My Economic Utopia

I feel bad contemplating the idea of doing enjoyable work that does not contribute to the basic areas of American consumption: food, water, housing, energy, transportation, healthcare, household appliances, computers, cell phones, stereos, air conditioning, insurance, banking, public parks. Could I possibly work within these fields and be happy? It's nice to contribute to the improvement of products. It would be good to help design more energy efficient and lower-priced goods. But this task of improvement only makes up a small fraction of an enterprise. The bulk of the work is in producing and servicing the current products. But how exciting can it be to build and sell washing machines? Whose first choice would this be? This type of work is essentially a chore. Thus, it seems that all we can do is 1) minimize the amount of time we spend on chore work, and 2) create conditions of chore work that facilitate socialization with co-workers and (in some instances) customers.

If we all do our share of the chore work, that should leave plenty of creative work for us to do. Those with a talent for teaching can teach, engineers can engineer, designers can design, etc. Things aren't looking so bad anymore, right? It gets even better.

Lastly there's the artistic work. This is the type of work that a small percentage of especially talented individuals are able to earn a living on. Whereas the creative work is something almost all people can earn money from, artistic work is more limited. As is presently the case, only a small percentage will be able to earn money from this type of work. However, all will be able to do artistic work in their free time.

I imagine that in this improved society I'm describing, it would be acceptable for the artists (musicians, painters, athletes, etc) to be exempted from the regular shares of chore work and creative work. They would be totally excepted from the creative work and partially excepted from the chore work. Though they wouldn't do their fair share of chore work, they would spend about 10 percent of their work time on those tasks, which I believe is enough to establish solidarity with the rest of society. We all benefit from this organization because we benefit from excellent music, sports, visual art. A world of mediocre art world certainly be a world of a lower quality of life.

So this is the economic utopia I've come up with. I'd be happy to hear any alternatives or amendments.

Modern Life Sucks

I graduated from College a month and a half ago and now need to find a job in order to survive economically. The problem is that when I think of all the roles that are played in our modern economy, the overwhelming majority of them seem quite horrible. Working as a waiter? Cashier? Bank teller? Factory worker? Construction worker? Research assistant? No thanks to all of these. Yes, there are roles to play that seem great. I would love to be a singer, or perhaps an educator, maybe a consultant, definitely a life coach, a therapist, a clinical psychologist, a psychiatrist, perhaps a counselor. But the problem is that even though I could find a role that I enjoy, I'd still be working within a system that necessitates others to spend their working hours doing unpleasant work. My Kantian conscience doesn't do well with this.

I previously thought that a Utopian society is possible if we make all the right changes. However, I'm starting to have second thoughts. Perhaps we can only lessen the unpleasantness of most work roles. Perhaps we can only lessen the depersonalizing and alienating conditions of most private and public hierarchical workplaces. Perhaps I'll have to settle for this limited progress.

Let's say that we all equally slit up the most menial tasks that must get done. This does not mean that the work that is left is spectacular. Professional work is usually quite specialized and operates within bureaucracies. Is being a politician really an engaging job? Doesn't engineering for a company get old after a while? Would I really want to manage mutual funds four of five days a week? I know I certainly would not want to manage an insurance company. That can't be fun. Even being a doctor seems quite tedious to me. I mean, how does that not get old? And think of lawyers; they just argue their clients' cases day in and day out. Imagine doing that for thirty years.

Perhaps I'm being too tough. Perhaps there are people who love doing these professional jobs. Perhaps the people who currently perform these jobs are quite satisfied. Well I certainly don't get this impression from the professionals I come across.

I just want people to enjoy their work. I recognize that task variety is not enough. We need our economy to be based on work that is intrinsically interesting and pleasurable--even after 25 years of doing the work. Is this possible? I'm not sure. All I can do try to make it happen.

However, if I see that pleasurable work has severe limits, there is still one important strategy left to use: the radical minimization of one's consumption. It's really quite simple: the less we spend, the less we have to work. Modern-day labor-saving technology makes the acquisition of food very cheap compared to pre-industrial times. Additionally, we can replace cars and trains with bicycles, which cost much less per month to operate. And there's no need for eating out; nor for paying for entertainment.

So maybe modern life doesn't have to be so bad after all. We shall see . . .

Work and Potential

The thought of working most jobs frightens me. Yes, the obligation of performing monotonous tasks day in and day out is a big reason for this. However, an even greater reason has to do with the opportunity cost of working a job. Even if the job is fun, one still must give up the potential for what could have alternatively been created during that time. If one is seeking only their own pleasure in life, finding a fun job would be ideal. However, I am primarily seeking the maximization of collective happiness. I therefore feel very uncomfortable when I must devote my time to activities that I do not view as the most essential for the achievement of that goal.

Being stuck doing tasks below my greatest utilitarian potential would plague my mind with a feeling of forced immorality. This is precisely what I fear. Hopefully I'll find an economic role that steers me clear of this.

Work Sucks

I've been thinking a lot about work lately . . . well really that is a subject I regularly think much about. What kills me is that it seems that the large majority of jobs really suck. I mean who the hell would want to build toasters, pave roads, work at the post office, do secretarial work, etc. A few years back I got a hold of some statistics that categorized the various occupations in America and then gave the percentage of the working population working in each. The statistics intrigued me and they still do, but they are also daunting. What is one to think about something like that? What is good about it? What is bad about it? I don't know, but I do like the idea of having an overview of our entire economy.

I dream about an economy where everyone loves their job. But how can we ever get there? What are the principles we need to follow in order to get to that point? What are the characteristics of today's jobs that cause so much unhappiness? The monotony? The lack of autonomy? What else?

There is a book related to this issue that I really want to read. It's called The Working Life: The Promise and Betrayal of Modern Work and it's written by Joanne B. Ciulla . Perhaps this is a subject I need to get more deeply into. Hmmm.

And this brings up the issue of all of the things I want to study: methodology, economics, economic sociology, information glut, education, city planning. It's really hard to decide what to study when? But now that I'm looking at this list I just made I think it would be best to work on the first three first.