Dear Steve:
So glad you answered with questions, the proper form of debate is not
challenge or personal confrontation but questioning the information,
rationale and assumptions that form the basis of anothers statement.
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Kurtz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: futurework <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: September 22, 1998 1:58 PM
Subject: rights/responsibilities
>Greetings,
>
>Rather than attempt a detailed refutation of parts of Thomas Lunde's post
>of today, I'm merely going to point out a few things (once again) that this
>list seems resigned to ignore.
>
>Work, a form of human action, involves intention, motivation, purpose.
>Otherwise it would be described as "movement". Whether the process involves
>monetary reward, barter, or self-subsistance via hunting, gathering, or
>agriculture, a willful decision to act is made.
Thomas:
This question formed around the word "work" ( by the way, I see this as the
implied question, Does or should everyone have to work?) was one that was
dealt with at the Conference. You see, there is a gamut of understandings
of the word "work", from one extreme, only that which produces renumeration,
to the other extreme, that to exist is to engage in work. No particular
answer was arrived at, though a strong point was made that the economist's
valuation of work did not cover many activities such as housework, child
rearing, care of the aged or infirm, acts of charity and good will and
mowing the lawn. You seem to indicate that you hold work as being the
result of wilful decision to act. Would that include housework? Would it
include sex? Would it include thinking? Wouldn't each of these activities
be the result of "a wilful decision to act"?
>
>I agree that it is desirable for communities to share when deemed
>necessary(within the group, and also with outsiders but probably less
>frequently), and that is the norm in my view of history. However, there are
>responsibilities demanded by these communities of their members. These
>require effort and will, as does work. The rewards are community acceptance
>and solidarity.
Thomas:
The key word here seems to be "responsibilities" and the implied question
is, "How, without renumeration could we expect members of society to work?"
I guess we are down to who will pick up the garbage if we give everyone a
Basic Income? That's like asking who will take the laundry to the washing
machine? The answer is whoever agrees too, or whoever wants too, otherwise
we will soon run out of clean clothes and someone will have to act. So far,
I see very few people who voluntarily wear dirty clothes as a result of not
being responsible or for any other reason except that they might be too poor
to afford to wash their clothes, or perhaps even have a home to wash them
in.
Another tack on this, let us imagine that I belong to a community that
supports me through a Basic Income. And I, fool that I am, I follow my
interests, which happen to be walking my dog, a totally non-productive
activity. After several years of this, I awake from my unemployed stupor
and realize that I know how much exercise a dog needs to be healthy and so
because I like walking dogs so much, I offer to walk several of my
neighbours dogs so that they will stay healthy. Now, they can't pay me, at
least not enough to make me self sufficient, but after another several
years, I notice some things about how dogs socialize and learn through play
from each other. I decide to become a dog trainer while I'm walking the
dogs. No one can pay me enough for my efforts though all are appreciative
of the healthy well behaved dogs they have. And because of this security in
their lives, they don't feel so guilty about not taking their dogs for walks
and therefore they don't have as much stress, in fact they actually have a
little pleasure. Now let's say my humble efforts, prevented a child from
being attacked and a worker from having a heart attack through reduced
stress. None of this is provable, though I'm sure statistics could be found
to justify almost anything. Have I performed a valuable service to my
community? Was it the result of responsibility or was it because I found it
interesting?
>
>A basic income is not a bad thing IMO. However, what should the community
>expect from everyone as cooperative members? Why the avoidance of this
>issue? Just as second hand smoke, toxic waste spills, acid rain from
>smokestack emissions, nuclear leaks, water pollution... have become
>recognized as infringements on the common good, so should every seemingly
>innocent human action be considered.
Thomas:
However, what should the community expect from everyone as cooperative
members? How about expecting them to feel secure and trusting that through
an act of fate or accident they will not be disenfranchised from the money
economy? How about having the feeling that you can stop long enough to take
some extra training. How about taking a year or two off from your forty
year work life to enjoy your children? How about getting involved for
several years in a community project that interests you? Work doesn't seem
to me so burdensome when I'm doing what I want to do rather than what I have
to do.
Idling a car motor, running water taps unnecessarily, or engaging in
>behavior which harms ones *own* health - since the community bears the
>total cost in socialized health schemes or insurance premium hikes. And I
>also claim that human fertility impacts the Commons and each current and
>future member of society.
Thomas:
"Why can't everyone be perfect" is the implied question here. Why can't
everyone change their behavior to totally support the wise use of the
resources of the community? I guess because we are not designed to be
perfect but to be experiencing creatures and that not all experiences are
beneficial against some absolute criteria, such as the Commons. But we
aren't here to be perfect, it is an impossible criteria. We are here to
experience.
>
>So, I leave it to you to decide if these types of 'responsibilities'
>constitute a part of the concerns of a list called "Futurework".
>Dissemination of credits, in itself, is work for the distributor alone.
Thomas:
And you have left us all with a question, "Do I consider that these types of
responsibilities constitute a part of the concerns of the list called
FutureWork? Well, it would be presumptious for me to answer for the list
but as a Listmember, I can voice the opinion of one - myself. Frankly, I
find the responsibilities argument unproductive. I have many concerns which
I express on FutureWork but "responsibilites" are not one of them. I tend
to think in terms of cooperation and sharing, rather than duties and
responsibilities.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lunde
>
>Comments welcome.
>
>Steven Kurtz
>Fitzwilliam NH
