5 ms·

By "race to the bottom" do you mean "the bottom slice of humanity is experiencing rapid growth in income"? https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0we_c3Ob8Ds/UrDEMjcK3MI/A

By "race to the bottom" do you mean "the bottom slice of humanity is experiencing rapid growth in income"? https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0we_c3Ob8Ds/UrDEMjcK3MI/AAAAAAAAEb8/Izydk1Hsi8I/s1600/milanovic+1.jpg https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0we_c3Ob8Ds/UrDEMjcK3MI/AAAAAAAAE... Also relevant: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/13/this-may-be-the-most-important-chart-for-understanding-politics-today/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/13/this-... The need for a radical solution lies in the far future. I know large numbers of educated professionals who clean their own homes but would be happy to pay $10-15/hour to have this problem solved. (I pay well over $15/hour, and need to turn to overseas folks for virtual labor.) Talking about the problem of human labor being obsolete during a time of labor scarcity is like worrying about mars being overpopulated.

alanwatts 11y ago
>The need for a radical solution lies in the far future. How far in the future? What KPI would we look at to know when there is a need for a new solution to replace our legacy economic model?
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  As a very concrete way to think of it, consider the typical middle class lifestyle in India. Consider all the labor that is regularly outsourced - house cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc. If I want to eat a paan, buy a cigarette, or other snack/consumable, I only need to walk a city block or so before I can find someone willing to sell it to me. Any educated female can easily afford child care so she can work. My office has multiple servants to make life easier for the skilled labor employed therein; if you want maggie, momos or beer, just give them some cash and they'll bring it to you. At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. When robots provide the same level of services to the US middle class, that would be a signal that we might need to think about something like a BI. Until then, BI is really solving the complete opposite problem to what we have.
  - brenschluss 11y ago
    > At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. Labor scarcity is another word for "there aren't enough people who want to work for less," and you describe it as if it's a good thing for society as a whole. We have minimum wage for a reason, because with wages low enough to make a neighborhood chai-seller a possibility, it means that the lower limit of a societal standard of living plummets. The fact that you present India, with its extreme income inequality, as an example of a country that provides an ideal lifestyle for you is indicative.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      According to the BI proponents, we have a shortage of jobs. Yet prices are rising and work is simply going undone. That's completely the opposite of what would happen if they were right. If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Your facts are also wrong; the US has a GINI of 41 (comparable to the UK or the Congo). In contrast, India has only 33.6 (comparable to France, Canada or Sierra Leone). India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem.
      - brenschluss 11y ago
        > India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem. Good point, but it doesn't change my argument; your conveniences are made possible by the higher poverty / lower income of service providers. > If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Do you believe that lowering standards of living by eliminating minimum wage is a good thing, because it "increases employment and production"? For example: Mumbai's trash and recycling ecosystem is largely driven by a complex economy of ragpickers, sorters, and tiny recycling factories based in informal settlements (Dharavi, etc). Last time I checked (Summer 2014), the ragpickers are paid 5rs per kg, and on average collect about 10kg a day, making that around 50rs, $0.75, or 48% the cost of a Big Mac (or its equivalent, the Maharaja Mac) in India. Would you really agree that someone who works all day to make 50% of a Big Mac be an ideal model of employment and societal economic policy, because they're working and thus raising employment and production? Because that's what you're asking for if you're claiming that we need to stop a "labor shortage" in order to provide more low-cost conveniences.
- kordless 11y ago
  "Not so far in the future", says the futurist. The issue with KPIs is that it focuses attention on a single indicator, which is what most business in the world revolves around (a stock ticker is a good example). Businesses run in a holistic way tend to do better, such as those explained in Good to Great (productive paranoia + empirical creativity + fanatical discipline). The same holistic approach could be applied to our economy, but lots of moving parts is going to make it hard to tell when, or if, things need to be changed. I expect a financial meltdown to be the thing that causes a revisit to exploring new business and economic models.
  - alanwatts 11y ago
    I holistically agree!
mcguire 11y ago
I also know many educated professionals who would enjoy the opportunity to employ slaves. What does that have to do with anything?
- lsc 11y ago
  are you arguing that there is a moral difference between hiring someone to clean your house and hiring someone to change the oil in your car? or are you arguing that consuming services provided by workers who are paid $12-$15/hr is immoral in and of itself, regardless of the service in question?
  - mcguire 11y ago
    I was replying to: "I know large numbers of educated professionals who clean their own homes but would be happy to pay $10-15/hour to have this problem solved. (I pay well over $15/hour, and need to turn to overseas folks for virtual labor.) Talking about the problem of human labor being obsolete during a time of labor scarcity is like worrying about mars being overpopulated." My interpretation of which is that yummyfajitas feels that labor is scarce and therefore overly expensive at $15/hour.
    - lsc 11y ago
      >My interpretation of which is that yummyfajitas feels that labor is scarce and therefore overly expensive at $15/hour. Okay, I can see that. Your response was kind of an aggressive way of putting it, but yes I agree that it is kind of rude to complain that the market rate for menial labor is higher than you'd like, and to say that there is a labor shortage when the prevailing wage for unskilled work is still below what a reasonable standard of living costs, considering what that means for the less fortunate. On the other hand, it's pretty reasonable to say "I'll by services up to $x per hour, but not above that." This is a lot of the 'basic income' debate, because obviously, giving people survival-level money is going to dramatically decrease their willingness to do unpleasant jobs for survival level money. Personally, I kind of like that, as it removes a lot of what I think of the consent problem of capitalism... remove the threat of starvation, yes, and some people won't work at all, sure, but you also remove the moral comparison between work and slavery, and a lot of the anguish and ethical issues that come with firing someone. On the factual side of things, I wonder where parent commenter lives; as far as I can tell, it's pretty easy to get the cheaper sort of manual labor done for $15/hr in silicon valley. If you are paying more than that for a cleaning service, either you are a generous employer willing to pay above market wages (perhaps to secure a trusted person over the long term) or you are using a service that is eating up most of the difference.

