top 63 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 72 points 2 months ago (13 children)

Welcome to America. Please ignore the collapse and enjoy these breads and circuses.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    I'm not arguing that America isn't in dire straits at the moment, but the concept of having to work so hard to live you don't don't ever get to enjoy life is ancient and global. It's a sad state of affairs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    We used to talk about the future in terms of how much better things could get. Now we talk about it in terms of reversion to the mean.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I still talk about how much better things could get. I'm very excited about photovoltaics and new energy storage methods. If we play our cards right, the history books could describe the USA as the last great fossil fuel empire. Maybe, if things go really well: the last global empire. That'd be pretty cool. Unfortunately, to extend the metaphor, we're still at the table and our cards are pretty weak at the moment, and plenty of other players still have imperial ambitions, so we still gotta keep our heads in the game.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Yes, but the fact that it is happening in a country which contains the most wealth any nation has ever had in recorded history is quite special.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I don't think it is, really. Every weathiest nation in history got their wealth by taking it from others, from within and without. America is the latest symptomatic patient of a disease that's been around a long time.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    Only if you completely ignore all context and recent history, and the fact that many nations does not have all of the issues which the US has, but has actually figured out some solutions to some of the problems.

    Meanwhile the US seems more adamant than ever to make life insufferable for most of its citizens. The point being that the US is indeed very special in its failure to learn from others, despite having more wealth than anybody else.

    The "it has always been like this everywhere in the entirety of human history" is a pretty useless and false statement in this context.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • That's not what I said. In the US, like in every "wealthiest nation on earth" to date, there are and have always been those who do not get to share in the wealth, at least not enough that they can afford to not work to death. I don't know of any time or place in human history where the poorest of the community don't meet this condition, and in that way the US is not special. It is also not special in succumbing to rising wealth inequality, as the wealthy use their power to circumvent laws, self-deal, and extract wealth from the earth and their fellow humans with increasing efficiency. That shit happens all the time.

    The US has a few special circumstances which make it feel different: one, it's happening now and not in history books, two, it's larger (in economic hegemony) than any empire in recorded history, and three, the middle class (i.e. people who were not rich but did not have to work literally their whole lives) are currently being demoted to being mandatory-perpetual-labor poor, which for many of them means they are becoming aware of the problem for the first time in their lives.

    The fact that this shit has been going on forever doesn't make it less dire, but it doesn't mean the US is special in this regard, or that it hasn't been happening for the whole of US history or human history. It's just more salient to more Americans now compared to, say, two or three decades ago.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago*

    even the ones that earn quite a liviable income are some of the sourest people attitude wise. the only one that enjoys all these hobbies it is the one that can live off(mooch) the family or SO forever and free to do anything else(one that refuses to find a job), other than well off or rich people.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    It’s a gap year that common anywhere?

    I took time off before university but I worked the whole time, mostly nights for the extra pay, and saved up a lot while deciding what I wanted to do. Is that what this means?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

    a gap year, especially common in much of western europe, is a year in between the end of childhood education(say US high school) and the beginning of adult education(say US university) where a young adult is encouraged to find themselves before choosing their exact field of interest or life path.

    It is common in many countries.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    That is a type of gap year yeah. The stereotypical one is obviously that of which someone goes on holiday for most of a year without any responsibilities but it's harder to do that when you don't have the money to support it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    Over here its very common to do your studies but you take an additional full year after the end just for your thesis. During the year people usually work, travel and do the thesis.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    it is for college, some people take 1year off from school and then come back, usually changing thier majors, or even going to a different field. you dont want to be graduating with a degree you dont like, since you wont get financial assistance after you already graduated.

    if you mean a gap year "from a job, like quitting it" that is abnormal, and usually indicates something deeper going on.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I get the point and I'm not criticizing it...

    But are "gap year", "vacation", and "backpacking" not all the exact same category of thing?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    More or less, but "vacation" also implies an additional expense beyond just missing work.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Gap year and backpacking, for most speakers of English, also refer to kinds of travel. Other countries have to have multiple words for "missing work" (jesus christ)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    When a poor (most people) tells me they took a gap year, I usually assume that means that they got a job to pay for college. When a middle class person (entry level wealthy) tells me that they took a gap year I assume that means that they did fuck all until their parents forced them to get the fuck out of the house.
    It's only when talking to actual wealthy people that I assume the gap year included backpacking or vacation.
    Also when somebody says they spent their gap year backpacking, I don't assume that has anything to do with hiking or camping, but is more about spending a year not bathing and doing drugs with sketchy people in sketchy places.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 21 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    The less you eat, drink and buy books; the less you go to the theatre, the dance hall, the public house; the less you think, love, theorise, sing, paint, fence, etc., the more you save – the greater becomes your treasure which neither moths nor rust will devour – your capital. The less you are, the less you express your own life, the more you have i.e., the greater is your alienated life, the greater is the store of your estranged being.

