Jan Matthieu wrote:
> Even more boredom, despair and drugs... So they will have to be educated to
> handle not having to work ?
Putting it more positively, they will have to be educated to make creative
(or at least 'satisfying') use of their time.
> Hm, maybe, most probably the people who worked
> with you didn't really do that completely out of 'free will'.
The participation in a programme at all wasn't completely out of 'free will',
that's correct. However, there was enough freedom on _what_ to work.
Everyone of these long-term unemployed could choose in which of the
programmes s/he would participate in. I designed my programme to be the
physically easiest and mentally most interesting one of them.
Unfortunately it seems that most participants chose my programme for
the former attribute, not for the latter. My disappointment was so see that
they weren't interested in the offered opportunities, and abused rather
than used given freedoms. (BTW, the authorities didn't like that I gave
them most freedoms. But it was an interesting experiment IMO.)
> In any case,
> from your description, they were already bored... so why bother, how much
> more bored can you get?
Your question sounds negative again. The favourite saying of a social
worker who advised all the programmes was: "You can always say 'the glass
is half full' or 'the glass is half empty'." Why don't you ask: "how much
LESS bored can you get ?" ? (Actually getting them LESS bored is one of
the main purposes of these programmes..)
> There will always be people who will not be able
> to handle the freedom of not having to toil any longer (as if this would be
> the 'natural' condition of man, it isn't), just like there are and probably
> always will be those who don't know how to handle drugs (but is that a
> reason to outlaw them, so that still others, much worse, can reap enormous
> profits?).
Sure, there will always be such people. But perhaps with good education we
can reduce the number of unfortunate ones ? (Yes Ray, the Arts can surely
be of assistance here!) Maybe the two groups you describe above happen to
be interrelated (if not largely identical) ?
> And so what if it would take efforts. Are you for or against the idea,
> that's what I would like to know.
My point was that we should take these efforts _before_ introducing BI,
otherwise the disadvantages of BI will outweigh the advantages.
> You don't sound like it. But then you will have to come with better
> arguments against it, Chris.
You got me wrong, Jan (like on other occasions).
--Chris
