3 ms·
Totally agree, especially with the concept of universal basic income. Over the past couple years I've come closer to the conclusion that the middle class is pr
by adevine 11y ago
Totally agree, especially with the concept of universal basic income.
Over the past couple years I've come closer to the conclusion that the middle class is pretty much doomed, and it will take a big change in our economic system to cope. A middle class fundamentally requires a large number of well-paying "repetitive" or "algorithmic" jobs. Doesn't matter if they are blue collar or white collar, but there need to be a lot of jobs where the output is relatively standard - e.g. the widget was made properly, the car ended up at the right destination, the audit was completed, etc. In these jobs, there isn't really that much of a difference between a good product and great product - it's just a job that needs to be completed.
Contrast that with "creative" or "competitive" type jobs: actor, writer, graphic designer, etc. Those jobs can never support a large middle class, because by definition there is such a huge valuation difference between the best performers and everyone else - there will always be a huge amount of inequality in these professions because the best can command a much higher salary than those even slightly down the ladder.
The problem, of course, is that automation and software will eventually take away the vast majority of the repetitive jobs. If all you are left with are the creative/competitive type jobs, you are guaranteed to have a huge amount of inequality.
- thenomad 11y agoThere's another element to this too which multiplies the problem: whether the competition is on a local or a global scale. Consider being a chef vs being a filmmaker. If you're the best chef in a city, you'll be in considerable demand. See, for example, Tom Kitchin in Edinburgh, who is justifiably rather famous and whose restaurant is booked out months in advance. If you're the best filmmaker in a city, by contrast, no-one really cares. What matters there is if you're the best - or one of the best 10 or so - in the world. (Or at least, within a specific language.) Why? Because you can copy films and sell them all over the world without additional labour. You can do neither with food. So whilst the two are "creative" jobs, the output's transportability and replicability make a huge difference in just how good you have to be to be the best. (Not that I'm saying being a chef or running a restaurant isn't competitive. It's very competitive. And bloody hard work in other ways. Say what you like about being a filmmaker, it doesn't involve 14-hour days 360 days of the year to stay afloat.)
- adevine 11y agoCompletely agree, and that's also a reason why the internet is making it hugely difficult for large swaths of society to compete - what used to be many smaller markets, each with room for its own winner, is now a single giant market (for the most part) that can only support one winner (or very few) in total.