• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

Mechanization and Unemployment


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

Poll: The End of Work? (23 member(s) have cast votes)

Will mechanization of labor eventually require a guaranteed minimum income?

  1. Agree (15 votes [65.22%])

    Percentage of vote: 65.22%

  2. Disagree (3 votes [13.04%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.04%

  3. Unsure (5 votes [21.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

If so, how soon?

  1. Now (2 votes [8.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.70%

  2. 5-10 years (1 votes [4.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.35%

  3. 10-20 years (7 votes [30.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.43%

  4. 20-50 years (5 votes [21.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

  5. 50-100 years (4 votes [17.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.39%

  6. 100+ years (2 votes [8.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.70%

  7. Never (2 votes [8.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.70%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 EmbraceUnity

  • Guest
  • 1,018 posts
  • 99
  • Location:USA

Posted 20 February 2008 - 04:06 AM


A majority of unskilled jobs are completely unnecessary even with current technology. We are already very much a Robotic Nation; ATM Machines, industrial robots, automated checkouts, e-commerce, computerized help desks, and vending machines have replaced millions of workers. The burden of everything from brick-laying, to vacuuming, to food service can and will be shifted to machines. Yet, currently, it is as if human beings are taking on the role of machines, grinding away day-in and day-out in dead end jobs, all the while, the middle class is shrinking and unemployment is growing. If something isn't done, there will be some major class warfare.

Leisure is a good thing! Even for our economies it is a good thing. If it wasn't for the norms and government regulations in our society that produce more leisure time such as weekends, holidays, child labor laws, minimum wage, overtime laws, and so forth, there wouldn't be nearly as much demand to fuel the enormous industries surrounding music, art, sports, movies, entertainment, etc.

Unfortunately, we have been infected with the Protestant Ethic meme which sanctifies work. This sort of mentality is prevalent among most of society, from CEOs to workers' unions. Unions fight for the “right to work” and are deeply fearful of their jobs becoming automated. Ironically, many of the policies they push for make human labor more expensive, which gives further incentive for automation. I argue that workers should rejoice at the possibilities created by human labor becoming obsolete. We should speed up the process. Screw the right to work, we need the Right to be Lazy!

Employment is only valuable if it is performing a necessary service. If we can get our basic needs taken care of sufficiently, unemployment could be a perfectly reasonable option. There are plenty of worse things in the world than doing nothing. Being a marketing executive or politician, for example.

I would argue, though, that under conditions of abundance, we should seek to find joy in ways that benefit others as well. Volunteering one's time to nonprofit charitable endeavors would certainly be one example. Creating art, music, comedy, poetry, movies, video games, and so forth would also be valid ways of contributing to the world.

Thus, as automation progresses, we should gradually and continually strengthen laws regarding overtime, retirement, minimum wage, welfare, universal healthcare, importation from sweat-shop-ridden countries, and so forth, all in the name of making human labor more expensive, and compensating for the displacement caused by mechanization of labor. We should consider simultaneously giving positive incentives, such as tax breaks, for businesses that make strides toward automation, and fund research in that area.

I would go so far to say that once a sufficient amount of our production of basic necessities is automated, unemployment would be a good thing. We shouldn't just have welfare, but a Guaranteed Minimum Income system. (even Hayek would agree)

Once liberated from needless toil, we will be free to spend more time enjoying the fruits of our material abundance by creating art, playing sports, and loving one another. Maybe our GDP won't be growing quite as quickly at first, but some things are more important than the quantity of stuff we produced this financial quarter.

Feel free to share your thoughts. Is the End of Work near? If so, what should be done about it?

Edited by progressive, 20 February 2008 - 04:39 AM.


#2 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 20 February 2008 - 05:18 AM

Progressive, you are going to get an earful from some people on this. Just to give you an idea what to be on the lookout for, it will sound something like this. God Damn Commie Pinko Leftist! What the Hell are you, French? But you knew that already. Anyway, one thing that came quickly to my mind here is that there is a difference between toil and rewarding work. I know some people who like their jobs and get genuine satisfaction from them. They tend to be people who create things, like craftsmen and trades people. The Protestant Work Ethic might be a bit too strong in some in our country, but a high level of productivity has real benefits. Many years of Borrow and Spend policies have our country headed for a real crap-hole, and productivity reduction is not really something we can afford in the face of that. While some people would have a lot of fun in a workless world, I worry that there are a lot of people who would go down the tubes in such an environment. An awful lot of people retire, then decide it sucks, and end up back at work. There must be something to that.

