[amelius]

But "family, friends, pets" are in the category of "someone else", right?

Also by working for someone else, you make money, which you use for your health, family, etc.

So either way, I don't get the point.

[tehbeard]

> But "family, friends, pets" are in the category of "someone else", right?

someone else == no emotional ties

You are going on the assumption that money earned by time not spent with loved ones is equivalent to the time that could've been spent with them.

"Well then get a better job that is worth it"

Not possible in a lot of instances (location, qualifications, balance of power between employed and employers).

And money can't replace an afternoon in the park with your kids riding bikes (ok, hunting pokemon in this day and age, but the point still stands)

[ramblerman]

Not sure if your being pedantic but your relationship with your 'company' and your friends/family is certainly not the same thing.

[TheOtherHobbes]

Most of us don't work for our pets.

(Unless they're cats.)

Maybe the whole idea of working for someone is a strange one. Would people still work towards doing cool stuff if they were free to make/break associations on a project basis?

There might not be the cycle of hyperconsumption driven by superficial novelty we have now. But would it be replaced by something more or less interesting?

[icebraining]

free to make/break associations on a project basis

Isn't that called freelancing?