[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Flags  
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

[Return][Go to bottom]

 No.1384

File: 1566697888524.jpeg (478.76 KB, 2000x1000, 2:1, job-line-robots.jpeg) ImgOps Google

It is conceivable that, in the coming decades, automation of jobs increases unemployment to above 50%.  What should be done in such a situation?  Would some variation of Universal Basic Income (
UBI
) be enough?  Can people be happy even if they are essentially told by society that they are useless to the economy?  Is doing useful work important to a person's happiness?  Should small-scale farming and livestock raising be encouraged, so that people have work to do that directly benefits them?  (I guess this will require reversing the trend of urbanization, so that people have enough land.  Perhaps also increased population control.)

 No.1385

>>1384
>Can people be happy even if they are essentially told by society that they are useless to the economy?

What? Of course they can. That strikes me as sort of a dumb question. Most people HATE working. They do it because it is required to live and to do the things they DO enjoy. Why do you think "Thank God it's Friday" exists? People look forward to when they do not have to work. That is when they are happiest.

As for your question, automation is a looming issue people aren't really looking into solving as much as we should. I think universal income could work, depending on how much it is, but solving this issue long-term is going to take a radical, widespread change to our society that's hard to make  predict. I don't think we need more farming just yet, as developed countries have an abundance of food BECAUSE of automation.

I once saw a video about the issue that I found interesting.

 No.1386

File: 1566706171981.jpg (308.24 KB, 1280x960, 4:3, rainbow-dash-scootaloo-zel….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1385
>Most people HATE working. ... People look forward to when they do not have to work. That is when they are happiest.
OK, but if people get a sense that they are just leeches on their society, that might impair their happiness.  Like, are all the idle grown-up children of multi-millionaires happy?  I'd say no.  I'd venture a guess that people deep down have a desire to contribute to society, to have some sort of purpose in life besides just hedonism.

 No.1387

>>1385
>Most people HATE working.
I disagree. People hate their jobs and their bosses and the conditions in which they work, but I think a lot of people really love having something meaningful to do. I was unemployed for three years and I hated every moment of it, even though all my needs were taken care of. Being able to earn and provide for yourself and others is something we should be wary about taking from people, even if we can automate away all necessity for people to work. Doing work is fulfilling to people's lives, they say TGIF because they work crappy jobs or long hours, not because they wish they never had to work again. One day I will want to retire when I'm old and tired, but if you automated my job away and gave me UBI, I would likely fall into a depression.

 No.1388

>>1386
>Like, are all the idle grown-up children of multi-millionaires happy?

I don't think that's because they lack work or think of themselves as leeches. It's because their parents were either too busy making millions to spend time with them, or chose not to because making money was more important than family to them.

And even if what you said is true, there are more ways to contribute to society than working a job. You could  help the needy, create art, or just do things that you find fulfilling like travel and see new cultures.

>>1387
I'm not sure I agree. If all my basic needs were met, I wouldn't work. That's not to say I would do NOTHING. But I would not work a traditional job unless I needed extra money for something I wanted to do. And even then, I would do so to meet that end, not because I needed work to feel fulfilled. Like I mentioned above, there's lots of ways to contribute to a society that doesn't fall into structure of working for pay we currently have.

 No.1389

>>1386
>I'd venture a guess that people deep down have a desire to contribute to society, to have some sort of purpose in life besides just hedonism.

I'm not so sure.  I can imagine at least some portion of people feeling that way right now due to how our society is set up and how our culture treats employment.  But using the OP's example of a 50% unemployment rate, suddenly they're just part of the half that doesn't work.  I don't think people would be especially ashamed of that, and our culture would ideally move forward to comfort people who are feeling like they aren't contributing.

And honestly, that's assuming the other 50% is contributing significantly and that they aren't also on the way to getting replaced.

 No.1390

>>1388
>And even if what you said is true, there are more ways to contribute to society than working a job. You could  help the needy, create art, or just do things that you find fulfilling like travel and see new cultures.

This is also important.  Being unemployed doesn't mean youa aren't doing anything, and a person could certainly still set goals for themselves.  They aren't just consigned to a lifetime of staring at the TV.

 No.1391

>>1388
>>1389
>>1390
Maybe what we should get from this is that "people" is a collection full of different needs and desires. I think some people would find good fulfilling work without a traditional job, others like me would probably flounder for a sense of meaning. And we don't have to choose one group to cater to, in this hypothetical we can provide for everyone, give useful work opportunities to those that want them and let the others be free to have their passions drive them.

