The Socialist

This conversation started with Austin's observation that Daddy spends a lot of time on the computer. "It's like he's choosing the computer over his family." To take this into context, Austin wasn't feeling very good about losing allowance for the day, because he had wilfully ignored Skye's reminders to prepare for bed so he could be in bed on time today (one of the daily criteria for earning allowance). I explained that Daddy needs to unwind after his workday. Austin said it would be better for Daddy to unwind by spending time with his family, than by getting back on the computer after being on a computer all day at work (I guess he doesn't realise that Skye actually spends very little time on a computer at work).

Austin said, "Companies need to start paying their employees to spend time with their family." Employees could earn money for spending time with their kids or friends/family because they are helping the future generation. This will be good for everyone on the Earth.

I asked Austin how companies will be able to make money if they are paying their employees to be away from work, spending time with their families. Austin explained that the employees will want to work hard because they have such good employers who are doing such good things for the world. So, the companies will make money, and families will be less stressed.

I asked Austin about the employees who don't have kids, and he said, "Well, they do want kids, eventually." I said, "Some people choose not to have kids. Some people feel it is responsible not to have kids, not to contribute to the population explosion." Austin feels that we don't have a population explosion ... this was a bit unclear, but Austin said we have evolved to be so smart. We (humans) used to be more spread out, but now we are living close together. Austin says, "It's natural to want to have kids ..." I could have debated this further, but wanted to stay on topic.

Austin gave other examples of when employees could earn money when not working to contribute to company earnings. If an employee were feeling grumpy or angry, and left the workplace to buy a coffee to make himself feel better, that would be good for the company and good for the employee, so, even though the employee wasn't spending time with family, he would still pay them, because what they were doing is for the greater good. If, however, an employee stayed home and did nothing (what does doing nothing look like?) but watch TV, for instance, he couldn't pay them - they'd just have to take an unpaid day off.

I was particularly impressed by Austin's astute statement, "The only reason we haven't been able to change is because we haven't gotten enough people to agree. Until we have enough agreement, nothing will change."