16 ms·

What's with this obsession with jobs? If all we wanted were "jobs", we could create 100 million real quickly. Just go destroy a bunch of stuff and get people to

What's with this obsession with jobs? If all we wanted were "jobs", we could create 100 million real quickly. Just go destroy a bunch of stuff and get people to work, rebuilding everything again.

akama 13y ago
Doing that doesn't increase value though.
Tharkun 13y ago
We're a long way away from this yet, but eventually we likely will run out of work. Some jobs are harder to automate than others, and some arguably will never be (robotic artists seem a little silly?) automated. At some point in the future we're going to have to ask ourselves the question: what the hell do we do with ourselves? Working less would probably be a good start. But then what? Do we turn into a dystopian planet of hedonistic oafs?
- 127001brewer 13y ago
  Do we turn into a dystopian planet of hedonistic oafs? I guess you haven't seen any of the recent reality TV shows lately...
- kasey_junk 13y ago
  We've been through this before, many many times. The agrarian revolution, the industrial revolution, etc. Each time we keep getting more time off (the 40 hour work week would sound ridiculous to someone in 1860). The problem as I see it is that we haven't lowered our standard work week to match our new productivity. We should be working around 27-30 hours at most.
  - yardie 13y ago
    According to my nontechnical friends, they are down to the 20-30 hour work week. Buhhtttt, businesses are also cutting compensation as well so working 30hr/wk is costing you more than working 40. As in completely dropped health plans, 401K, paid holidays, etc.
  - flyinRyan 13y ago
    wtf are you talking about? The revolutions have increased work times, not reduced them. It's basically unions that have reduced work time.
127001brewer 13y ago
The article is trying to highlight two different types of "jobs": ones that can provide a family with a "comfortable lifestyle" and ones in which people struggle to make ends meat. I think the article makes a far leap to say the internet is responsible for the decreasing middle class. There are many factors, such as manufacturing automation, in our changing economic conditions. Overall, I do not think the internet will be huge catalyst for job growth - in terms of providing millions of new jobs. But it will always be a huge catalyst for economic growth. The following was insightful: "It suddenly occurred to me," wrote Packer, "that the hottest tech start-ups are solving all the problems of being twenty years old, with cash on hand, because that’s who thinks them up." Hopefully those twenty years old developers will solve more meaningful problems than sharing cat photos. As an aside, I'm surprised that any discussion on "basic income" - you know it's coming - hasn't mention the Star Trek economy. Seriously, how do people in Star Trek universe survive in their economy?
- 2pasc 13y ago
  "Hopefully those twenty years old developers will solve more meaningful problems than sharing cat photos." The truth is that cat photos are mostly shared by people in the middle class that is being destroyed. 20 year old developers solve problems they know, and sometimes this involves their mom.
- Roboprog 13y ago
  Ugh. There has to be a happy medium somewhere between serfdom and welfare-dom. In my mind, both extremes involve leaches wanting money for nothing, whether its because there are a few aristocrats, er, capitalists collecting "rent" for assets they inherited, or many people (I believe by Kiwi friend calls them "dole bludges") who simply expect a monthly welfare payout for nothing. I'm so old, I remember a period in this country's time when we rejected the idea of an aristocracy, taxed the hell out of the well off, and used it to pay for maintenance of the commons. This maintenance involved people in many walks of life, whether it was filling pot holes in roads, or researching rocket science and brain surgery. This made work that paid well enough for many people to do things that were helpful to society as a whole, but that which it was hard to get a single person to pay for. Forcing those who benefitted most from the structure of society to contribute to its continuation is NOT the same as expecting a free ride. OTOH, I'm pretty sure that handing out "basic income" to everybody would greatly stagnate society, as 60 to 90% of the population would do nothing :-(
edkennedy 13y ago
Ahh, you mean like the parable of the broken window? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window)
- xwowsersx 13y ago
  Right.

What's with this obsession with jobs? If all we wanted were "jobs", we could create 100 million real quickly. Just go destroy a bunch of stuff and get people to work, rebuilding everything again.

akama 13y ago

Doing that doesn't increase value though.

Tharkun 13y ago

We're a long way away from this yet, but eventually we likely will run out of work. Some jobs are harder to automate than others, and some arguably will never be (robotic artists seem a little silly?) automated. At some point in the future we're going to have to ask ourselves the question: what the hell do we do with ourselves? Working less would probably be a good start. But then what? Do we turn into a dystopian planet of hedonistic oafs?

127001brewer 13y ago
Do we turn into a dystopian planet of hedonistic oafs? I guess you haven't seen any of the recent reality TV shows lately...
kasey_junk 13y ago
We've been through this before, many many times. The agrarian revolution, the industrial revolution, etc. Each time we keep getting more time off (the 40 hour work week would sound ridiculous to someone in 1860). The problem as I see it is that we haven't lowered our standard work week to match our new productivity. We should be working around 27-30 hours at most.
- yardie 13y ago
  According to my nontechnical friends, they are down to the 20-30 hour work week. Buhhtttt, businesses are also cutting compensation as well so working 30hr/wk is costing you more than working 40. As in completely dropped health plans, 401K, paid holidays, etc.
- flyinRyan 13y ago
  wtf are you talking about? The revolutions have increased work times, not reduced them. It's basically unions that have reduced work time.

127001brewer 13y ago

The article is trying to highlight two different types of "jobs": ones that can provide a family with a "comfortable lifestyle" and ones in which people struggle to make ends meat. I think the article makes a far leap to say the internet is responsible for the decreasing middle class. There are many factors, such as manufacturing automation, in our changing economic conditions. Overall, I do not think the internet will be huge catalyst for job growth - in terms of providing millions of new jobs. But it will always be a huge catalyst for economic growth. The following was insightful: "It suddenly occurred to me," wrote Packer, "that the hottest tech start-ups are solving all the problems of being twenty years old, with cash on hand, because that’s who thinks them up." Hopefully those twenty years old developers will solve more meaningful problems than sharing cat photos. As an aside, I'm surprised that any discussion on "basic income" - you know it's coming - hasn't mention the Star Trek economy. Seriously, how do people in Star Trek universe survive in their economy?

2pasc 13y ago
"Hopefully those twenty years old developers will solve more meaningful problems than sharing cat photos." The truth is that cat photos are mostly shared by people in the middle class that is being destroyed. 20 year old developers solve problems they know, and sometimes this involves their mom.
Roboprog 13y ago
Ugh. There has to be a happy medium somewhere between serfdom and welfare-dom. In my mind, both extremes involve leaches wanting money for nothing, whether its because there are a few aristocrats, er, capitalists collecting "rent" for assets they inherited, or many people (I believe by Kiwi friend calls them "dole bludges") who simply expect a monthly welfare payout for nothing. I'm so old, I remember a period in this country's time when we rejected the idea of an aristocracy, taxed the hell out of the well off, and used it to pay for maintenance of the commons. This maintenance involved people in many walks of life, whether it was filling pot holes in roads, or researching rocket science and brain surgery. This made work that paid well enough for many people to do things that were helpful to society as a whole, but that which it was hard to get a single person to pay for. Forcing those who benefitted most from the structure of society to contribute to its continuation is NOT the same as expecting a free ride. OTOH, I'm pretty sure that handing out "basic income" to everybody would greatly stagnate society, as 60 to 90% of the population would do nothing :-(

edkennedy 13y ago

Ahh, you mean like the parable of the broken window? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window)

xwowsersx 13y ago
Right.