#3 EmbraceUnity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,018 posts
  • 99
  • Location:USA

Posted 20 February 2008 - 05:55 AM

Progressive, you are going to get an earful from some people on this. Just to give you an idea what to be on the lookout for, it will sound something like this. God Damn Commie Pinko Leftist! What the Hell are you, French? But you knew that already. Anyway, one thing that came quickly to my mind here is that there is a difference between toil and rewarding work. I know some people who like their jobs and get genuine satisfaction from them. They tend to be people who create things, like craftsmen and trades people. The Protestant Work Ethic might be a bit too strong in some in our country, but a high level of productivity has real benefits. Many years of Borrow and Spend policies have our country headed for a real crap-hole, and productivity reduction is not really something we can afford in the face of that. While some people would have a lot of fun in a workless world, I worry that there are a lot of people who would go down the tubes in such an environment. An awful lot of people retire, then decide it sucks, and end up back at work. There must be something to that.


Those who retire then willingly go back to work at least had that option. For many, the only option is 60 hour weeks. I guarantee you there will be plenty of opportunities for creativity and public service in a society without compulsory wage labor. A guaranteed minimum income wouldn't even eliminate all opportunities for wage labor. Those who wish to go beyond a basic standard of living would be allowed to do so.

As for productivity, we would probably continue to grow, since automation is so efficient. There might be only modest growth at first, but that would be perfectly fine, especially since growth nowadays just seems to be a license for politicians to exacerbate their Borrow and Spend policies even more. Having a high GDP won't balance the budget; that is a political issue. We could, for instance, cut our bloated military spending.

Furthermore, the GDP isn't a meaningful measure of the robustness of the economy if it is the elites who are raking in all the profit from the productivity and everyone else is left out. I frankly don't care what the GDP is, all that matters is if people are living fulfilling lives.

Edited by progressive, 20 February 2008 - 06:01 AM.


sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 20 February 2008 - 07:18 AM

It'll be interesting how this all works itself out. The end of work (I happened to read that book a few years ago), due to automation. I could see virtually all of the educational system being automated via things like MIT opencourseware, eliminating a huge chunk of tax spending, and laying off a large group of people. And doing that would require very minimal effort. And automated checkout stands and online shoping could take a big chunk out of retail. Someday we're bound to see union workers protesting robotics & automation all over the place. No doubt a huge number of jobs people currently do could be automated.
Even if all these people could be educated enough to do other jobs that machines cant do, There may not be as many jobs to be done as there are people. Unless there is some real exponential growth going on. Welfare for everyone could be a way to keep capitalism going, trickle down economics for people that don't work. I wouldn't be surprised if the super rich don't go for that and something else entirely happens, like mass unemployment, poverty and such. I give it 50 years

Edited by Fear&Obey, 20 February 2008 - 07:29 AM.


#5 marcopolo

  • Guest
  • 128 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Fair Oaks, California

Posted 20 February 2008 - 09:57 AM

It'll be interesting how this all works itself out. The end of work (I happened to read that book a few years ago), due to automation. I could see virtually all of the educational system being automated via things like MIT opencourseware, eliminating a huge chunk of tax spending, and laying off a large group of people. And doing that would require very minimal effort. And automated checkout stands and online shoping could take a big chunk out of retail. Someday we're bound to see union workers protesting robotics & automation all over the place. No doubt a huge number of jobs people currently do could be automated.
Even if all these people could be educated enough to do other jobs that machines cant do, There may not be as many jobs to be done as there are people. Unless there is some real exponential growth going on. Welfare for everyone could be a way to keep capitalism going, trickle down economics for people that don't work. I wouldn't be surprised if the super rich don't go for that and something else entirely happens, like mass unemployment, poverty and such. I give it 50 years



About 10 years ago I discussed this same idea with some people including a friend of the family. This person thought I was a communist for daring to even suggest such a thing, he didn't get it and was totally closed minded. IMO Communism failed because the economy still required the input of human labor. Human labor needs incentives to produce, and the more incentives you give people, the more they produce. However, incentive comes at a price that Communism cannot accommodate. I am too tired to explain my thoughts in detail at the moment, but in a nutshell, having machines do most of the labor I think is more akin to wealthy Arabs living off oil royalties in Dubai then it is the proletariat toiling away in some factory in the Ukraine.

