Technological unemployment is (almost) here - page 18.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: anu on March 29, 2014, 03:05:20 AM

All civilizations that collapsed before were extremely centralized.

Modern civilization is too technologically advanced therefore cannot become more decentralized than some threshold, after which hi-tech products will start to disappear (space flights at first, then jet airliners, then microprocessors and so on). I agree that many countries now are too centralized, but going "all-in" to decentralization is not a good idea!

Quote from: anu on March 29, 2014, 03:05:20 AM

Give me one historic collapse of a de-centralized civ (not conquest) and I will consider you less of a narrow minded totalitarism monger. What I mean is something like the Greek civilization. It never collapsed and in a way, it still survives.

There are examples when small decentralized civilizations were conquered by a more centralized one due to superiority in the technologies [related with above post].

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1020

Quote from: anu on March 29, 2014, 03:05:20 AM

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 09:27:04 PM

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 08:50:50 PM

Because the Soviet system worked so well. AKA "We pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay".

If you would have a choice between USSR economic system and prospective collapsed civilization due to tech unemployment induced inequality, I am sure you would choose the former.

BTW, recent NASA study looks very realistic IMHO!

That, my friend, is called a False Dichotomy.

This. Same as the poll.

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 01:08:00 PM

Quote from: phelix on March 28, 2014, 12:37:54 PM

There certainly are simple jobs which are not creative that are more and more being taken over by machines. What about people that can not compete against robots any more? What about a significant percentage of citizens that have nothing of value to offer for society or only at a price much higher than the cost of machines?

They need to adapt to survive, just like every other living thing on this planet (humans included.)

And by "adapt to survive" you actually mean "die"?

anu

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

RepuX - Enterprise Blockchain Protocol

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 09:27:04 PM

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 08:50:50 PM

Because the Soviet system worked so well. AKA "We pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay".

If you would have a choice between USSR economic system and prospective collapsed civilization due to tech unemployment induced inequality, I am sure you would choose the former.

BTW, recent NASA study looks very realistic IMHO!

That, my friend, is called a False Dichotomy.

For the record: All civilizations that collapsed before were extremely centralized. Some of them, like the Easter Islands, directed all their ressources towards one goal, and worked "as one". Our civilization as it is can't collapse in it's entirety because it is still too de-centralized. Politicians are working hard to change that, but they are not yet there. We can, of course, have a world wide financial collapse - again, because the financial world is too interconnected and too centralized.

Interestingly, the problem of centralization and interconnectedness was entirely ignored in Jared Diamond's otherwise very interesting book "Collapse". Wonder why? It is the topic of Vernor Vinge's "Deepness in the Sky" and Dimitry Orlov's "Five Stages of Collapse". Interesting reads, all of them, for those who wonder why and how civilizations collapse.

Give me one historic collapse of a de-centralized civ (not conquest) and I will consider you less of a narrow minded totalitarism monger. What I mean is something like the Greek civilization. It never collapsed and in a way, it still survives.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 11:15:32 PM

For the record, jobs went to 3rd world countries because American workers got greedy and were being lazy. It got to the point where so many factories were unionized and demanding obscene pay to do very simple jobs and slack off a lot. For example, the union workers destroyed the one great American steel industry. So everyone saying greedy corporations sent jobs overseas should take a long hard look at the facts and realize that greedy workers demanding $30 an hour to tighten bolts on an assembly line caused management to look for a better alternative.

In fact only profits of the corporate owners grew significantly last decades! It is a pure race to the bottom! If the state would nationalize all "unpatriotic" enterprises and leave manufacturing onshore, unionized workers in the US/EU would continue enjoying high standards of life, but managers/shareholders/CEOs who don't like this form of socialism can be awarded with a free one-way airline ticket! Grin

dogechode

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

For the record, jobs went to 3rd world countries because American workers got greedy and were being lazy. It got to the point where so many factories were unionized and demanding obscene pay to do very simple jobs and slack off a lot. For example, the union workers destroyed the one great American steel industry. So everyone saying greedy corporations sent jobs overseas should take a long hard look at the facts and realize that greedy workers demanding $30 an hour to tighten bolts on an assembly line caused management to look for a better alternative.

AND everyone has this cheapass mentality nowadays and they want rock bottom prices for everything, forcing companies to find ways to lower production costs. Decades ago the American consumer was very picky about quality, warranty, brand loyalty was stronger, etc. Nowadays the culture is all about getting the cheapest price.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 08:50:50 PM

Because the Soviet system worked so well. AKA "We pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay".

