5 ms·
I see the collapse in demand for human labor as the key political issue of the 21st century. So many of us are just not required by our economy.
by jl6 13y ago
I see the collapse in demand for human labor as the key political issue of the 21st century. So many of us are just not required by our economy.
- wavefunction 13y agoThe economy should serve man, not the other way around.
- Fede_V 13y agoIt's funny how once you are inside a certain ethical paradigm, you automatically take it for granted. For example - Samurai in Edo Japan were forbidden from working, and if you didn't have a master to defend, the honorable thing to do was either starve to death, or find another master who would give you permission to kill yourself.
- wavefunction 13y agoThat's a great way of putting it with an excellent example. I see so many man-made problems in the world that people just accept as "how things are" as if they were physical laws of reality.
- mtdewcmu 13y agoCommunist, eh?
- wavefunction 13y agoFunny how you can take an innocuous statement like that and fit it into your fucked up worldview. Says more about you than me.
- mtdewcmu 13y agoI was trying to make a joke. I like the idea that the economy should serve the worker, but I think that's essentially what Karl Marx was saying. The Cold War is over, and the future seems to belong to robots.
- arethuza 13y agoYou could argue Communism + Robots = The Culture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture
- parasight 13y agoTo me the comment was quite clearly ironic.
- kika 13y agoThis is just a classical definition of Communism by inventor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_ability,_to_each_according_to_his_need http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_each_according_to_his_abil... I was taught this in school. Socialism, on the other hand, is "to each according to their contribution".
- Fede_V 13y agoNot in the slightest, I'm afraid I'm a plain ol liberal. I also have a great job that I love. I just think it's interesting how, aside from a few moral rules which are fairly common to all of humanity (don't steal, don't kill, etc), a lot of the rules that we follow and take for granted in our current historical milieu, would be considered completely arbitrary by the rest of humanity.
- CmonDev 13y agoWhat is wrong with that? Just because an idea was ahead of time and too idealistic does not mean it's not useful or worthy. Socialistic Sweden is doing better than capitalistic USA. Look at Switzerland considering a quite generous guaranteed basic income.
- paulhauggis 13y ago"What is wrong with that? Just because an idea was ahead of time and too idealistic does not mean it's not useful or worthy" Because human nature. "Socialistic Sweden is doing better than capitalistic USA." I guess it depends on what you define as "better". Innovation is very low (I don't see companies flocking there) and it's not easy to start your own business because of regulations and high taxes. Social mobility is also very low. So your choice is to move or work for a big company. I've been traveling all around Europe and Asia for the past year and I haven't found a place better than the US. Of course it has its problems, but every country does. "Look at Switzerland considering a quite generous guaranteed basic income." It was shot down rather quickly. If you know the culture of the people that live in Switzerland, it was never even an option.
- nkoren 13y ago> It was shot down rather quickly. The referendum has not happened yet. You're probably confusing it with the referendum on limiting CEO pay.
- CmonDev 13y agoWhat if there is an overproduction of those "man"?
- brc 13y agoA functional definition of 'the economy' to me is the interaction between people trading goods and services. To try and separate it out as some type of entity seems like faulty thinking, like saying the chess game should serve the players.
- kfk 13y agoIf people avoided seeing labor as a problem and started looking at it as to what it is, a resource just like any other (petrol, energy, etc.), they would stop making comments like this. Once you free humanity from a task, people will just do something more important.
- pfisch 13y agoAre you just not thinking through the road that will maybe lead to that outcome or what? Before we live in this utopia that you are describing that will probably not happen, a lot of people will find themselves destitute and a lot of people will die from that and the ensuing revolution that will probably be required. Also based on what has happened historically in the real world and in the past decade, it seems far more likely that we are moving towards a dystopia that will not be what you are imagining. However it will still require making a large portion of humanity destitute or on the dole living hand to mouth at the leisure of those who retain power/employment.
- tsotha 13y ago>Before we live in this utopia that you are describing that will probably not happen, a lot of people will find themselves destitute and a lot of people will die from that and the ensuing revolution that will probably be required. And may be lost. "Soldier" is an occupation that can be automated.
- tsotha 13y ago>If people avoided seeing labor as a problem and started looking at it as to what it is, a resource just like any other (petrol, energy, etc.), they would stop making comments like this. And what happens to the value of a resource for which there is much supply and little demand? What is so important that isn't being done today?
- dualogy 13y agoDunno, there's lots of potholes and worse issues in poor corrupt countries the world over. I can foresee a huge wave of next-gen Western "voluntourists" (on Basic Income or mum's allowance or whatever other scheme) coming over here to Cambodia for example fixing up the roads and installing solar panels, while at the same time admiring the locals' relaxed hammocky approach to life :D
- stretchwithme 13y agoIf we get to the point where machines are so good they replace all human labor, everything we require to live will be incredibly cheap. Which means becoming an entrepreneur will be much easier than it is now, in much the same way that being a web app developer is much easier now than it was a decade ago. But what if a large number of people can only do the work they are doing today? There's no reason they can't keep producing what they currently do and trade their products and services with each other. The Amish are doing exactly that and their standard of living is still probably better than it was when being Amish was first invented. So I don't think it would be a disaster. But I don't think replacing all human labor is going to happen before we also invent technologies that will radically improve how fast we can learn new skills and change limiting mental patterns. Either way, such a society will be incredibly wealthy and able to do things like remove all the mercury from the oceans and cover every structure with solar cells. We'll be able to deal with the issues.
- wavesounds 13y agoHow do you square this with the idea that deflation is bad? That's what I've never understood.
- stretchwithme 13y agoI don't hold that view. Keynesian economics doesn't make much sense to me, as a change in the value of our medium of exchange is not what creates prosperity. Its investment in technology that makes things cheap and makes a country prosperous. Not manipulating the medium of exchange. Austrian economics makes a lot more sense to me, although not everything they say does.
- LogicalBorg 13y agoI think deflation occurs when the economy is in a downturn, therefore economists think it is bad. I myself would refer to "good" or "bad" kinds of deflation. It's OK when prices are falling due to technological advance (the "good kind"); that happens all the time and is not the same as a downturn (the "bad kind" of deflation).
- 13y ago
- mtdewcmu 13y agoThe people who own all the robots shouldn't feel too smug, because robots will not buy their products.
- bjourne 13y agoWell.. I've been writing phone games, backend system for gambling sites, written crm sites, spent years on billion dollar companies projects that got nowhere, fixed spelling errors in forms applications used by <3 users, and so on. All while drawing a reasonable salary coding in a cozy office. But is my work "required by the economy" for any reasonable definition of "required by the economy"? I can't say I'm sure about that.