I also want to add that I don't think our society can do this today, I think it will be a gradual transition, but in 50 years if not less I believe it will be a serious issue and there will be mass unemployment once machines reach human level capabilities in most fields.

Edited by marcopolo, 20 February 2008 - 10:12 AM.


#6 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,844 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 20 February 2008 - 08:59 PM

I think it was Hans Moravic (or maybe Rodney Brooks) that said "having robots do all our work will be like getting our birth rite back". The reasoning is this: back in the caveman days, if you lived in a good climate with abundant food, how would you spend your day? Sleeping, eating, having sex, laying around in the sun....even fishing and hunting (when it is easy and not dangerous) could be considered a leisure activity.

I am glad someone else has realized the self-defeating activities of modern labor unions, the more they demand over $60 an hour (combined salary and benefits) for standing on an assembly line, the quicker they will be replaced by automation. They are in an almost no win situation. It is a sad reality that the golden age of industrial unions is over. Even service industry unions are falling into the same self-reinforcing trap as industrial unions. The best thing would be to get out while the getting is good. Entertainment, sports, art, science, creative stuff, is the last bastion of human work.

I actually don't mind that the middle class is shrinking. I view it as a natural evolution. The goal of every society should be to make everyone rich, comfortable, and prosperous. Really, do we want everyone to be in the "middle" class, always being mediocre, never rising? Institute policies that give everyone the opportunity to reach the "upper class". As things are going and as the middle class shrinks, there will probably be something the resembles a guaranteed minimum income. In the U.S. there is already EIC and the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay no income tax. The top earners are already supporting a good deal of the population. I think they will continue to do so as long as they are guaranteed retain most of their freedom.

#7 knite

  • Guest
  • 296 posts
  • 0
  • Location:Los Angeles, California

Posted 20 February 2008 - 09:23 PM

There's a book by Robert Heinlen that deals with this very thing called "For Us, The Living." I enjoyed it and it is pretty interesting seeing what he thought the real economic problems stemmed from, and how he designed his Minimum Income system. Don't expect the moving sidewalk public transit system any time soon though. =)

Edited by knite, 20 February 2008 - 09:24 PM.


#8 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 20 February 2008 - 10:41 PM

I actually don't mind that the middle class is shrinking. I view it as a natural evolution. The goal of every society should be to make everyone rich, comfortable, and prosperous. Really, do we want everyone to be in the "middle" class, always being mediocre, never rising? Institute policies that give everyone the opportunity to reach the "upper class". As things are going and as the middle class shrinks, there will probably be something the resembles a guaranteed minimum income. In the U.S. there is already EIC and the bottom 50% of taxpayers pay no income tax. The top earners are already supporting a good deal of the population. I think they will continue to do so as long as they are guaranteed retain most of their freedom.

I wouldn't mind if the middle class was being turned into the upper class, but if it bifurcates such that 10% get rich and 90% are poor, then our country will have a big problem. Although the bottom 50% of taxpayers may pay little or no federal income tax, they are paying federal payroll taxes, state and local taxes and sales taxes. While people at the very bottom indeed pay little or no taxes overall, there's a large chunk of people in the lower middle range that are paying more total taxes as a percentage of their income as people who are much wealthier. I think that a society where the great mass of poor people live off of the largess of the wealthy is in deep trouble. That situation will breed resentment at both ends of the income spectrum, and is unlikely to come to a good end.

#9

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 20 February 2008 - 11:28 PM

I could see virtually all of the educational system being automated via things like MIT opencourseware, eliminating a huge chunk of tax spending, and laying off a large group of people.

Could someone add more on the topic of automating education? It's a personal area of interest for me, though at the moment I'm not sure how that could be made possible.

#10

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 21 February 2008 - 02:08 AM

I could see virtually all of the educational system being automated via things like MIT opencourseware, eliminating a huge chunk of tax spending, and laying off a large group of people.

Could someone add more on the topic of automating education? It's a personal area of interest for me, though at the moment I'm not sure how that could be made possible.


A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.

#11 modelcadet

  • Guest
  • 443 posts
  • 7

Posted 21 February 2008 - 02:29 AM

I'm starting an NPO to create a database for open eduction accreditation. If you wanna help, PM me. It'll go a long way in easing the transition to automation in education, especially in areas like maths.

I could see virtually all of the educational system being automated via things like MIT opencourseware, eliminating a huge chunk of tax spending, and laying off a large group of people.

Could someone add more on the topic of automating education? It's a personal area of interest for me, though at the moment I'm not sure how that could be made possible.


