If you are unemployed because you are genuinely unable to find work, then that's an entirely different matter (and I apologise, and wish you all the best for finding work). I got the impression that you were unemployed by choice, especially given your various statements (and the rest of this post is partially prefaced on that assumption). Therein lies the problem. While your personal situation may work for you, it will not work for a vast majority of people. So my response was in regard to the various broad unqualified statements you made. I personally don't have anything against your choice. I can understand where you are coming from. However, your statements seem to reveal a certain level of naivete.
There are many people that must work in order to pay their families living expenses as they are married and have children. Even with welfare they might not have enough money to live above the poverty line. So they must work. While they could choose not to work, its hardly much of a choice.
I'm guessing your living with your parents (based on your statements). What if your parents decided to stop working? While in your circumstance they might have saved up enough money to live comfortably for many years, they had to work to get it in the first place. There are many people that cannot live with their parents for various reasons.
> Jobs are one avenue for this fulfillment.
I didn't say jobs are the only avenue for fulfilment, merely one avenue to it. People in undesirable jobs generally aren't there by choice. This breaks down your assertion that jobs aren't necessary.
> I think it's a great thing to live with your parents. And if there are a lot of NEETs in japan, maybe there are reasons behind it which go beyond "naivete". Calling this an epidemic without trying to understand the reasons behind it is easy.
Its an epidemic regardless of the reason behind it. I'm fully aware of the tough working conditions many face there, and that it will drive some to avoid employment due to the unbearable pressure. I suspect there are many that are simply just unmotivated to work, and have the means to do so.
>> and people will find all sorts of ways to justify their apparent lack of motivation.
> Why should people have any motivation? Is it some kind of a moral duty? Don't you read that people can be angry, desperate and resentful about their economic situation?
This is where I see the issue. You have formed opinions which justify your lack of motivation and project it onto others. Your situation might work for you, but it does not work for everybody. Yet you do not understand this:
"I always sense there is this weird belief that "people must work and belong to something so that society can function". I can't really express it. What bothers me is that somehow, even after the new deal and social programs, not having a salary or income is seen as some sort of a bad thing, and often, it will be a bad thing for your mental health (isolation, lack of personal goals)."
These social programs only function because others work. Their taxes pay for your expenses. These welfare systems are designed for people who are unable to find work, despite trying to find it. While there are some places trialling basic income, until most of the western world moves to it (unlikely any time soon), you are a burden to society. Now maybe in a few years, you will finish making your game (i hope it goes well), and it will sell well, justifying your unemployment. Until then many people will not understand your choice, and even dislike you for it. As I said previously, it would be a different matter if you quit your job to make your dream game. People can see you have a goal and are motivated - that you don't intend to remain a burden.
>> then you are a burden
> That's the worse thing you can call an unemployed person. Not only am I not interacting with anybody, but now I should feel guilty for my situation? How do you want me to improve my situation if you accuse me? I don't really like to continue this kind of conversation, because it only deal with social constructs, which aren't really good standards.
If you are seeking work and unable to find it, then I agree, its not a good thing to say to an unemployed person. However, I'm assuming you are unemployed by choice. If you are isolated, you need to work on a social life. It is your choice to be isolated. If you are actively trying to seek employment, then you should absolutely not feel guilty.
So what? Work is consented, not forced. If nobody wants to pay them better, they won't work. If they have the means to work, but don't want to work, what's the point of calling this a lack of motivation? It's basic supply and demand at work. Maybe society has to find a better way to employ those people. I think unemployment is sustainable. If you decide to work, you have more money, but an unemployed person will still have enough to live.
> Their taxes pay for your expenses.
Money is just an indicator, but it doesn't explain structural phenomenons. If you make abstraction of money, work is overrated. Automation removes a lot of necessary work. Haven't you seen how less people are need to grow food? Haven't you seen how many workers machines replace?
I'm now in a place of "discouraged unemployment". Meaning I had many interviews and did not get hired. The more unemployment you have, the more candidates will get discouraged to find a job. That's my situation currently. I think labor and the socioeconomic model need to change. You can't tell people to fit in a mold they don't like. Will a bank loan me money to work on my game ?
Other details you might not know: France is currently in a roar because the left government want to pass a law which is more liberal towards labor. France is pretty conservative in term of economic policy (despite the fact that welfare is generous). The fact is that in france, you literally CANNOT fire someone if you want to, or it's VERY difficult to do so. That might be the main reason people like me are in long term unemployment, and are refusing to make new concessions. I already gave my resume to the city company who deals with trash, and I got no answer. So in short, don't pretend you can advice everybody to work in fast food. That will only get votes for candidates like Sanders.
There are many people that must work in order to pay their families living expenses as they are married and have children. Even with welfare they might not have enough money to live above the poverty line. So they must work. While they could choose not to work, its hardly much of a choice.
I'm guessing your living with your parents (based on your statements). What if your parents decided to stop working? While in your circumstance they might have saved up enough money to live comfortably for many years, they had to work to get it in the first place. There are many people that cannot live with their parents for various reasons.
> Jobs are one avenue for this fulfillment.
I didn't say jobs are the only avenue for fulfilment, merely one avenue to it. People in undesirable jobs generally aren't there by choice. This breaks down your assertion that jobs aren't necessary.
> I think it's a great thing to live with your parents. And if there are a lot of NEETs in japan, maybe there are reasons behind it which go beyond "naivete". Calling this an epidemic without trying to understand the reasons behind it is easy.
Its an epidemic regardless of the reason behind it. I'm fully aware of the tough working conditions many face there, and that it will drive some to avoid employment due to the unbearable pressure. I suspect there are many that are simply just unmotivated to work, and have the means to do so.
>> and people will find all sorts of ways to justify their apparent lack of motivation.
> Why should people have any motivation? Is it some kind of a moral duty? Don't you read that people can be angry, desperate and resentful about their economic situation?
This is where I see the issue. You have formed opinions which justify your lack of motivation and project it onto others. Your situation might work for you, but it does not work for everybody. Yet you do not understand this:
"I always sense there is this weird belief that "people must work and belong to something so that society can function". I can't really express it. What bothers me is that somehow, even after the new deal and social programs, not having a salary or income is seen as some sort of a bad thing, and often, it will be a bad thing for your mental health (isolation, lack of personal goals)."
These social programs only function because others work. Their taxes pay for your expenses. These welfare systems are designed for people who are unable to find work, despite trying to find it. While there are some places trialling basic income, until most of the western world moves to it (unlikely any time soon), you are a burden to society. Now maybe in a few years, you will finish making your game (i hope it goes well), and it will sell well, justifying your unemployment. Until then many people will not understand your choice, and even dislike you for it. As I said previously, it would be a different matter if you quit your job to make your dream game. People can see you have a goal and are motivated - that you don't intend to remain a burden.
>> then you are a burden
> That's the worse thing you can call an unemployed person. Not only am I not interacting with anybody, but now I should feel guilty for my situation? How do you want me to improve my situation if you accuse me? I don't really like to continue this kind of conversation, because it only deal with social constructs, which aren't really good standards.
If you are seeking work and unable to find it, then I agree, its not a good thing to say to an unemployed person. However, I'm assuming you are unemployed by choice. If you are isolated, you need to work on a social life. It is your choice to be isolated. If you are actively trying to seek employment, then you should absolutely not feel guilty.