cfimages wrote: Gman wrote:
cfimages wrote: others have talents that could benefit society in non-monetary ways or skills that need time to mature
What examples of this can you give me?
The anthropology professor / museum curator who wants to be an organic farmer to give one I met recently. It's taken him until his early 50's to be able to make a start on it via semi-retirement but he still needs to go to a job he hates 4 days a week. How many great rock bands, artists etc have sprung from people working 9-5 and how many from those solely dedicated to music and art? What about the hobbyist inventor who spends nights and weekends tinkering - imagine if he were free to dedicate all week to coming up with new inventions.
All it requires is recognizing that society must benefit society not a select few individuals.
Let's look at your professor / farmer example. He developed a skill as a professor / museum curator that people where willing to pay for. With the money he made from that he is able save enough capital to make a start on his dream of being an organic farmer. It sounds like this is a case of the free markets working. If he can produce food people are willing to pay for at a price that people are willing to pay he will be successfull and he'll be able aford to switch to full time. What's your alternative? Have the government just hand over land and some starting capital to anyone who says they want to be a farmer?
In terms of rock bands, I have no idea. But, Rod Stewart, for an example, worked as a grave digger, before making it big. And what do you propose? That the government just subsidise anyone who says they want to be an artist, or and inventor? How many people do you think would suddenly declare an interest? Let's look at Rod Stewart as an example. Here's a guy that worked as a grave digger (and other jobs) he did those jobs to earn a living wage while he pursued his musical asperations. Guess what? Society benifitted from the minute he picked up a shovel and will benfit until the day he hangs up his microphone (if he hasn't already). Now if we take your idea, how does society benifit? Rather than having various jobs done, society is funding hundreds of thousands potential Rod Stewarts. Of which only a very few will suceed so how does society benifit? How does society recovers it's investment. After all I doubt one Rod Stewart pays for all the failed Rod Sterwarts out there? And what do we now do to all the failed Rod Stewarts now that they've washed out and can't earn a living having never developed any other markatable skill that will allow them to earn a living in the real world or do we just fund them until death?