Blood and Wine

Don't know what they're doing.

My friend and fellow Asean scholar, Elaine, just posted an entry, "Don't Know What They're Doing", on her blog, Lavished, that triggered quite a reaction from me. The following is the very long comment I deemed necessary to her words in my fury and refusal to return to my Mathematics revisions:

I will forgive the naïveté of this post. Not all of us study economics.

For most people, a job is just that: a job. The business owner takes risks and trades his entrepreneurship for profits. We trade our labor for wages, which we spend on consumption. That's how the economy functions. We trade production for returns. No production, no returns, no consumption.

You are confusing the issue when you say "We must pursue our passions." You forget that while work may be a passion in itself, work can also be a means to pursuing a passion.

What about the passion for one's family? What about the passion for travel? What about all these people whose passions defy easy translation into employment? Don't assume we all love architecture or art or helping people.

In their case, work is a means to fulfilling their dreams and pursuing their passions. The psychologist Abraham Maslow defined the Hierarchy of Needs clearly: people place higher importance on their physiological, safety, love, and esteem needs than the need for self-actualization, or the pursuit of their passions. It's obviously not very easy to want to create art or dance when you haven't eaten in days.

All those SALESPEOPLE you don’t respect are simply displaying rational economic behavior. They treat their labor as a commodity to be exchanged for wages, which can subsequently be exchanged for consumption. It is in consumption that people fulfill most of their fundamental needs, e.g. food, security, nice clothes (which you have to admit serves more than just physiological needs). Only after these needs are satisfied can they even think of their passions.

You also neglect the use of consumption in fulfilling self-actualization needs. An artist needs to buy materials. A musician needs instruments and perhaps lessons if he sucks. A parent needs money to spoil his family, to finance those holidays to China and send money to his daughter when she needs it.

If you consider labor to be a commodity, you would be wise to consider the jobs market. You are, after all, making an investment in your own human capital here. You want the best returns possible for all that money you’re spending on education.

It would be most unadvisable to enter a job market that is experiencing a surplus of labor supply. An excess of supply caused by an explosion of people entering that career drives average wage rates down. Employers realize they can bid down the wage rates when there is a surplus of labor. People who refuse to work for so little will find themselves unemployed, but that doesn't matter to employers: they know someone out there will be desperate/humble enough to work for that wage level.

The lesson here? Enter a job market in surplus if you're willing to work for very little. If not, better pray that the demand for engineers or teachers or salespeople picks up. Soon. Before you get desperate too.

So don't be so quick to criticize people for being rational when they choose to enter job markets because the money is good or because the demand is high (in essence, the opposite of a surplus: a shortage of labor). Don’t be so quick to create erroneous links between problems in the labor force and that rational behavior.

Your passion has very little to do with your ability to speak clearly and market your ideas. It helps, but only when you have the preexisting ability to express that passion. A person who simply can't convey their ideas clearly and persuasively obviously won't find it easy to convey their passion for pharmaceuticals or drugs or smack or whatever you want to call it. On the other hand, a good speaker can talk about absolutely nothing for a whole hour and still sound so intelligent and persuasive. I know. I’m a debater. Debate is the training ground for people to do that.

I do agree with your example of your link between poor service and the lack of passion. Because your example is true depending on what you’re referring to when you say ‘passion.’ I'm sure the service industry would be better if those damned cashiers could just love collecting cash and printing receipts and counting your purchases a lot more.

You have confused customer service and public relations with a love for the field. The guys at the famous Manhattan Fish Market might not love cutting fish up, but they're sure having fun doing it by adopting a unique attitude towards their work. Your waiter might not love rushing around taking orders and carrying food, but he can be courteous and provide you 'great service.'

It's about work attitude and salesmanship. Not passion.

Passion is not everything. Your scathing remark about people not knowing what they're working for reflects your poor grasp on this obviously lowly and unrefined philosophy to life. They do know what they're working for: wages. And through wages, consumption. Through consumption, self-actualization (if they have any passions at all; working class people are so dull, right?).

Don't be elitist.

No offense was intended, Elaine. It is harsh. But as an economics student and whatever kind of person I am, I really am appalled that you really think that way.
Commentaires: 3