A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.



#12

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 21 February 2008 - 02:50 AM

I'm starting an NPO to create a database for open eduction accreditation. If you wanna help, PM me. It'll go a long way in easing the transition to automation in education, especially in areas like maths.

Do send me a link when you get up a website.

#13 marcopolo

  • Guest
  • 128 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Fair Oaks, California

Posted 21 February 2008 - 04:02 AM

A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.

hahahahaha...not that easy I am afraid. Have you ever taught in a classroom before? Just try to stick an educational video in the projector for a class of rowdy high school students(or even college freshmen) to watch for the entire session, then walk away, go have some coffee in the lounge or something...and see what happens to your class when there is no teacher in there!

Edited by marcopolo, 21 February 2008 - 04:07 AM.


#14 EmbraceUnity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,018 posts
  • 99
  • Location:USA

Posted 21 February 2008 - 06:00 AM

A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.

hahahahaha...not that easy I am afraid. Have you ever taught in a classroom before? Just try to stick an educational video in the projector for a class of rowdy high school students(or even college freshmen) to watch for the entire session, then walk away, go have some coffee in the lounge or something...and see what happens to your class when there is no teacher in there!


Automated education would only work for a select few areas since it would require very self-motivated students. I am a strong supporter of allowing more self-direction in schools and progressive education, and automated methods would surely aid in that, but teachers will certainly still be in demand for awhile yet.

For the foreseeable future, lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, business executives, IT professionals, and so forth will all be very hard to replace. Of course those professional occupations will not even come close to providing full employment once automation really starts to take off.

Edited by progressive, 21 February 2008 - 06:02 AM.


#15 marcopolo

  • Guest
  • 128 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Fair Oaks, California

Posted 21 February 2008 - 06:31 AM

A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.

hahahahaha...not that easy I am afraid. Have you ever taught in a classroom before? Just try to stick an educational video in the projector for a class of rowdy high school students(or even college freshmen) to watch for the entire session, then walk away, go have some coffee in the lounge or something...and see what happens to your class when there is no teacher in there!


Automated education would only work for a select few areas since it would require very self-motivated students. I am a strong supporter of allowing more self-direction in schools and progressive education, and automated methods would surely aid in that, but teachers will certainly still be in demand for awhile yet.

For the foreseeable future, lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, business executives, IT professionals, and so forth will all be very hard to replace. Of course those professional occupations will not even come close to providing full employment once automation really starts to take off.


I do think most professions, including teachers, will eventually be replaced, but I think it will take more then sticking in a video feed or recording of someone teaching another classroom. Instruction works best for most people if it is interactive. Many people are able to learn, and prefer learning, many subjects out of a book, without outside direction, but we are in the minority. I think something like commander Data on Star Trek would be able to replace a teacher, but I also think that by then most academic learning will be done by implanting the information directly into one's brain.

Edited by marcopolo, 21 February 2008 - 06:35 AM.


#16 cyborgdreamer

  • Guest
  • 735 posts
  • 204
  • Location:In the wrong universe

Posted 21 February 2008 - 07:37 PM

I agree that mechanization of labor could be a good thing. It is oppressive that we should be forced to spend our days doing things that we don't enjoy. However, we'd have to be careful about how we make the transition. We don't want to end up with a society were a few people own all of the robots and everyone else starves in squalor. Also, people who enjoy their work should be allowed to keep doing it (although they may not need to be paid if there is a minimum income). Forcing people not to work would be nearly as oppressive as forcing them to work.

#17 advancedatheist

  • Guest
  • 1,419 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Mayer, Arizona

Posted 21 February 2008 - 07:59 PM

Robert Anton Wilson (a libertarian who said he didn't hate poor people) wrote about strategies to create "The RICH Economy" years ago.

#18 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 21 February 2008 - 08:05 PM

Robert Anton Wilson (a libertarian who said he didn't hate poor people) wrote about strategies to create "The RICH Economy" years ago.

One thing that struck me as interesting the last time I read Prometheus Rising was how he said that how people of today are raised and act make sense in terms of our current needs. The labor class would adapt to fit a different sect of society if machines took over that type of job.

