3 ms·

That's a very classist attitude founded on a view of economic activity that pertained to human history only over a short period of tube and otherwise is a compl

That's a very classist attitude founded on a view of economic activity that pertained to human history only over a short period of tube and otherwise is a completely unrealistic view of the human condition. Humans are amazing creatures. Moreover there is no limit to the work that can be done, there is always something else that can or should be done should the labor become available. I can assure you, people will not run out of valuable, substantive work to do. People got much more efficient at farming (by orders of magnitude), that didn't lead to people stopping working it led to people finding other things to do such as crafts, art, and later manufacturing. Now that the save thing has happened with manufacturing people are again finding other things to do.

coding123 10y ago
While I dont agree with everything this comment or said, I definitely see that most people in the US (because that's where I live) are typically either tellers, paper pushers, execs... Hardly anyone does anything actually meaningful it seems. There is like 3% that seems to be in endeavor fields like science, exploration, invention... But most of what I see is completely meaningless drone work.
- thehardsphere 10y ago
  "Meaningless drone work" needs to get done just as much as "science, exploration and invention." Just because it's work that seems tedious and boring to you doesn't mean it's not valuable to either the person paying for it or the person doing it.
  - state_less 10y ago
    Does it though? Look at the health insurance industry, Aetna pulls in $15B and has $3B in overhead. Couldn't automation cut out (nearly) all the people involved in that overhead. They spent $20 million pulling levers to get a better deal for themselves in Washington alone. This is worse than drone work, it's drone work that kills people.
    - thehardsphere 10y ago
      Well, if we're going to drill down a layer and talk about specific companies and the specific work that is done for them, rather than paint entire classes of people as worthless, then sure, we can find all sorts of "meaningless" work. Health insurance is actually a very good example if you want to find meaningless drone work, because of the rent seeking you describe and because of other perverse things that come about due to government intervention in that market. That's work that nobody would do if there wasn't a government regulating that industry. You could make an argument that all of that work is meaningless and human beings should be freed from doing it. Of course, you could also argue that work is no less necessary simply because the government exists and intervenes in healthcare, because the government exists and is going to intervene in healthcare whether we like it or not. Thus, having drones at the office to lobby governments is valuable to Aetna. And I'm sure someone from Aetna would claim that they have to spend that $20 million or else they'd be unable to provide health insurance at all. Which is also a ludicrous claim, but a lot of companies seem to be getting out of health insurance lately...
zouhair 10y ago
Exactly. People are talking that there is no jobs like if everyone in the world have a roof on their heads, have enough food to eat, have good education and so on and so forth. Just those basic things are a huge amount of human activities. The problem is not no jobs, the problem is political will and priorities. Right now most of the wealth created by all humans goes to a tiny minority that has different priorities than the rest of humanity.
randallsquared 10y ago
> Moreover there is no limit to the work that can be done, there is always something else that can or should be done should the labor become available. I can assure you, people will not run out of valuable, substantive work to do. Maybe. The existence of so many businesses with vast stores of cash in the bank makes me wonder, though. This is capacity to pay for valuable, substantive work, but it sits. Even if people look back on this era in 100 years and note that everyone had something else to do by 2060, the sudden change seems likely to cause more traumatic social upheaval, so a peaceful transition to a post-whatever-this-is economy seems unlikely without trying something very different. I'm quite libertarian, and I think a basic income is not fundamentally incompatible with that, if implemented correctly. It seems to me that GiveDirectly's voluntary approach is a step in the right direction.

coding123 10y ago

While I dont agree with everything this comment or said, I definitely see that most people in the US (because that's where I live) are typically either tellers, paper pushers, execs... Hardly anyone does anything actually meaningful it seems. There is like 3% that seems to be in endeavor fields like science, exploration, invention... But most of what I see is completely meaningless drone work.

thehardsphere 10y ago
"Meaningless drone work" needs to get done just as much as "science, exploration and invention." Just because it's work that seems tedious and boring to you doesn't mean it's not valuable to either the person paying for it or the person doing it.
- state_less 10y ago
  Does it though? Look at the health insurance industry, Aetna pulls in $15B and has $3B in overhead. Couldn't automation cut out (nearly) all the people involved in that overhead. They spent $20 million pulling levers to get a better deal for themselves in Washington alone. This is worse than drone work, it's drone work that kills people.
  - thehardsphere 10y ago
    Well, if we're going to drill down a layer and talk about specific companies and the specific work that is done for them, rather than paint entire classes of people as worthless, then sure, we can find all sorts of "meaningless" work. Health insurance is actually a very good example if you want to find meaningless drone work, because of the rent seeking you describe and because of other perverse things that come about due to government intervention in that market. That's work that nobody would do if there wasn't a government regulating that industry. You could make an argument that all of that work is meaningless and human beings should be freed from doing it. Of course, you could also argue that work is no less necessary simply because the government exists and intervenes in healthcare, because the government exists and is going to intervene in healthcare whether we like it or not. Thus, having drones at the office to lobby governments is valuable to Aetna. And I'm sure someone from Aetna would claim that they have to spend that $20 million or else they'd be unable to provide health insurance at all. Which is also a ludicrous claim, but a lot of companies seem to be getting out of health insurance lately...

zouhair 10y ago

Exactly. People are talking that there is no jobs like if everyone in the world have a roof on their heads, have enough food to eat, have good education and so on and so forth. Just those basic things are a huge amount of human activities. The problem is not no jobs, the problem is political will and priorities. Right now most of the wealth created by all humans goes to a tiny minority that has different priorities than the rest of humanity.

randallsquared 10y ago

> Moreover there is no limit to the work that can be done, there is always something else that can or should be done should the labor become available. I can assure you, people will not run out of valuable, substantive work to do. Maybe. The existence of so many businesses with vast stores of cash in the bank makes me wonder, though. This is capacity to pay for valuable, substantive work, but it sits. Even if people look back on this era in 100 years and note that everyone had something else to do by 2060, the sudden change seems likely to cause more traumatic social upheaval, so a peaceful transition to a post-whatever-this-is economy seems unlikely without trying something very different. I'm quite libertarian, and I think a basic income is not fundamentally incompatible with that, if implemented correctly. It seems to me that GiveDirectly's voluntary approach is a step in the right direction.