"Let's let humans do more human (and humane) oriented tasks."
The definition of "humane" keeps shifting over time and will always be a matter of perspective.
To share a personal story, my father was unemployed while I was in college. Within a few months he looked like he had aged 10 years. Several months later he took a part time job as a landscaper and he started recovering.
I remember coming home from college once, driving to his work site and watching him push a lawnmower until he had a break in his work. This was a man that used to wear a suit and tie and commute to the city every day. Yet as I watched him push a lawnmower, I never felt more proud of him. He introduced me to his co-workers and it was the first time I had seen him smile in nearly a year. Several months later he was able to find gainful employment.
One could argue the isolation and lethargy caused by long term unemployment is more damaging mentally and physically than most labor intensive jobs. Moreover, society needs rungs in the ladder of economic advancement and it is human nature to find value in work and being part of a team.
There are a lot of assumptions here. Why can't people learn to or be assisted in finding purpose and happiness outside of a job? I've done it twice myself, going 6+ months by choice without a job. Regarding isolation, I don't think it is that difficult to imagine ways people can stay connected and have a vibrant social life without full time employment.
A big aspect of this is reframing cultural values so that people don't feel so strongly that there worth is determined by their employment status.
That's his point. Although it wasn't a blue collar job like his dad originally had, it was still enough to keep him mentally healthy. Being completely unemployed sitting home harmed him psychologically.
His point was that having any job will create enough benefits to offset the supposed harms caused by having a job that one would consider himself overqualified for.
For the most part I agree, with the caveat that 'any job' is perhaps too broad.
I've done loads of 'menial' jobs throughout my life and some were so soul-crushingly terrible (to me) that I'm not sure having them was better than 'sitting at home unemployed'.
I've never done landscaping, but I suspect it would not have been one of those soul-crushing jobs.
It wasn't "gainful" employment because of schedule variabilities. Beside, the PP is arguing against the employment value of "cog" type jobs that are easily automated.
The definition of "humane" keeps shifting over time and will always be a matter of perspective.
To share a personal story, my father was unemployed while I was in college. Within a few months he looked like he had aged 10 years. Several months later he took a part time job as a landscaper and he started recovering.
I remember coming home from college once, driving to his work site and watching him push a lawnmower until he had a break in his work. This was a man that used to wear a suit and tie and commute to the city every day. Yet as I watched him push a lawnmower, I never felt more proud of him. He introduced me to his co-workers and it was the first time I had seen him smile in nearly a year. Several months later he was able to find gainful employment.
One could argue the isolation and lethargy caused by long term unemployment is more damaging mentally and physically than most labor intensive jobs. Moreover, society needs rungs in the ladder of economic advancement and it is human nature to find value in work and being part of a team.