Quote:
Originally Posted by freebeard
Needs don't always align with choice.  |
Rarely do needs align with choice. Most of us "need" to not die, or to not have our bodies wear out over time. That's entirely beyond our choice.
Ok, some needs are more immediate, like breathing oxygen or drinking water. We're the principle actor responsible for securing those needs. Others have a role, but we're the most invested.
My point though is that the individual is responsible for defining need, and the individual is responsible for seeing that those needs are met. Most would agree that having needs minimally met is still better than failing to meet needs, or to meet them at even lower levels.
Everyone's got to work to meet their needs. Even those that have a large inheritance must work to manage it, because that's no easy task.
Either everyone who voluntarily exchanges their time for money is exploited, or nobody is. I'm fine defining it either way (BTW, everyone being exploited is the same as nobody being exploited, just as everyone winning is the same as nobody winning), but it must be consistent; the alternative is arbitrary.
I lived in the back of a Subaru for nearly 2 years. If someone says my needs were not being met, I'd tell them "that's just, like, their opinion, man". Likewise, if I lived in a mansion and someone said it's too extravagant... well I'd probably agree with them, but that too is just, like, their opinion, man.