"Whoever does not work does not eat" - is this statement

>>16545494
>>>/pol/

If you want to eat you need to give something in exchange

For example, working, donating, doing something for charity. The key is not being a lazy ass.
Opus dei take this seriously and work big jobs and never stops because that dignifies them in their eyes to god. Take it was you want.

Is not about being free or feeling under pressure, is doing something to get it, if you want free food make your own garden, it still takes work. But you have to make something in order to obtain something

> Must we always feel under pressure for our safety

Yes that is life.

I think one of the biggest dangers the human race faces today is becoming dependent on hand outs. They would die as they have no clue how to take care of themselves. I struggle everyday and work twelve hours 6-7 days a week to give my family a good life and sustenance.

If I was a lazy piece of shit they'd either leave or starve whichever comes first.

I refuse help from the government as it's my responsibility to care of myself and my family. I'm a fucking adult, and I can take care of myself and my family just fine without handouts.

I am not a Christian but I do agree with this bible verse.

Both. Without work you can't fulfill your basic needs unless you or somebody you know has access to a large amount of resources.

In contrast to the harsh years in which the bible was written you're very much free, though. You're free to work as hard as you like and support yourself or eat out of a dumpster for the rest of your life.

>>16545494

I have a question for you, if you agree with the quote, /adv/

What if automation gets rid of much of the work we need to do now?

Let's say that automation, over the next 10 years, structurally unemploys 10-20% of the population who would otherwise work doing the jobs machines kill. These workers will mostly be nontechnical workers with few employable skills to compete against the bots with.

Are we to honestly believe that 10-20% of the population, despite wanting to work, should not be fed? Does this imply that this quote is only valid in a society where there is lots of work available to be done?

>>16546710
> 10-20%

That is a laughably conservative estimate. Autonomous vehicles alone could kill up to 40% People have *no* idea what's coming.

>>16546729
>>16546710

Not a problem for a long time we need to think about.

I predict people will not trust autonomous vehicles until 2030, earliest.

ONE major fatal trucking accident by an autonomous trucking vehicle, even if it's not at fault, will cause immediate and intense public backlash which will force either outright short term bans or behind-the-wheel "pilots" of auto vehicles, which prevents the job elimination automation zealots expect.

Things will be pretty bad in the fast food industry, but transportation will largely be spared.

>>16545494
What it means is that in any organized society everyone should contribute to the general good - should give and not just take. Contributing need not be quantifiable - children contribute to the general good by being cute and giving promise for the future, artists by enhancing the lives of others. But you can't have a society in which some just take.

>>16545494
>"Whoever does not work does not eat" - is this statement true or is it a quote from the Bible taken seriously?
Taken seriously and translated poorly. It is more accurately translated "whoever would not wok should not eat". Note the shift in emphasis: it is not intended to punish unfortunate circumstances, but destructive attitudes.

>Must we always feel under pressure for our safety?
That is the world we live in, yes. We as a people can only afford to support so many who are not contributing. That space needs to be reserved for those who actually need it: the very young, the very old, the very ill, and the injured. And to do even that much, we need everyone else. People who have just decided that "work isn't for them" are not on the list, and should not be. The alternative is societal collapse under the ever increasing deadweight.

>Are we not free?
Of course we are. What about contributing to society precludes your freedom?

>>16546710
>Automation

It's a reddit meme

Automation's happened since the industrial revolution, we'll be fine