5 ms·

It's remarkable how when people talk about how there won't be any jobs due to automation they rarely, if ever, look at how there will quite likely be fewer peo

by sien 9y ago

It's remarkable how when people talk about how there won't be any jobs due to automation they rarely, if ever, look at how there will quite likely be fewer people and people will be older. That's going to take demand out of the system for many things and add demand for things where automation is hardest such as taking care of the old and infirm. Some aspects of automation, like cheap autonomous meal delivery help, but taking care of people is highly labour intensive. That coupled with lower productivity growth is going to have big impacts everywhere. The Welfare state might become unsustainable. Places like Australia and the US with high immigration will delay these issues somewhat, but even there as the countries where immigrants get richer and themselves have fewer children immigration is likely to reduce in the next 20-50 years.

ekianjo 9y ago
> The Welfare state might become unsustainable It's not "might become", we already know it's unsustainable. It's just that presently we are taking on so much debt to make up for the ongoing costs of it, but at some point the future generations of workers may wonder why they have to pay so much when they don't get any of the benefits.
- sien 9y ago
  Potentially productive capacity might rise rapidly due to automation. Also the welfare state might be reduced somewhat to make it sustainable. Or a combination of both.
  - ekianjo 9y ago
    > Also the welfare state might be reduced somewhat to make it sustainable. That's already progressively happening, but it's because it's progressive it becomes a problem: you are for example paying for the pensions of folks who are retired now, but not for yours and there will be either no pension for when you reach 65, or they'll push it back to 75 to manage the costs. Folks who will retire in 20 years cannot count on the government's welfare at all.
- lz400 9y ago
  Perhaps it would be sustainable if most of the wealth wasn't going to a few people with little redistribution. I'm not even talking about communism, just fair taxation and contributing and no loop holes (double irish tricks and the like).
  - ekianjo 9y ago
    > most of the wealth wasn't going to a few people with little redistribution What are you talking about? Corporate profits are nothing compared to the national budget for redistribution. Check your figures.
    - lz400 9y ago
      US Corporate profits are about 1.6 trillion, total national budget is 3.8 trillion. Looks very comparable numbers, don't they? And this is profit, after everyone already got paid and all the tricks have been performed in the books. I think definitely globalization and global tax dodging is affecting the ability of states to support a welfare state.
      - sien 9y ago
        And corporations paid 770Bn in taxes in the US according to USA facts. http://usafacts.org/the-big-picture/revenue?return_to=%2F http://usafacts.org/the-big-picture/revenue?return_to=%2F In addition they employ a lot of the people who pay the 1.7Trn in Income and 1 Trn in payroll tax the US government gets.
        lz400 9y ago
        Yes. I'm not sure what your point is. Do you mean "they already pay a lot of tax!". I think things like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement Point to the fact that global corporations spend a lot of effort making sure they get away with paying less than they should. If there was a fair taxation of corps at the level they should be taxed, they would be paying more. Obviously the corporations keep getting bigger and richer, and the 1% wealthier, yet we see countries struggling with welfare state. Doesn't seem right.
option 9y ago
Lets suppose for a moment that automation is abundant and a welfare state is able to provide universal basic income. People wouldn't need to worry about their kids future and they will have plenty of time. How would that affect fertility rates?
- ekianjo 9y ago
  > How would that affect fertility rates? People don't have kids because they dont want to have kids. That's more a choice now than it ever was. Automation, Basic Income, won't change the global trend, especially in Japan.

by sien 9y ago

ekianjo 9y ago

> The Welfare state might become unsustainable It's not "might become", we already know it's unsustainable. It's just that presently we are taking on so much debt to make up for the ongoing costs of it, but at some point the future generations of workers may wonder why they have to pay so much when they don't get any of the benefits.

sien 9y ago
Potentially productive capacity might rise rapidly due to automation. Also the welfare state might be reduced somewhat to make it sustainable. Or a combination of both.
- ekianjo 9y ago
  > Also the welfare state might be reduced somewhat to make it sustainable. That's already progressively happening, but it's because it's progressive it becomes a problem: you are for example paying for the pensions of folks who are retired now, but not for yours and there will be either no pension for when you reach 65, or they'll push it back to 75 to manage the costs. Folks who will retire in 20 years cannot count on the government's welfare at all.
lz400 9y ago
Perhaps it would be sustainable if most of the wealth wasn't going to a few people with little redistribution. I'm not even talking about communism, just fair taxation and contributing and no loop holes (double irish tricks and the like).
- ekianjo 9y ago
  > most of the wealth wasn't going to a few people with little redistribution What are you talking about? Corporate profits are nothing compared to the national budget for redistribution. Check your figures.
  - lz400 9y ago
    US Corporate profits are about 1.6 trillion, total national budget is 3.8 trillion. Looks very comparable numbers, don't they? And this is profit, after everyone already got paid and all the tricks have been performed in the books. I think definitely globalization and global tax dodging is affecting the ability of states to support a welfare state.
    - sien 9y ago
      And corporations paid 770Bn in taxes in the US according to USA facts. http://usafacts.org/the-big-picture/revenue?return_to=%2F http://usafacts.org/the-big-picture/revenue?return_to=%2F In addition they employ a lot of the people who pay the 1.7Trn in Income and 1 Trn in payroll tax the US government gets.
      - lz400 9y ago
        Yes. I'm not sure what your point is. Do you mean "they already pay a lot of tax!". I think things like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_Irish_arrangement Point to the fact that global corporations spend a lot of effort making sure they get away with paying less than they should. If there was a fair taxation of corps at the level they should be taxed, they would be paying more. Obviously the corporations keep getting bigger and richer, and the 1% wealthier, yet we see countries struggling with welfare state. Doesn't seem right.

option 9y ago

Lets suppose for a moment that automation is abundant and a welfare state is able to provide universal basic income. People wouldn't need to worry about their kids future and they will have plenty of time. How would that affect fertility rates?

ekianjo 9y ago
> How would that affect fertility rates? People don't have kids because they dont want to have kids. That's more a choice now than it ever was. Automation, Basic Income, won't change the global trend, especially in Japan.