It could work. There's no reason it couldn't. Lots of people don't have jobs.
Housewives (remember back before the Teri Hatcher resurgence when we had to call them "homemakers"?) don't have jobs. That is, they usually don't bring in much income. They do things around the house and they care for a child or two.
This could work, because I don't even have a kid. Or two. I just have me. And my peers - they only have themselves, too.
There's a lot of math involved. Sometimes, I miss math. Assigned equations to solve, little puzzles.
Letterman once interviewed someone - the (moviestar?) was once responsible for sacking groceries, as was Letterman. Letterman enjoyed the work. "Every bag is like a puzzle," he said. His guest was less enthusiastic.
So, math. Let's say there is a house full of five of us. Families of five are all over the place - the difference here is that we're all adults. But let's say the house exists, it's roomy, and we are in it. There is a mortgage. We all have enough space. Five of us. Professionals.
Five professionals, living together, utilities shared, mortgage shared.
If all five professionals were employed, the house would have significant income. I make about $40 K right now. Math says the five of us would pull in about $200K.
Here's the trick - if only four of us were employed, the house would still make $160 K, and one lucky individual could sit around in his/her boxers all day.
We'd work in shifts. You work for a year, maybe two, pay your dues, then you take a year off, you play with the house money like a teenager with an allowance. Maybe after that year (when you travel, you spend time with your dog, etc.) expires, you go back to the same job. Or maybe you spent your year off learning a new trade, and you decide that you want to take a job in that line of work. No sweat. Just get back to making some scratch so your housemate can relax.
There are some problems. By now you've noticed that this reeks of socialism/communism, and you might want to point out that such isms have a spectacular rate of failure/tragedy. Fair enough. You might also point out that that "allowance" for an adult would be much higher than for a child. Health insurance and the like. And who gets to take a year off now? Who has to wait a few more years?
These are hard questions to answer. Harder than working every day for the next 40 years? Probably not. Let me know when you want to move in together.
3 comments:
I'm in, and I'll go ahead and use my 5 years of leisure right now. I'll work for the next 20, I promise...
I'll move back in immediately.
Does the person who does not have a job still have to clean up after everyone, cook, do laundry, run everyone else's errands and all that stuff? Or is everyone respnsible for their own stuff, just that one of them at a time doesn't have to be earning cash? That would make it more like having a "residency" (in the artist sense, not the MD sense). That would make a big difference. That's appealing, but being 4 adults' maid/butler does not. Unless I also got to bathe them, dress them and chase them around the house with a broom.
Barbara
Post a Comment