• deaf_fish@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I guess I am confused, because on one hand you say the post is stupid, but in the other hand you seem to agree with it but think that the “correct” way would be very challenging.

    So it sounds like your only problem is with the implementation details. Am I understanding your point?

    • dream_weasel
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah you got it. I take issue with the fact that it’s an individual in the comic. In reality, automation comes first, then (probably) job loss at scale, then UBI, then a more idealized society that isn’t focused on individual labor.

      This graphic as it is looks like some dumb oversimplification from anti-work.

      • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see. I see the comic as pointing the interesting problem that arises from automation today.

        A tool like automation should be a boon to humanity and therefore a boon to all individuals. Instead, in the current reality, automation is causing a lot of problems because our system wasn’t designed for the level of automation we have today.

        I think the comic is stating that the system should work for us, not the other way around. You seem to agree with this point and I do as well.

        I don’t see the comic prescribing any order of changing policy to arrive at the “correct” panel. I also don’t see any specific anti-work themes.

        There is an assumption that more time to do what you want is better than more time at a job, but I don’t see this as anti-work as I think most people would agree with it.