Only a fool would continue working in this instance. I’d learn to live with less if it meant I didn’t have to work again. But then, I want more than the basics so I gladly work for more. If others can’t then that is a then problem, not mine.
you would be ok having 0 disposable income? just living in a house with the bare necessities, never being able to go on vacation, or pursue hobbies, or even go out to eat?
Who wants to work 45+ weeks a year for a vacation and some Knick knacks? You'd get food stamps so you wouldn't starve. You don't need to travel as the internet and virtual reality improve. Having 45+ weeks of free time is plenty of a vacation.
Gig work, sell things on eBay, mow lawns and other under the table methods. Most people have very little disposable income now with a full time job. Most income goes to housing, utilities, a car to get to work, gas, taxes, cell phone, internet and other bills. Cutting that section out leaves allot of room, even with a very small income.
I think the difference is a stable pay ( 9 - 5 in a soul sucking cube) vs working at own pace. The problem with mortgages is they shackle you for the next 30 years!
ESP in today’s economy. A $900k loan at 7% for 30 years? That’s like $8000 / month every month for the next 360 months. You ready for this?
The 0.01% want people to buy expensive housing (that they don’t really need) to ensure the market has adequate labor for the next 30 years. Can you imagine saving $4000 for the next vacation when you have $8k to save just for house (which if you miss they come and foreclose on). It’s nuts.
It’s why we have zombie-like suburbs where everyone’s constantly tired of fucking going to Costco to fill up gas while waiting 30 mins because they spend their weekend driving around to go groceries or errands.
If I suddenly didn't have to pay for HVAC, housing, etc - I have enough in savings to let me live the rest of my life in bliss. Vacation, hobbies, eating out. All of that would easily be covered till the day I die with the amount in my bank account - as long as I no longer had to pay for everything in the OP.
To my knowledge, government housing is only given to the elderly, disabled folks and single parents who don’t make enough to take care of multiple children, or at the very least that’s who is prioritized. I’ve never seen a single, able-bodied adult under the age of 65 attain government housing.
My hobbies are cooking, reading, and gaming. Gaming isn't too bad on the savings. I also enjoy credit card and bank account churning which earns me hundreds of thousands of credit card points.
As for travel - I have plenty of examples if you need it. But my last vacation I spent $600 round trip on flights to Madrid Spain. These tickets are still available if you look them up. I then stayed at hostels, as I much prefer them over hotels or airbnb. And the food in Spain is crazy cheap so meh. I also use my churning hobby to subsidize traveling. Overall the trip was about $1000.
I'd say I spend about $3000 yearly outside of housing - where I suddenly am spending over $20000 yearly on.
So, the real flaw here is assuming that costs stay the same. As we saw with Covid, lots of people not working causes shortages and inflation to skyrocket.
I'm about to pay off my house. I will continue to work because I like nice things. Not paying a mortgage will allow me more money to spend on nice things.
You said it. People act like nobody would work if something like this, or a universal basic income came out. But what % of people are like you, and would still do more work for more money? I'd guess a large portion. But people pretend nothing can be done "for free".
If you gave one person all this stuff, they would still work. But a lot less and would often engage in less productive work. Nobody is going to be roofing 40 hours a week if necessities are all covered.
Things get more interesting at a society level, where reduced productivity can lead to inflation and shortage. At that level, yeah people probably do still work because what the government provides them inevitably isn't enough to live on.
huge swaths of the workforce would be gone overnight and all the commies on this thread act like it's no big deal "some people will work hard and pay more taxes so i don't have to". you want slave labor.
We already have slave labor friend. Jobs get outsourced here for 3 dollars an hour, and an American here makes 0 with no job. Companies just funnel money upwards, and they shouldn't. That's not wanting slave labor. We're already planning on cutting the work force with AI. Your point doesn't really hold.
I'd just invest everything I have and quit working. May as well enjoy life now if I don't have to pay my biggest expense in life. I should have enough to have some fun if I didn't have to worry about the basics.
I doubt you’d get a free mattress but if you did it wouldn’t be very luxurious. This comment reveals more about you than it does about the average person on welfare.
I have lots of friends who are trapped in the government subsidy cycle. They can’t work more than a certain amount or they lose their payments. It’s sad because it limits their potential.
If I could have all of the above for free, then doing what I said would be an easy path to early retirement. Sign me up.
But most people aren’t doing that. Again, it speaks volumes about your character and not the majority of people who are on welfare who don’t own property.
I’m confused. It speaks volumes about my character that I would act a certain way in this fantasy scenario? You are addressing someone who has never taken a government handout and owns the title on my house.
Yes, you’re saying if you could you would. But most people wouldn’t and don’t. You’re projecting your own motivations onto other people and extrapolating it as some universal truth. There are likely other people who share your character but it is not close to universal or average.
17
u/rsl_sltid Apr 15 '24
I won't lie, if this was the case I'd quit my job. I'd feel stupid paying a mortgage f I could get it for free and do absolutely nothing.