    — Karl Marx, Human Requirements and Division of Labour Under the Rule of Private Property

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    How is thinking, theorizing, loving, singing, painting, etc wastes my capital?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (10 children)

    Not a waste of capital though?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (8 children)

    So let's take a philosopher who works by thinking and feeling. And this by thinking, feeling and doing other things he's increasing his labor potential. What am I missing?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    ...the actual labour? Philosophers aren't paid to just sit around thinking, it's only once they put the labour into publishing their thoughts that they get paid (possibly).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (6 children)

    Right but the moment of publishing is the last stepin the long, tedious thinking and analysis process. Without it there will be nothing to publish.

    Anyways, absolutist statements hold no water, other news at 11.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    I mean you're just arguing that thinking is labour for a philosopher. The statement remains correct. The philosopher is encouraged to think about publishable things instead of just for the freedom of thinking.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    Stretching the other way, painter who's not painting is wasting capital?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah, if they're not doing some other form of labour. I really feel like you might need to spend more time thinking on the meaning of the quote if you're wasting time trying to find gotchas where things that can potentially be done just for pleasure are being turned into labour.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    I went as far as reading it in original to make sure the meaning wasn't lost in translation but my questions remain unanswered.

    The quote I think operates on assumption that there's a direct correlation between time spent labouring and financial outcome. In capitalist world we have here, this correlation does not exist universally. it's still possible to engage creatively, express yourself and be paid for it. Not for everyone, but still possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    No, you definitely added that assumption yourself, it just talks about saving capital. You are assuming there is equal money to made in self expression as there is commercial execution.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    In Australia your gap year is taken after high school, before university. Most people get jobs.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    In the US some people take a gap four years and go to war. It's the American Vacation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    Now A.I. can do it for them, so it's totally fine

    /s

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    Welcome to the third world (somewhat). Source: Am from the third world.

  • source
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago

    hello, i've been traveling for 15 years and invite anyone interested by the implications of this meme to visit travel for information on how accessible the wider world is.

  • source
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    I don't think money is an entry barrier for most of those things. It is if you want to make any of those things a full time job.

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (10 children)

    The entry barrier is time.

    Poor people must make money all the time so they don't have time to do those things.

    That what op is talking about.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Swim, cycle, skate, play an instrument... These are all things people generally learn to do as a kid and require parents buying the equipment and/or access for you. A lot of poorer people can't swim because they have no place to learn how, and you can't do the others in you don't have equipment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Why do you reply this to my comment?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Because its not just time. Kids have a lot of time, and sometimes poor adults have a lot of time too when they can't find a job or they are disabled. The things OP mentioned require money for equipment or access. Can't learn to swim when nobody around you has a pool and there's no public pool around. You can't learn to ride a bike if you don't have one.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Swim lessons are expensive too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    My town/school district takes the second grade to the YMCA for swim lessons as part of their gym curriculum.

    I'd never heard of such a thing until we got the permission slip, but I thought it was pretty damn awesome.

    Both my kids are way better swimmers than me.

    We also have universal school lunches (and breakfast), and during the summer they give out free lunch to kids at the town pools, every day, no means-testing. And the town pool isn't that expensive to begin with (and also really nice), but they do have a sliding scale for that as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    It's nice you live someplace that demonstrates so much care for those in need. Easy to argue it's not even the bare minimum but it's still much, much more than other communities. Do mind sharing the area you live?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    As a kid I wanted to go to music school but we couldn't afford it because my single mother had two jobs and other three children to take care of.
    I did free lessons at the community center, borrowed my first instrument and got library books. No one encouraged me to do it, I just did it because music was something I wanted in my life.
    Now OK, that was me and I was just a kid with a lot of spare time right? What about adults?
    Well, if I graduated while working full-time (and I'm not exactly "Good Will Hunting" level of smart) everyone can do something as trivial as learning basic Spanish if they want.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    um. gap year. can't do that. you get enough gap years called unemployment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    How are ppl supposed to pay for bikes, skates, vacations, backpacking or instruments to learn? Maybe learning languages is pretty cheap, but that's about it.

    Depends on how you define "poor" though. I'd say if you live paycheck to paycheck to just cover the basic survival-costs with nothing left to save, you're already fucking poor.

  • source
  • parent