• undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    Its work

    Working, in the way that we do, takes years off of our lives and ruins the quality of life of people in their final years too.

    I mean, its a meme and the message is put across very well but, for me, an important distinction for the comments section is that wealth increases life, as much as, if not more than poverty decreases it. Its wealth specifically and not wages too. After a certain point, increased wages actually have an inverse effect on lifespan which I’m sure comes as no surprise to anyone and the reason is both self explanatory and further supports what I’m saying.

    Just so its been said, wealth, in these instances, refers to capital that makes you money. More specifically, wealth gives you money from NOT from working.

    The exact point at which life expectancy and QoL increases is always around the exact level of wealth and passive income someone would need to drastically lower their working hours or stop completely.

    A second argument: women live longer than men. There are some biological factors for this, such as oestrogen being a vasodilator etc. However, it wasn’t really enough to explain the differences we were seeing.

    The thing is, this unexplained gap has started getting smaller and smaller. Now, unless there’s been a fundamental change in the average womans physiology recently, only one thing has changed in our society to the extent that it could effect something like this. Its also filtering through at around the exact time it should be, were the trend to be caused work.

    Nothing else reconciles all of the positions, let alone so perfectly and in one single stroke.

    Edit: so many typos

    • rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Its work

      Working, in the way that we do, takes years off of our lives and ruins the quality of life of people in their final years too.

      Work has never been so unstressful, if you look back at the history of mankind.

      Industrialization killed workers with 60 hour shifts in unsafe environments. Middle ages made you work 18 hours a day once you were 7 and made you starve if the harvest was bad. In the stone age your family died from hunger after you got killed on the hunt.

      Life expectancy was never as high as today.

      • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 hours ago

        And yet, we actually have the capacity now to provide for everyone’s needs without working anyone to death.

        So why don’t we?

      • Vilian@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        39 minutes ago

        You are being downvoted by people who didn’t read all of your comment, you are right, job has never being so unstressful but unstressful ≠ happy,

      • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Work has never been so unstressful, if you look back at the history of mankind.

        I agree that it was even worse before. Although, I’m a little puzzled as to what point is being made. Are you agreeing with me or not? I can’t tell.

        Industrialization killed workers with 60 hour shifts in unsafe environments. Middle ages made you work 18 hours a day once you were 7 and made you starve if the harvest was bad. In the stone age your family died from hunger after you got killed on the hunt.

        Life expectancy was never as high as today.

        Looking back at what I wrote, what point is all this agreeing with or refuting?

        To me, it seems like you’re arguing that the passage of time is a good thing. I don’t remember saying that the passage of time wasn’t good.

          • undergroundoverground@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            51 minutes ago

            You would have to define how you’re using “have to” here. I mean, I wouldn’t try to come and attack you for neither agreeing not disagreeing with a subject you still managed to have such strong a need to inject in.

            Partly because you might be bigger than me but mostly because I generally only see doing that as soemthing I strongly frown upon, in even the most severe of cases. I’m not particularly keen on forcing people to do anything, in fact.

            Really, though only you can answer that question.

            I’m glad we agree that our lives are probably better now than they for the people who literally had to live in caves, thousands of years ago, though. Thank you for including that important point.