[EGreg]

And this is why I think fulltime employment is the wrong way to go for many people today.

In fact the whole "we are an institution and you are a peon" mentality needs to be disrupted.

More companies should hire on a project basis and share the revenues. More companies should try holacracy and abolish a top down chain of command for everything.

Then people can really will be compensated on their merit, ie their contributions.

In our own company, I laid out how we do it https://qbix.com/blog ... would welcome your thoughts.

[alexchamberlain]

To be honest, I don't like the Qbix Compensation Model. One reason to work for someone else is that they are taking the risk. Within reason, no matter what I do at work, I'll get paid the same at the end of the month. Yes, there is the risk the company could go out of business (a form of job security I guess), and yes, I would expect a fair annual review, but ultimately, I'm able to plan in the medium term for a consistent income.

[EGreg]

Stability at the cost of autonomy breeds complacency, which is the opposite of OP's attitude. Presumably he lived with his parents. But he wants to be paid for his work commensurate with his contributions.

Means tested welfare has the same problems as full time employment: people are so used to that paycheck that they are afraid to do rock the boat and work on something meaningful in ther lives. They just drive the same truck every day, until they lose their job.

In fact, even Adam Smith proposed the free market as a way to achieve equality among men. Even socialist anarchists like Oscar Wilde were most incensed by the degrading nature of the employer-employee relationship.

You don't need this model for everyone. Just for those who are sick and tired of playing office politics and pretending to work 8 hour days becauss they finished in 2 hours and can't be seen doing anything productive for anyone else, since the company can sue them.

[Asooka]

What if we had stronger unemployment benefits and some form of UBI? I.e. if you take a risky job, the government insures some part of your pay (e.g. up to 2000$/mo), and if everything tanks you can still fall on a UBI and pay the bills and buy food.

[jstanley]

> More companies should hire on a project basis and share the revenues.

The problem with this is employees being unwilling to take on risk. In general they want to get paid a good amount whether the project succeeds or not.

[EGreg]

Not all employees are the same. A kid who lives with his parents (as the OP) or a person receiving UBI or a person in a country with universal healthcare may take more risks, and work on this basis. You don't need EVERYONE to work this way.

Furthermore, this can be done part time by existing employees.

For millions of people, FTE has the same perverse incentives as means tested welfare: they pretend to work, they play office politics, and most of all they are afraid to undertake anything in their own life for fear of losing the guaranteed cashflow. They practice learned helplessness in their life and do not advance.

While some people are ok with this, many like the OP are not.

[xamuel]

>compensated on their ... contributions

Kiss goodbye to any kind of code hygiene.

>abolish a top down chain of command

You now have a squeaky wheel company. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.