this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2025
737 points (95.1% liked)
Greentext
7478 readers
717 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Something tells me if they gave him 40 hours he'd be posting about how he has no free time to enjoy his life.
Which would be a valid complaint. Your life should not be an endless grind for the privilege of having the most basic necessities to survive.
Mkay but why shouldn't someone be able to live a dignified life working 25 hours a week? Why does it have to be 40?
He's got a roof over his head, food to eat, and a ton of leisure time. That is dignified.
His comment about one accident away is something he'd still be facing with 40 hours a week. We could all do with improvements to the social safety net.
I don't know how leisurely that leisure time is gonna be, considering he's only got a hundred bucks to play with, coupled with the stress and anxiety of being one car repair or injury away from financial ruin.
You're absolutely right that the social safety net needs improvements, but that net should be there for everyone, not just those that work some arbitrary number of hours.
No. That's not full time work. Full time is 35-40 minimum, often closer to 50.
That's the type of job you have while you are in college or pursuing education for a better job.
I worked 10-20 hours a week in college. Work 25 hours a week and having nothing else to do is working 3 days a week. If OP worked 5 days a week they'd up theri income substantially, but they refuse to do so.
Big "just pull yourself up by your bootstraps" energy with this comment.
It's insane that you think people have to hit a minimum bar of "productivity" to justify living above a barely-scraping-by level, and that you set that bar at over half a person's waking hours.
what should people do then? work 10 hours a week and then sit around watching TV for 120?
Yes, why the fuck not? Social safety nets and access to basic human necessities like food, shelter, and healthcare should not be gated by some arbitrary number of "working hours".
because society would collapse. social programs only work by having more people putting into them than are taking out. they are a form of insurance.
resources are not infinite. the insurance company can't operate if it's pay outs exceed it's pay ins.
So your argument is that if everyone has access to basic necessities, society would collapse? What in the slipperiest of slopes are you talking about?
If your "society" is dependent on people voluntarily going into wage slavery, maybe it should collapse.
It's no an argument dude. It's material and economic reality.
The problem with the current safety net is we don't have enough going in. And you want to put less in while everyone takes out more.
That isn't how reality works. You seem to think the garden of eden is just a matter of politics. in order for there to be food, medical care, etc, people need to provide it. people need to work.
We're talking about two different things then. I'm talking about how things should be.