#19

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 22 February 2008 - 01:27 AM

A typical class that would have 30 students in it could be recorded and put online to be downloaded by every student in the country, year after year. If you add on top of that a goverment website with a bunch of multiple choice question tests... Then every teacher for that class in the country could be fired. Sounds pretty efficient to me. Personally I learn more from reading textbooks than I do from trying to follow teachers giving lectures.

hahahahaha...not that easy I am afraid. Have you ever taught in a classroom before? Just try to stick an educational video in the projector for a class of rowdy high school students(or even college freshmen) to watch for the entire session, then walk away, go have some coffee in the lounge or something...and see what happens to your class when there is no teacher in there!


Automated education would only work for a select few areas since it would require very self-motivated students. I am a strong supporter of allowing more self-direction in schools and progressive education, and automated methods would surely aid in that, but teachers will certainly still be in demand for awhile yet.

For the foreseeable future, lawyers, doctors, professors, scientists, business executives, IT professionals, and so forth will all be very hard to replace. Of course those professional occupations will not even come close to providing full employment once automation really starts to take off.


I do think most professions, including teachers, will eventually be replaced, but I think it will take more then sticking in a video feed or recording of someone teaching another classroom. Instruction works best for most people if it is interactive. Many people are able to learn, and prefer learning, many subjects out of a book, without outside direction, but we are in the minority. I think something like commander Data on Star Trek would be able to replace a teacher, but I also think that by then most academic learning will be done by implanting the information directly into one's brain.


Ok, so it would only work if the students wanted to learn something. I just gave a simplistic answer off the top of my head that could be improved, like interactive websites that have various teaching methods and go into more detail when students actually need it and so on. students could learn at their own pace instead of sitting quietly in confusion (they're not going to admit to being stupid in front of all their peers by asking questions) or just acting out. And if they need it there could be a "press one to speak to an actual teacher" option of some kind (in India of course, it will encourage diversity). I have never taught a high school class before but I've been in a few and know that if left to themselves like that there would probably be a rape or a stabbing, or they might just leave. But a teacher could easily be replaced with a gard in that situation, or you could just get rid of the classroom in the first place and have them learn at home or something. The only problem I can see is for things that are more hands on like disecting a frog or woodshop. Also, high school students consider high school a joke and screw around all day even with teachers. I know I did and I still graduated, high school is a joke and a waste of everyones time and money, schools just dont have the balls to actually require students to learn anything in order to graduate at the high school level. You even say yourself students cut that crap out sometime in their first year of college, thats because they have to pay for it, have to learn the material to actually pass, and want to get a degree that actually means something. Shockingly all of the sudden students take school seriously. Anyways, I think that having a serious online automated version of education should be set up at least as a kind of supplemental education tool. Kind of like how at walmart you have your choice of a robotic check out or a lifeform check out stand. I think the kids that learn from computer programs will do at least as well passing a high school exit exam. You know, the ones they don't actually back up anyways.
I think pharmacists are a good example of a highly educated, professional occupation that could be replaced by a robot, if they have a vending machine for Ipods why not one for your medication? I think that could be made fairly secure. swipe your I.D., fingerprint, digital prescription of some kind, and so on. But I do agree for the most part that most professional occupations will be much harder to replace or near impossible to replace.

#20 EmbraceUnity

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,018 posts
  • 99
  • Location:USA

Posted 22 February 2008 - 11:17 AM

I think pharmacists are a good example of a highly educated, professional occupation that could be replaced by a robot, if they have a vending machine for Ipods why not one for your medication? I think that could be made fairly secure. swipe your I.D., fingerprint, digital prescription of some kind, and so on. But I do agree for the most part that most professional occupations will be much harder to replace or near impossible to replace.


Actually, they do have medical vending machines. In fact, some of them dispense medical marijuana.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22910820/

#21

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 22 February 2008 - 06:31 PM

I think pharmacists are a good example of a highly educated, professional occupation that could be replaced by a robot, if they have a vending machine for Ipods why not one for your medication? I think that could be made fairly secure. swipe your I.D., fingerprint, digital prescription of some kind, and so on. But I do agree for the most part that most professional occupations will be much harder to replace or near impossible to replace.


Actually, they do have medical vending machines. In fact, some of them dispense medical marijuana.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22910820/


Yeah, it wasn't my idea I read some news article a while ago that was about how there is or someday will be pharmacutical "vending machines". I never heard of them for medical marijuana before though, hella funny.

#22 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 February 2008 - 03:44 AM

Yeah, it wasn't my idea I read some news article a while ago that was about how there is or someday will be pharmacutical "vending machines". I never heard of them for medical marijuana before though, hella funny.

Yeah, now they just need to start installing them in bowling alleys.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users