Cav's Place

When someone makes a comment about moving to a post-work future, you get the usual reactions. Some mention laziness, even though on the one hand that has nothing to do with it and on the other many, many people who currently work cause more harm that way than if they’d just sit at home and not do much of anything. Some lash out against even the current welfare programs, even if those are almost always demeaning for those who use them and embarrassing for the societies that consider them in any way adequate. Some ask why should they work for others who don’t, even though if nobody’d be required to “earn a living” then normally people would only do what they’d truly want to do, if anything, while if the question is asked by some who simply can’t see themselves without what’s currently understood as a job even if they have to force themselves to do it, it actually means that instead of striving to escape that conditioning, they want all those who did escape it to be forced to suffer in the same manner in which they’re making themselves suffer.
But particularly infuriating are those who ask who would do the jobs that nobody wants to do if nobody’d need to “earn their living” in that manner. Of course, the first questions are how many of those jobs are actually required and how many of those couldn’t be automated, and by that I mean that it just can’t be done now or in the near future, not that it’d be more expensive to automate them than to exploit people who have no other choice, paying them low wages or not even that. But, for those truly undesirable but still absolutely necessary jobs, a better question should be who shouldn’t be doing them. For one, everyone, from individuals to authorities to society as a whole, should first do their part to reduce the need for such work, for example by reducing the amount of trash and cleaning up after themselves, picking up instead of requesting deliveries for everything, preparing their own food, making small repairs, taking care of gardens or public spaces, not causing damage or degradation, being more helpful and friendly in general, or on the other hand by improving public health. And then, if they’re so necessary, those jobs should be well rewarded and respected, not passed off to those seen as a lower caste, if I may use the term, while the rest see themselves as too good to perform them. On the one hand, that would mean that some people may choose to perform such jobs, probably temporarily, for the additional benefits, be they material or not, despite not needing to “earn their living”. On the other, it would mean that, if that won’t be enough, people should take turns performing those jobs for brief periods, because the only ones who could actually be seen as too good to perform jobs that are truly necessary are those who’d already be indispensable in other necessary fields.