, I don’t see how innovation doesn’t fall into Engineering.
I agree that I left out research, but I was simply giving some examples, I didn’t list every job I thought was good and I didn’t suggest every other job was un-ethical.. I am talking about jobs as a whole, from a natural point of view.
Your reply seems to show a small picture, rather than the larger one, one that the majority see, work being a required thing, something useful that contributes but the majority of work doesn’t contribute and although a few amazing people have created amazing things in the past few decades innovation hasn’t really sped up with all the new jobs, all the new people and all the new and improved education systems.. Doing new things, usually with imagination is where new things and improvements come from, most work is repetitive hard work, physically and/or mentally stressful, including office work, call centres, etc.. these are the people doing the actual work, the higher you go up the ladder the easier it is, the lower levels of management can be stressful, but the higher you go the less you do and the only real stress usually is that if you mess up, then the mess is big. Of course we should have innovation, you cannot tell me that the majority of work contributes to anything but the monetary system.
Supply and demand doesn’t really work with the majority of farming, corporations go to farmers and tell them how much they will pay, the farmer can accept or refuse, every once in a while that price goes down because of automation and battery farming, the farmer can again accept or refuse, if they refuse then they make no money and struggle to find someone else to sell to, but if they accept they take a pay cut, this has been especially obvious to dairy farmers.
When I was talking about money, I was only talking about money, not the quality of life, that was another point, quality of life and money/debt do not go hand in hand, hope I don’t need to go into that deeper.
Automation has in some cases created more work but in virtually every case makes even more money for those higher up than before because of productivity, and I am not complaining about productivity considering I am more than half way through by Robotics degree, but I am complaining about economic ethics. Clearly as more automation.. and productivity increases.. life will improve, no doubt, but there will be less jobs, more stuff, less money for people to earn except in probably fewer and fewer industries over time and of course unemployment is already an issue, only those that work can afford, and those who don’t work cannot afford, even though there is more productivity and ‘stuff’ than ever before. Money and work are fallacies unless they are actually useful to human life, instead of corporate profits and yes.. almost all corporate profiting is unethical and immoral.
Not to be a dick, but look at the images and they explain half of this stuff.. How like a homeless person may have no money, but someone with a house, car, technology, new clothes and food has less than no money…
How a guy working in an office has a stressful job.. Unsure how to make my points any clearer.
“Firstly you totally didn’t get some of what I said so some of the arguments don’t even stand.”
- Like what?
“Secondly you are suggesting that money is required for human survival.”
-where?
“I don’t see how innovation doesn’t fall into Engineering.”
- Me neither, I never said this
“I am talking about jobs as a whole, from a natural point of view.”
- What the hell is the natural point of view of jobs?
“he majority of work doesn’t contribute and although a few amazing people have created amazing things in the past few decades innovation hasn’t really sped up with all the new jobs”
-Really? have you heard of moore’s law? I’m sure you have since you’re in robotics. You have no evidence to say that new jobs haven’t sped up innovation. Plus new jobs are a result of innovation, not the other way around
“These are the people doing the actual work, the higher you go up the ladder the easier it is, the lower levels of management can be stressful, but the higher you go the less you do and the only real stress usually is that if you mess up, then the mess is big.”
- The higher ups either already went through doing that hard work or helped create those lower jobs in the first place. As a higher up you are responsible for the work of the people that are below you. There is a higher amount of risk involved in being a higher level manager. A good fair world would take risk-reward into consideration and the higher up managers do take a higher risk in their daily activities than the people below them doing the “hard” work
“you cannot tell me that the majority of work contributes to anything but the monetary system.”
- First of all what do you mean by this? It sounds like this “monetary system” you are describing is a vacuum where money and well-being just disappears. Can you explain this welath sucking black whole “monetary system” that you are describing that supposedly doesn’t help anyone?
“Supply and demand doesn’t really work with the majority of farming, corporations go to farmers and tell them how much they will pay, the farmer can accept or refuse”
- This is supply and demand. Take a basic econ course and you’ll understand. If there is too much supply, the farmer simply cannot give himself the luxury of trying to sell at a high price since the buyer will just go to someone else and purchase the goods at a lower price. When supply is low or demand is high, the farmer can simply refuse to sell at a certain price and look for a buyer willing to pay a higher price for the goods. SUPPLY AND DEMAND ALWAYS “WORKS” (more like always applies), unless there is a price freeze by the government where the price is set at a certain point by law, or when there is a price floor or ceiling.