If you would have a choice between USSR economic system and prospective collapsed civilization due to tech unemployment induced inequality, I am sure you would choose the former.

BTW, recent NASA study looks very realistic IMHO!

anu

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

RepuX - Enterprise Blockchain Protocol

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 05:26:03 PM

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

At least he finally admits it. Yes, we should all share and sit around and sing kumbaya, and it shouldn't matter that some people are stupid and lazy and self-destructive and wasteful and ignorant

If you have carefully read my previous posts, you should know that I advocate guaranteed employment instead of unconditional basic income for idling. However, this of course is impossible if privately-owned corporations force people to work 8-12 hours/day and use child labor in China/Bangladesh/Vietnam so there are simply no jobs for everyone in developed countries.

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

we should just go right ahead and give them an equal share of everything others have worked hard to earn.

Robots worked hard 24/7/365 while 0.001% elite takes all profits.

Because the Soviet system worked so well. AKA "We pretend to work, and the government pretends to pay".

twiifm

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 05:26:03 PM

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

If you have carefully read my previous posts, you should know that I advocate guaranteed employment instead of unconditional basic income for idling. However, this of course is impossible if privately-owned corporations force people to work 8-12 hours/day and use child labor in China/Bangladesh/Vietnam so there are simply no jobs for everyone in developed countries.

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

Have you read the proposal for Job Guarantee by Pavlina Tcherchnova? http://www.levyinstitute.org/publications/?docid=1508

Heres another proposal by Randall Wray http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/03/mmp-blog-43-job-guarantee-basics-design-and-advantages.html

reckoner

newbie

Activity: 16

Merit: 0

some insightful posts here.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

At least he finally admits it. Yes, we should all share and sit around and sing kumbaya, and it shouldn't matter that some people are stupid and lazy and self-destructive and wasteful and ignorant

If you have carefully read my previous posts, you should know that I advocate guaranteed employment instead of unconditional basic income for idling. However, this of course is impossible if privately-owned corporations force people to work 8-12 hours/day and use child labor in China/Bangladesh/Vietnam so there are simply no jobs for everyone in developed countries.

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 03:23:02 PM

we should just go right ahead and give them an equal share of everything others have worked hard to earn.

Robots worked hard 24/7/365 while 0.001% elite takes all profits.

dogechode

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 03:20:07 PM

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 02:49:20 PM

But I guess you want wealth redistribution now? In other words, you want the government to take away your neighbor's property at gun point and hand it to you?

Better if it will happen peacefully. But if the elites won't take any measures to deal with tech unemployment, the outcome likely will be as you wrote (however it will be not a govt, but the desperate hungry rioters who will point gun and have absolutely no mercy to the wealthy people)!

At least he finally admits it. Yes, we should all share and sit around and sing kumbaya, and it shouldn't matter that some people are stupid and lazy and self-destructive and wasteful and ignorant, we should just go right ahead and give them an equal share of everything others have worked hard to earn.

Right. I'll get right on that.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 02:49:20 PM

But I guess you want wealth redistribution now? In other words, you want the government to take away your neighbor's property at gun point and hand it to you?

Better if it will happen peacefully. But if the elites won't take any measures to deal with tech unemployment, the outcome likely will be as you wrote (however it will be not a govt, but the desperate hungry rioters who will point gun and have absolutely no mercy to the wealthy people)!

anu

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

RepuX - Enterprise Blockchain Protocol

Quote from: giantdragon on March 28, 2014, 02:22:50 PM

In the long run only few creative jobs will be available, so it not a question of adaptation (education and skills) but rather a wealth redistribution.

I'd like to quote here who should be your favorite economist: In the long run we're all dead.

The upcoming crisis will cost countless jobs (and possibly countless lives) and it will have nothing to do with tech unemployment. How about we worry about the problems at hand and not the ones that may come up in 2050? Because for tech unemployment to ever become a problem we need to live long enough.

