By 1990 You May Not Need a Job

By CHARLES M. GUTHRIE

Of the editorial/opinion page staff

published by the StarTribune 

May 30, 1965

   THE OLD ORDER is changing too rapidly.  Adjustments must be made too fast.  Old truths are voided and old certainties nullified.  I long for the return of the rumble seat, bulk sauerkraut and other charms of yesterday, when man didn't worry about the gross national product, automation or accelerated math.

   A lot of old saws have vanished or are gurgling their last.  To mind come such honored aphorisms as "Early to bed and early to rise...," "Plough deep, while sluggards sleep," "Never leave until tomorrow what  you can do today," "Keep thy shop and thy shop will keep thee," and "He who by the plow would thrive, himself must either hold or drive."  

   IT'S ALWAYS BEEN thought --and the belief endures to this day--that unemployment is a curse and the fellow without a job should make it his first order of business to see the foundry boss about getting on the payroll.  Either that or he must swallow his pride and ask the welfare people to bail him out.

   But a new concept of unemployment is dawning which mocks enterprise.  Unemployment may be the coming thing.  According to a press release quoting the president of an automation engineering firm in Stamford, Conn., it is bound to increase--and this won't necessarily be bad.  This man, Richard S. White, asserts that fewer and fewer workers will be required and finally, along about 1990, we'll reach a point "where holding a job is not critical."  In fact, he says, technological job loss must be "constructive" to the new society as part of the process of increasing the total of goods and services.

   White recognizes that encroaching automation presents a "fearful situation" for the worker who is dislocated, but he maintains that if we can produce more without the requirement that everyone work, "we should start to question the concept that a man must hold a job to share in the productivity of the nation."  He thinks we can give those without jobs adequate support "without destroying our basic free economy" and without destroying incentives.

   I lack sufficient knowledge to argue economic theory but have observed the habits and responses of the human animal for years and fear that if we ever reach a point where a man can get along comfortably and in clear conscience without holding a job what will result will be a surplus of loafers.

   THE GOOF-OFFS ARE in good supply now, and if word gets around that you can eat steady without toil, and without going through any red tape at the welfare office, park benches will be more popular, more men will go fishing, and fewer will care whether they're on daylight or standard time.

   White feels that progress will cause continued temporary dislocation, as automation increases, but to the ultimate benefit of everyone, and "that we should find a way to protect those who suffer from the very change that helps most of us."

   Then, he adds, "we will have made a major stride in the long evolution toward the day when literally all our people can pursue the higher meanings of life free of the fear of poverty."

   These are humane and philosophical words, rich in sympathy and aspiration.  I hope, if we gain leisure time in this predicted abundance, that people will indeed pursue "the higher meanings of life."

   I don't say that they won't.  The new breed may be different.  But, given the opportunity, we old-school indolents would have sought this higher meaning of life in the pool hall.   

Copyright 2014 StarTribune.  Republished here with the permission of the StarTribune.  No further republication or redistribution is permitted without the express approval of the            StarTribune.