“if they refuse then they make no money and struggle to find someone else to sell to, but if they accept they take a pay cut,”
- Either too much supply or not enough demand.
“Automation has in some cases created more work but in virtually every case makes even more money for those higher up than before”
- Why is this bad? Automation can lead to workers losing their jobs but it also creates new ones. Net result probably more money for the higher ups and the same amount of money for the workers since by switching to the new created jobs they will probably make the same amount of money as they did before. Now there is more productivity, more money for the higher ups, the same money for the workers, and the creation of jobs that actually fit the productivity needs adjusted to the new innovations/ automation.
“I am more than half way through by Robotics degree”
-Congrats, good stuff. This will for certain become more and more relevant to our daily lives. I will always respect those entering fields that impact the technological advancement of society.
“I am complaining about economic ethics”
-Again what is this economic ethic you’re talking about? Is it more ethical to have income equality or to reward those that innovate/ create (entrepreneurs also create so don’t think this only goes to scientists) more than the ones that don’t.
“productivity increases.. life will improve, no doubt, but there will be less jobs, more stuff, less money for people to earn except in probably fewer and fewer industries over time”
- There have been more industries created over time than ones that have disappeared. Take the oil industry, financial, manufacturing, technology that emerged over the past century. I see a trend where more industries are created. The ones that disappear are not needed for society anymore and they become obsolete. If they still existed they would not add any value.
“unemployment is already an issue, only those that work can afford, and those who don’t work cannot afford, even though there is more productivity and ‘stuff’ than ever before.”
-There is always the option of becoming autonomous, living in a farm and producing and consuming only what you need. Therefore you kind of flipped the table from when you said that I was “suggesting that money is required for human survival” since you are implying it yourself
“Money and work are fallacies unless they are actually useful to human life”
-I don’t think you know what a fallacy is From Wikipedia: “an error in reasoning often due to a misconception or a presumption. Some so-called fallacies are not rhetorically intended to appeal to reason but rather to emotion, or a more nuanced disposition.” It definitely doesn’t apply to work, I can see how you can make an argument for it applying to money but you are reaching. Fallacies apply to statements, not things or actions.
“almost all corporate profiting is unethical and immoral.”
-Can you expand on this? This is interesting… you should explain sentences like this if you are expecting to have any validity. From where I see it, corporate profits help the economy. With profits, corporations have more money to invest. When corporations invest they create jobs and stimulate the economy. Corporations drive innovation (Don’t think I think that they are the most important drivers of it though, but they do fund a decent amount of research) since. The only scenario that I can think of where corporate profits may be unethical is when they are monopolies or when the profits are a result of conflicts of interest.
“Not to be a dick, but look at the images and they explain half of this stuff.. How like a homeless person may have no money, but someone with a house, car, technology, new clothes and food has less than no money…”
-I don’t see what it explains and The cartoon is wrong. I have seen it before and we actually commented on it in one of my econ classes. it is deceiving especially because the title says “net worth”, when in reality none of those figures really express net worth or takes into consideration the intangible value of the assets purchased by those other people with that debt. Take the guy with the car for example, yeah he may be in debt by X amount, but you can’t forget the current value of the car or the utility it provides him, the 2 things combined will probably give you a value of > X. Take the credit card example, you may be in debt but you actually purchased goods that do have a value to you (hopefully, unless you gambled and lost it all). Take the guy with the student loan, yeah he is in debt by Y amount but does the amount of extra money that he will make with that degree justify the current debt he has (the answer is most likely, unless you got a degree that offers no jobs). Therefore in reality the net worth of all of those people is higher than that of the homeless person factoring in the intangible value of some of the assets purchased with those loans.
And lastly, you’ll understand things better once you enter the workforce. It is important though that you do your research right and understand the concepts behind what you are trying to express. It’s fine because you are a college student and you’re still learning. remember that “fairness” doesn’t mean equal pay for all. In my opinion fairness relates more to the value we individually add to society. Managers make more money because they assume more risk (I do think it becomes a problem though when they start making more money than people that think and innovate, but an argument can be made either way).
Anyway, keep up the good work on that Robotics degree! We need more people like you innovating (and at the same time not expressing uninformed opinions since we already have plenty of that)