alanwatts 11y ago

>The need for a radical solution lies in the far future. How far in the future? What KPI would we look at to know when there is a need for a new solution to replace our legacy economic model?

yummyfajitas 11y ago
As a very concrete way to think of it, consider the typical middle class lifestyle in India. Consider all the labor that is regularly outsourced - house cleaning, cooking, laundry, etc. If I want to eat a paan, buy a cigarette, or other snack/consumable, I only need to walk a city block or so before I can find someone willing to sell it to me. Any educated female can easily afford child care so she can work. My office has multiple servants to make life easier for the skilled labor employed therein; if you want maggie, momos or beer, just give them some cash and they'll bring it to you. At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. When robots provide the same level of services to the US middle class, that would be a signal that we might need to think about something like a BI. Until then, BI is really solving the complete opposite problem to what we have.
- brenschluss 11y ago
  > At the moment the problem in the US is labor scarcity. Robots haven't replaced these jobs, these jobs just don't get done. Labor scarcity is another word for "there aren't enough people who want to work for less," and you describe it as if it's a good thing for society as a whole. We have minimum wage for a reason, because with wages low enough to make a neighborhood chai-seller a possibility, it means that the lower limit of a societal standard of living plummets. The fact that you present India, with its extreme income inequality, as an example of a country that provides an ideal lifestyle for you is indicative.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    According to the BI proponents, we have a shortage of jobs. Yet prices are rising and work is simply going undone. That's completely the opposite of what would happen if they were right. If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Your facts are also wrong; the US has a GINI of 41 (comparable to the UK or the Congo). In contrast, India has only 33.6 (comparable to France, Canada or Sierra Leone). India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem.
    - brenschluss 11y ago
      > India has absolute poverty which is a totally different problem. Good point, but it doesn't change my argument; your conveniences are made possible by the higher poverty / lower income of service providers. > If you want to claim that less employment and lower production is a good thing, go ahead. Do you believe that lowering standards of living by eliminating minimum wage is a good thing, because it "increases employment and production"? For example: Mumbai's trash and recycling ecosystem is largely driven by a complex economy of ragpickers, sorters, and tiny recycling factories based in informal settlements (Dharavi, etc). Last time I checked (Summer 2014), the ragpickers are paid 5rs per kg, and on average collect about 10kg a day, making that around 50rs, $0.75, or 48% the cost of a Big Mac (or its equivalent, the Maharaja Mac) in India. Would you really agree that someone who works all day to make 50% of a Big Mac be an ideal model of employment and societal economic policy, because they're working and thus raising employment and production? Because that's what you're asking for if you're claiming that we need to stop a "labor shortage" in order to provide more low-cost conveniences.
kordless 11y ago
"Not so far in the future", says the futurist. The issue with KPIs is that it focuses attention on a single indicator, which is what most business in the world revolves around (a stock ticker is a good example). Businesses run in a holistic way tend to do better, such as those explained in Good to Great (productive paranoia + empirical creativity + fanatical discipline). The same holistic approach could be applied to our economy, but lots of moving parts is going to make it hard to tell when, or if, things need to be changed. I expect a financial meltdown to be the thing that causes a revisit to exploring new business and economic models.
- alanwatts 11y ago
  I holistically agree!

mcguire 11y ago

I also know many educated professionals who would enjoy the opportunity to employ slaves. What does that have to do with anything?

lsc 11y ago
are you arguing that there is a moral difference between hiring someone to clean your house and hiring someone to change the oil in your car? or are you arguing that consuming services provided by workers who are paid $12-$15/hr is immoral in and of itself, regardless of the service in question?
- mcguire 11y ago
  I was replying to: "I know large numbers of educated professionals who clean their own homes but would be happy to pay $10-15/hour to have this problem solved. (I pay well over $15/hour, and need to turn to overseas folks for virtual labor.) Talking about the problem of human labor being obsolete during a time of labor scarcity is like worrying about mars being overpopulated." My interpretation of which is that yummyfajitas feels that labor is scarce and therefore overly expensive at $15/hour.
  - lsc 11y ago
    >My interpretation of which is that yummyfajitas feels that labor is scarce and therefore overly expensive at $15/hour. Okay, I can see that. Your response was kind of an aggressive way of putting it, but yes I agree that it is kind of rude to complain that the market rate for menial labor is higher than you'd like, and to say that there is a labor shortage when the prevailing wage for unskilled work is still below what a reasonable standard of living costs, considering what that means for the less fortunate. On the other hand, it's pretty reasonable to say "I'll by services up to $x per hour, but not above that." This is a lot of the 'basic income' debate, because obviously, giving people survival-level money is going to dramatically decrease their willingness to do unpleasant jobs for survival level money. Personally, I kind of like that, as it removes a lot of what I think of the consent problem of capitalism... remove the threat of starvation, yes, and some people won't work at all, sure, but you also remove the moral comparison between work and slavery, and a lot of the anguish and ethical issues that come with firing someone. On the factual side of things, I wonder where parent commenter lives; as far as I can tell, it's pretty easy to get the cheaper sort of manual labor done for $15/hr in silicon valley. If you are paying more than that for a cleaning service, either you are a generous employer willing to pay above market wages (perhaps to secure a trusted person over the long term) or you are using a service that is eating up most of the difference.