What Capitalists Get Wrong About Human Motivation
If money was the only thing, we’d all be in a small list of careers.
Making money is only one purpose of work. It’s not even the most important purpose. People have always worked, even before we dreamed up the concept of money.
The thing capitalists get completely wrong is their assumption that everyone is motivated by money. It makes sense, of course — that’s what motivates them. So if money is the grand motivator for everyone, why don’t we all work in finance?
Why do we have preschool teachers, social workers, artists, clergy and cooks?
Why do we have stay-at-home mothers and fathers who are literally on duty day and night in return for no money at all? If you believe people are only motivated by money, it makes sense to have few or no social safety nets.
There are many people who believe everyone is intrinsically lazy and will not lift a finger unless they’re handed a buck. Some of these people truly believe it’s necessary to threaten the masses with starvation to motivate them to work.
That’s why such people shudder at the thought of social safety nets. Why do you think liberals still fight for things like paid parental leave? The U.S. still doesn’t have that because the far-right is convinced that some woman somewhere is going to have a baby just to get a few weeks off work. (I have to wonder: Have any of these people given birth? Or cared for a newborn?)
Some leaders are still upset that food stamps exist.
From Ronald Reagan on, some conservatives have fervently believed that anyone who requires help feeding themselves is just a grifter, out to take somebody else’s hard-earned money and probably blow it on steak, lobsters and caviar. That’s if they didn’t figure out a way to get the cash off the card and use it to buy drugs.
And they’re right about some people. Lazy people do exist! Yes, there are some people who, if allowed to do so, will loll around playing video games or fishing all day. Some will take advantage of whatever safety nets we offer.
My son had the best comeback to this I’ve ever heard. He said he’s worked with a few people who didn’t have any work ethic at all.
“Let those people stay home,” he said. “I don’t want to work with them. They don’t add anything to the workplace. They’re just in the way.”
I can already hear the critics.
“So you’re just fine with people sitting on their butts and letting all of us hard-working Americans support them? I have worked 16 hours a day, six days a week, since I was 14. In my spare time, I started two side hustles, both of which turned into multi-million companies before I sold them. Now you want to give my hard-earned money to people like the good-for-nothing nephew my sister coddled all his life, who gets high every day and is always hitting his mom up for cigarette money?”
I will never be able to convince people like that of the truth: Most of us have already been working plenty hard but have not been adequately compensated for it. I would love to live in a society in which talent, hard work and a willingness to accept responsibility always pay off. If young people are losing their faith in capitalism, it’s for very good reasons.
The working poor are society’s biggest philanthropists.
The working poor (unwillingly) donate lavishly to the very rich. That idea blew my mind when I first read it on the last page of the book Nickel and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America, by the much-missed genius Barbara Ehrenreich. She put into words exactly what I had always felt.
A big chunk of the wealth of the top 1 percent comes directly from failing to adequately compensate the people who work for them. The modern-day robber barons (like their 19th century forebears) did not become rich from their brilliant ideas, hard work, talent, vision or anything else. They may well have all those things, but their real special sauce was being in the right place at the right time, having seed money and contacts — and being willing to squeeze the hell out of their workers.
Most people only think they don’t want to work.
If they’re unemployed, they might appreciate the break for a week or two. But then they start looking for things to do.
They might paint their living room or finally do that landscaping project they never had time to tackle. They might start some kind of passion project they always wanted to do. For the most part, people like to work. They enjoy the feeling of accomplishment. Very few people truly want to do nothing. And some of those people who appear to be lazy just need mental health care, another thing we’re quite stingy with.
I care about my work. I’m proud of my writing, even though it’s never earned me very much money. I bet you care about the things you do, too.
Plenty of good, worthwhile work doesn’t pay.
If you’re a nursing home aid, to give one example, you’re severely underpaid, yet you’re doing extremely important work you should take pride in. If you do volunteer work, you’re serving society without any pay whatsoever.
Why should anyone feel shame for being poor? Your value as a human being has nothing to do with your net worth. Are you doing some good in the world, whether it’s paid or unpaid?
Maybe you have a black belt in karate and teach karate classes to kids in the evenings. Or you are known for your apple pies and bring them to every bake sale. Perhaps every year you help organize your town’s biggest festival, play in a pretty good local band on the weekends or do woodworking in your garage. Maybe you’re busy raising young children.
There are many, many ways to have a good life. I fervently hope you can earn enough to pay your basic living expenses and that after that you’re able to find some time and energy to build a satisfying life that doesn’t depend on the system, because for many of us, the system is broken.
About Michelle Teheux:
I’m a writer in central Illinois. If you like my work, subscribe to me on Medium or Substack. My new book is The Trailer Park Rules.
GREAT points about how much the working poor (and the middle classes!!) subsidize the wealthy in the United States.
I suppose there should be a small qualification: Adam Smith only attributed money as a motivator to market actors. And we are not all market actors. There’s no price mechanism regulating the value of domestic work. But there really should be, in my opinion, because domestic work should be paid even when you’re married to the person doing it.
In keeping with the origins of capitalism, the actual purposes of wealth was to free us from labour so that we might pursue other, more meaningful tasks, including civic duties and democratic participation. There’s a tension between capitalism and democracy. They definitely do not to hand-in-hand.
I agree wholeheartedly that money as the measure of all value misses the mark by miles. But a healthy and vibrant society must build an economy where values and monetary compensation correlate more effectively.
What matters more to society than teaching the young or supporting young parents to raise an empowered generation that can advance toward greater achievement than previous generations? Small efforts add up. People struggling to make ends meet perform miracles every week.
We the people can do a much better job aligning values and salaries. It will not be easy and I may not see it, but I sincerely believe that if Americans vote their actual interests, we can improve this.
We need to pick the better over the worse candidates. Perfection will not be one of the choices. Every eligible voter must register and vote. We simply cannot give up, I think.