ForumGarden

Watch this video. It's almost 11 minutes but very entertaining and thought-provoking.

‪RSA Animate - Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us‬‏ - YouTube

While watching it a thought came to me: Imagine a society where everybody received a check from the government so long as they were employed, to use as they wished. Everybody received the same size check, regardless of skill level, education, job description or responsibilities. This pay would be large enough to take care of everybody's needs - a truly living wage.

All education and healthcare would be paid for, so anyone could pursue any career that struck their fancy.

All of this would be paid for by taxing the businesses, schools, and hospitals themselves. So I spose it would be virtually a closed system, but not necessarily.

Anyway, considering the information in the video. Could it work?

I had viewed either that video or another one very similar to it in the past. I know for myself that I function at a much higher level when what I'm attempting to achieve is purposeful.

When I was young it was easy to convince me I was serving a purpose in whatever I was doing at the time and so I performed very well at my jobs, though money was never my motivation. As I had aged I'd found my purpose become paternal, thus my motivation and appetite to make money decreased further. As it turns out, due to my purposeful desires, I am an outstanding father and partner. I know this because my family members constantly tell me so. I in turn encourage my family members to seek to understand the concept and importance of successful relationships.

Thanks for sharing the video, and I think your idea has merit and could be workable in some form. I'm convinced the present looks nothing like the future.

I've always been a pleaser. I never really cared about money. Drives my beloved nuts sometimes.

I've found I don't try as hard unless I'm supporting a bigger purpose. Self-improvement usually isn't enough.

So people will work better if as well as being paid for what they do they feel they are part of something, are valued and doing something worthwhile. People don't just work for money. Only an economist would actually find that surprising. You need to pay someone for doing work you value and also treat them with respect businesses that think the latter doesn't matter will fail unless they are the only employer in town, and as soon as there is a better alternative even of the pay is less people will leave. That is human nature.

gmc;1362747 wrote: So people will work better if as well as being paid for what they do they feel they are part of something, are valued and doing something worthwhile. People don't just work for money. Only an economist would actually find that surprising. You need to pay someone for doing work you value and also treat them with respect businesses that think the latter doesn't matter will fail unless they are the only employer in town, and as soon as there is a better alternative even of the pay is less people will leave. That is human nature.
Obviously it would be surprising to someone, because virtually nobody runs their business that way.

eta: I think you missed the part about larger extrinsic rewards can actually result in lower performance.

Accountable;1362749 wrote: Obviously it would be surprising to someone, because virtually nobody runs their business that way.

eta: I think you missed the part about larger extrinsic rewards can actually result in lower performance.


No I didn't miss the point I just didn't find it surprising. It ties in with the point I was making that people don't just work for money alone there`are more subtle issues involved without which the money ceases to be enough of an incentive. Not everybody is motivated simply by money. Try asking all the people you know who are self employed why they started their own businesses. I'd be willing to bet nine times out of ten making more money won't be the first reason they will list rather it will be a lifestyle choice or centred round having a greater sense of self esteem. The employer making larger extrinsic rewards is treating people like rats expecting them to perform better for more cheese.

Why do nurses and the like do what they do or any vocational kind of employment? It's not just is .it?to make money

Accountable;1362749 wrote: Obviously it would be surprising to someone, because virtually nobody runs their business that way.

eta: I think you missed the part about larger extrinsic rewards can actually result in lower performance.


You must be in the wrong business sector.

Many businesses have long realized this.

At least within the High Tech world.

This stuff was new back in the 1970's, perhaps.

LarsMac;1362758 wrote: You must be in the wrong business sector.

Many businesses have long realized this.

At least within the High Tech world.

This stuff was new back in the 1970's, perhaps.


Glad to hear it. I don't know when this was produced. I do know that it's not common knowledge in my blue collar circles or at my high school. Though since seeing it a couple of us were toying with the idea of having an "open assignment" day. Produce something related to what we've studied this week (6 weeks, whatever). Your choice of assignment and product.

LarsMac;1362758 wrote: You must be in the wrong business sector.

Many businesses have long realized this.

At least within the High Tech world.

This stuff was new back in the 1970's, perhaps.
Do you think it could be assigned to an entire society?

Accountable;1362765 wrote: Do you think it could be assigned to an entire society?


I don't see quite how.

Humans are not yet ready for that level of leadership.

Let me try to clarify.

Humans seem to deal best with localized society.

Sure the grand concepts of Nation, and planet, the "global tribe" and the like sound cool to most folks, but in reality, the average human is pretty provincial.

They see world events and even national events in the context of how they will affect their own circle of influence.

I think that in the future, this type of management and motivational work will trickle down to the local high school and city/county Admin, and that sort of thing.

But getting that all worked into standard societal structure is going to take an entire national structure to evolve into such a thing, and that will take, first, resolving the enormous differences in wealth across the globe, resolving some of the vast differences in philosophy, and then figuring out who is going to take on the responsibility of overseeing such a thing.

Fascinating idea, to be sure, but I see it being a far more local thing for a long time.

LarsMac;1362767 wrote: Let me try to clarify.

Humans seem to deal best with localized society.

Sure the grand concepts of Nation, and planet, the "global tribe" and the like sound cool to most folks, but in reality, the average human is pretty provincial.

They see world events and even national events in the context of how they will affect their own circle of influence.

I think that in the future, this type of management and motivational work will trickle down to the local high school and city/county Admin, and that sort of thing.

But getting that all worked into standard societal structure is going to take an entire national structure to evolve into such a thing, and that will take, first, resolving the enormous differences in wealth across the globe, resolving some of the vast differences in philosophy, and then figuring out who is going to take on the responsibility of overseeing such a thing.

Fascinating idea, to be sure, but I see it being a far more local thing for a long time.Oh I could never see the entire globe under any kind of single central system, no matter what kind. I was referring to a country. But I'm with you. It's not something likely to happen even on a small scale. It's too foreign to any culture, so far as I'm aware.

Accountable;1362768 wrote: Oh I could never see the entire globe under any kind of single central system, no matter what kind. I was referring to a country. But I'm with you. It's not something likely to happen even on a small scale. It's too foreign to any culture, so far as I'm aware.Have faith, my boy, have faith. Consider the fact that barring a cataclysmic event (and that may not even be enough) 1,000; 10,000; 100,000; 1,000,000; or even 1,000,000,000 years from now a lot will happen. Our participation in this is but amongst the smallest of sparks.

Accountable;1362768 wrote: Oh I could never see the entire globe under any kind of single central system, no matter what kind. I was referring to a country. But I'm with you. It's not something likely to happen even on a small scale. It's too foreign to any culture, so far as I'm aware.


It CAN happen on a relatively small scale. Communal living can be similar.

Everyone works for the good of the group as a whole. Survival of the group is primary.

It takes a level of social evolution that seems rare today.

At least within human society.

LarsMac;1362772 wrote: It CAN happen on a relatively small scale. Communal living can be similar.

Everyone works for the good of the group as a whole. Survival of the group is primary.

It takes a level of social evolution that seems rare today.

At least within human society.
Still, it makes good business sense.