You Could Not Become a Doctor, So You Refuse to Work?—Who Ultimately Pays for That Pride?

The other day, I watched a news feature about Japan’s aging population of NEETs—people who are not in education, employment, or training.

One case involved a person who had hoped to enter medical school but failed to realize that dream and remains unemployed, supported by their parents.

The reason was that they could not become a doctor.

That is quite a grand story. If they cannot become a doctor, they do not want any other job. Since they could not obtain their ideal life, they have chosen to give up working altogether.

Yet countless people earn their living by doing work they would rather not do.

I have worked in the IT industry for many years, but I have never felt that every day at work was a joy.

Is that not simply what work is like in the first place?

A Salary Is, in a Sense, Compensation for Putting Up with Things

The world is full of inspiring phrases such as “Turn what you love into your career” and “Find self-fulfillment through your work.”

It is wonderful if you can make that happen. In reality, however, money is paid precisely because someone takes on things that other people do not want to do or cannot do themselves.

Of course, there are moments when work feels rewarding. But part of any salary is inevitably compensation for what you have to endure.

An unpleasant boss, a difficult client, unreasonable demands—many people earn their living while dealing with such things.

It must be disappointing not to have become a doctor. I am sure the person worked hard. But what does that have to do with being excused from working?

There are more people than anyone could count who did not enter the profession they wanted.

What would happen to society if all of them gave up working because they could not get their ideal jobs?

Pride Does Not Put Food on the Table

For someone who studied hard enough to aim for medical school, taking a job at an ordinary company or working part-time may feel humiliating.

But refusing to do anything because you do not want to accept that you failed to become a doctor will not change reality.

On the contrary, returning to society only becomes more difficult with age.

What I find strange is that this person’s pride will not allow them to work part-time, yet it apparently allows them to accept living expenses from their parents.

They hate having to bow to someone else for a paycheck, but have no objection to being supported by their parents.

That is remarkably convenient pride.

What Will Happen When the Parents Die?

Of course, if the parents willingly provide support, it is basically a private family matter.

If they have enough wealth for this person to live without ever working, then that is fine in its own way.

The problem arises if they do not.

Parents do not live forever. When they die and both income and assets are gone, who exactly will pay this person’s living expenses?

Even if the person tries to find a job at that point, filling a gap of many years will not be easy.

They may ultimately have to rely on public assistance.

Public assistance is a necessary part of society. Without a system to support people who fall into hardship because of illness, disability, unemployment, or other circumstances, none of us could live with peace of mind.

However, I cannot accept a situation in which someone who is capable of working refuses to do so for decades because no job other than their ideal one is good enough, then ultimately lives on taxpayers’ money.

Why Should Other People Pay to Clean Up After Your Dream?

I did not feel even one percent of sympathy for the NEET in this story. Still, the fact that even someone like this may qualify for public assistance prompted me to think about the system itself.

This also connects to the issue of public assistance for foreign residents. How much public welfare should be provided to people who have paid little or no tax in the past, whether they are foreign nationals who have only recently arrived in Japan or Japanese people who have lived for years without working?

Eligibility for public assistance is not determined by how much tax a person has paid in the past. Even so, I think there should be more discussion about whether the system ought to work that way.

That said, the issue is not so simple that cutting off support would solve it.

If people in hardship are abandoned, the streets could fill with homeless people, while public safety and sanitation deteriorate. We would ultimately bear those social costs as well.

I cannot accept supporting people who refuse to work with taxpayers’ money. But if society does not support them, it will pay the price in another form.

It seems that public assistance exists not merely to rescue people in need, but to keep the rest of us from ending up in trouble ourselves.