4 ms·

>uncomfortably large part of the population just really doesn't have anything economically worthwhile to offer in the modern context? Someone still has to do t

>uncomfortably large part of the population just really doesn't have anything economically worthwhile to offer in the modern context? Someone still has to do the jobs. The sanitation workers, the McDonalds employees, the truck drivers, the waiters, the cooks -- they all have a role in society and are economically worthwhile -- it's just that nobody has had a raise since the 90's and income inequality is the highest it has ever been in history while the cost of essential needs for humans continues to rise. When's the last time you've seen rents go down? In my opinion, UBI is a band aid on the problem of late capitalism. Simply guaranteeing health insurance, implementing full employment, would raise the country economically (but not for the poor shareholders!) enormously but our current corrupt system of crony deregulating late capitalism won't allow this at the expense of the middle & lower classes. I keep saying this here: workers really need to see the surplus value they create instead of just their wages; the surplus value goes into the pocket of the shareholder and benefits absolutely nobody.

adamnemecek 8y ago
> Someone still has to do the jobs. The sanitation workers, the McDonalds employees, the truck drivers, the waiters, the cooks Those jobs are going away.
- greglindahl 8y ago
  Cooking has become vastly more efficient over the past 10,000 years, especially recently with labor-saving kitchen equipment. Yet there are still cooks. And we eat fancier food.
  - adamnemecek 8y ago
    They will be replaced by machines very soon. I'm pumped for when cooking becomes essentially programming. Cooking is a sequence of steps, just like programming.
claytonjy 8y ago
> Someone still has to do the jobs. I think GP's argument is that we won't need them too much longer. The jobs you mention don't need to disappear completely for there to be problems; if the demand for that class of fungible unskilled labor drops by 20% (not hard to imagine in the next decade or so), what happens to those tens of millions of people who have no way to provide for themselves and their families? Curious to know what you mean by "implementing full employment", given we're about as close to that now as anyone has ever been.
- prolikewh0a 8y ago
  >what happens to those tens of millions of people who have no way to provide for themselves and their families? In our current system of late capitalism, they probably get told to pull up their boot straps and work more/different jobs with no help at all. You won't hear about it on the news, you won't see it in the paper, you won't see it on TV because there are only 5-6 corporations that own almost all media, but people will be struggling and in poverty no doubt. We've been continuously taking away SNAP benefits, taking away medicaid benefits, adding work requirements, and now HUD wants to raise rent on people receiving federal rent assistance. I have absolutely no faith USA will do anything beneficial for its people anymore, only for the benefit of corporations and now with full Republican control we're probably going to see a Lochner Era 2.0. >Curious to know what you mean by "implementing full employment", given we're about as close to that now as anyone has ever been. Wages aren't rising because 4.0% unemployment[1] is still 15 million people unemployed, and not all people out of work are included in the official US unemployment numbers. That's a huge reserve of employment that doesn't allow workers to really have any control in their workplace because they have absolutely no job security, and it doesn't allow them to bargain for higher wages. It turns the tables and gives workers control instead of bosses & corporations, it gives the power to the people who do the work.[2] Wages are actually falling. This shouldn't happen if unemployment is extremely low.[3] [1]https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 [2]http://delong.typepad.com/kalecki43.pdf http://delong.typepad.com/kalecki43.pdf [3]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b865064c29f2 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t...
dragonwriter 8y ago
> won't allow this at the expense of the middle & lower classes. I keep saying this here: workers really need to see the surplus value they create instead of just their wages; the surplus value goes into the pocket of the shareholder and benefits absolutely nobody. So, tax capital income at non-preferential rates and use the funds as part of the funding stream for UBI. Alternatively, mandate labor cooperatives as the exclusive form of business entity granted artificial personality with liability protection, but UBI is probably an easier political sell and less risky.

adamnemecek 8y ago

> Someone still has to do the jobs. The sanitation workers, the McDonalds employees, the truck drivers, the waiters, the cooks Those jobs are going away.

greglindahl 8y ago
Cooking has become vastly more efficient over the past 10,000 years, especially recently with labor-saving kitchen equipment. Yet there are still cooks. And we eat fancier food.
- adamnemecek 8y ago
  They will be replaced by machines very soon. I'm pumped for when cooking becomes essentially programming. Cooking is a sequence of steps, just like programming.

claytonjy 8y ago

> Someone still has to do the jobs. I think GP's argument is that we won't need them too much longer. The jobs you mention don't need to disappear completely for there to be problems; if the demand for that class of fungible unskilled labor drops by 20% (not hard to imagine in the next decade or so), what happens to those tens of millions of people who have no way to provide for themselves and their families? Curious to know what you mean by "implementing full employment", given we're about as close to that now as anyone has ever been.

prolikewh0a 8y ago
>what happens to those tens of millions of people who have no way to provide for themselves and their families? In our current system of late capitalism, they probably get told to pull up their boot straps and work more/different jobs with no help at all. You won't hear about it on the news, you won't see it in the paper, you won't see it on TV because there are only 5-6 corporations that own almost all media, but people will be struggling and in poverty no doubt. We've been continuously taking away SNAP benefits, taking away medicaid benefits, adding work requirements, and now HUD wants to raise rent on people receiving federal rent assistance. I have absolutely no faith USA will do anything beneficial for its people anymore, only for the benefit of corporations and now with full Republican control we're probably going to see a Lochner Era 2.0. >Curious to know what you mean by "implementing full employment", given we're about as close to that now as anyone has ever been. Wages aren't rising because 4.0% unemployment[1] is still 15 million people unemployed, and not all people out of work are included in the official US unemployment numbers. That's a huge reserve of employment that doesn't allow workers to really have any control in their workplace because they have absolutely no job security, and it doesn't allow them to bargain for higher wages. It turns the tables and gives workers control instead of bosses & corporations, it gives the power to the people who do the work.[2] Wages are actually falling. This shouldn't happen if unemployment is extremely low.[3] [1]https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000 [2]http://delong.typepad.com/kalecki43.pdf http://delong.typepad.com/kalecki43.pdf [3]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-the-biggest-group-of-american-workers-wages-arent-just-flat-theyre-falling/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.b865064c29f2 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/06/15/for-t...

dragonwriter 8y ago

> won't allow this at the expense of the middle & lower classes. I keep saying this here: workers really need to see the surplus value they create instead of just their wages; the surplus value goes into the pocket of the shareholder and benefits absolutely nobody. So, tax capital income at non-preferential rates and use the funds as part of the funding stream for UBI. Alternatively, mandate labor cooperatives as the exclusive form of business entity granted artificial personality with liability protection, but UBI is probably an easier political sell and less risky.