But I guess you want wealth redistribution now? In other words, you want the government to take away your neighbor's property at gun point and hand it to you?

bobdutica

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

One profession that will continue to be in demand for a long time is that of plumber. They cannot be automated or outsourced, and without them human wastes will back up, smell bad and cause diseases. Consider The Great Stink of London (a great read). In the 1850's the city of London could not grow any larger because the sewage was making people sick and the people couldn't stand the smell. It wasn't until they started engineering a sewer system that the city could start to grow again.

giantdragon

legendary

Activity: 1582

Merit: 1002

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 01:08:00 PM

Quote from: phelix on March 28, 2014, 12:37:54 PM

There certainly are simple jobs which are not creative that are more and more being taken over by machines. What about people that can not compete against robots any more? What about a significant percentage of citizens that have nothing of value to offer for society or only at a price much higher than the cost of machines?

They need to adapt to survive, just like every other living thing on this planet (humans included.)

In the long run only few creative jobs will be available, so it not a question of adaptation (education and skills) but rather a wealth redistribution.

dogechode

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

Quote from: phelix on March 28, 2014, 12:37:54 PM

There certainly are simple jobs which are not creative that are more and more being taken over by machines. What about people that can not compete against robots any more? What about a significant percentage of citizens that have nothing of value to offer for society or only at a price much higher than the cost of machines?

They need to adapt to survive, just like every other living thing on this planet (humans included.)

bobdutica

newbie

Activity: 53

Merit: 0

Quote from: kjj on March 28, 2014, 06:44:34 AM

Quote from: anu on March 28, 2014, 01:47:09 AM

Tech unemployment means that machines plus a minority of human workers can saturate ~~any~~ every conceivable market.

Obviously that is not the case.

The present problem is the fiat money system.

The problem is that when you are "debating" with people that are desperate to impose a total government takeover of everyone else because they imagine themselves clever enough to end up on the ruling side, they have their hammer well in hand and they sure as hell aren't going to let you convince them that the screw they aren't looking at is anything but a nail.

I think kjj is right. He has hit the nail right on the head!

phelix

legendary

Activity: 1708

Merit: 1020

Quote from: giantdragon

Unconditional income (extremely high taxation inevitable)

I don't agree to this at all. It's a wrong premise. Think cost neutral BIG.

IMHO this thread has been derailing a little. Whether there could be more white collar jobs is not the question of the OP.

There certainly are simple jobs which are not creative that are more and more being taken over by machines. What about people that can not compete against robots any more? What about a significant percentage of citizens that have nothing of value to offer for society or only at a price much higher than the cost of machines?

dogechode

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

The other problem is that people have raised their standard of living to an absurd level. People that make 30k still buy designer clothes and expensive cellphones and have cars. This is absurd. There is even a program where you can get a cellphone via a welfare-like program, as though it were a basic need like food and water. Many people are spending more than they make so they turn to credit cards and loans to finance the lifestyle that they can't really support financially. Houses are another big issue; it wasn't that long ago that you needed to save up 20% of the purchase price and that was just how it went. There was none of this 0 down or 5% down or double mortgage nonsense, if you couldn't afford it you just kept renting.

If people lived according to their means, even a mcdonalds salary could support them. It cracks me up when they do those examples where they try to show that a certain salary can't support a person (like the ones that were plastered all over the news around the time of the fast food workers strike,) but then you look at the numbers and they are of course assuming that the person has to have a cellphone, and cable internet, and live in their own apartment (God forbid they live with roommates) etc.

anu

legendary

Activity: 1218

Merit: 1001

RepuX - Enterprise Blockchain Protocol

Quote from: dogechode on March 28, 2014, 08:22:39 AM

Between this thread and the "omg we're going to get hit by a solar flare and lose the power grid and 90% of the world population will die in 1 year" thread... when did the economics subforum become the preferred hangout spot for the paranoid delusional tinfoil hat-wearers? You guys are off your friggin meds. It's impossible to even have a sane conversation.

Fine, if you want to believe that your job will be automated away then go ahead and worry your ass off about it.

While I agree with much of what you say, you have to admit that there is a problem. Up to 60% youth unemployment in some EMU countries is a problem. But the reason is not that these jobs have been automated away. The reason is the Euro. The fact that people rely on multiple McDonalds jobs to feed a family in the US is a problem. But the reason is the relentless money printing of the US financial cartel and the resulting massive asset price inflation.

One has to emphasize with these worries, but the solution is not more government and centralization. Certainly not total government. The solution is less government and de-centralization.

That should not be confused with the de-regulation that took place during the last 20 years or so. The real economy got burried in regulation during that period. The de-regulation was only for the fiscal-financial complex, and that is the opposite of creating and maintaining a free market.

Topic: Technological unemployment is (almost) here - page 18. (Read 88285 times)