 No.1392

>>1384
I imagine in the era of automation and resource-abundance, which'd inevitably be a result, more folk'd turn to specialized jobs, making products people don't bother to automate.
I think, in large part, it's already happened thanks to the Chinese coming in to the market for most our standard stuff.
The era of the factory worker, if nothing else, seems to've fallen.

I see more people going towards artisan goods, as a means for income, over just basically giving up and all that.

 No.1393

>>1392

There's a lot left to automate, but we're advancing towards it pretty quickly.  I'm not sure artisan goods are going to cover the abundance of unemployment we're about to hit.

 No.1394

File: 1566730657463.png (187.96 KB, 819x975, 21:25, fuutfwoot.png) ImgOps Google

Automation is the excuse for a boss to fire 75% of the employees to let 25% pick up on the mess the automated systems should be able to process but they can't since a bug botches a good part of the output.

Be very wary of automation.

 No.1395

>>1393
I think we've been seeing a move that way for a really long time, personally.
Like I said, look at factories.
Used to be pretty much everyone anywhere near cities worked in a factory. Now, at least in America, that's pretty uncommon. Factories as a whole've died out in a couple of generations.
Other necessary lines of work cropped up. A lot of it has been clerical work ,oddly you ask me. Maybe we'll see more of that. Maybe more people'll use the cheapening of resources to perfect trades, like I was saying. Maybe people'll want a face at their businesses, so shops'll always hire people in them.
Hard to say, but, I'm not worried.

 No.1396

>>1394
No, no, no. That's far too optimistic.
It wasn't a bug at all. It's just that corporate demanded everyone upgrade to windows 10, without bothering to check compatibility or update old systems.
Of course, of that 75% cutback to staff expenses, 90% came from IT, by outsourcing entirely to India.

 No.1397

>>1396
I feel like people on site get to pick up the slack and people are driven to work outrageous hours for little compensation.

 No.1398

File: 1566770621219.png (302.38 KB, 638x347, 638:347, 1777039.png) ImgOps Google

>>1394
Yeah, there's some of that.

>>1384
Karl Marx, of being evil fame, came to the conclusion economic value derived from the human labor that went into products, factoring for the labor in training and education as well.  Of course, you have to say *productive* labor, which loops  a bit back on itself as productive labor is what gives something value.  But in this mode, automation is a background.  Yes some products have a trivial cost because their production is mostly automated, but people are doing something with their time and that will attribute value to some class of goods and services.

Of course, Marx was evil because he felt not everyone was being paid fairly for the value they created.  It's not inevitable that using your life's energies to create value results in a steady paycheck.

>automation of jobs increases unemployment to above 50%

I think most who are unemployed have become so involuntarily.  In areas without much regular employment opportunities most people become self-employed.  Of course, they are fighting for survival and would rather have a regular job.  Take that pressure away, and I don't know.  The upper crust leisure class, in some cultures, certainly don't see their unemployment as a problem (what are they, servants?), but America does not look at such a life honorably.  In America, the rich and poor are to be hard working and creative.

>Can people be happy even if they are essentially told by society that they are useless

I don't think so, no.  Unemployed people can be happy.  People who are told they are useless, in general, will be a bit sad.

>small-scale farming and livestock raising be encouraged

Maybe.  I'm a farm kid and hated it.  You could probably look at it as a segment of the maker movement, though.  Problem will be for all the maker hobbies you might have, that seems a pretty expensive one.

 No.1399

>>1395
>A lot of it has been clerical work ,oddly you ask me. Maybe we'll see more of that.

We'll be seeing less of that because a lot of clerical work can also be automated.

 No.1401

It seems to me that, with massive automation and a reasonable UBI, plenty of people would do plenty of work. It just wouldn't be codified as 'wage labor' in the specific sense. But people would still be drawing, painting, writing, and so on. They'd be raising children. Pursuing hobbies. Otherwise being engaged with life.

Honestly, the past several decades is probably the aberration. For most of human history, people have produced things for themselves and others outside of the context of 'careers' and 'jobs'. If you needed something, then you or somebody close to you made it. That was life. There were no bosses, cubicles, time clocks, etc.

The future will be interesting, we can say that for sure at least.

 No.1402

>>1399
Maybe. I am fairly sure most if it could be automated already, yet for some reason, it isn't. Near as I can tell, it keeps expanding.
It makes me suspect that someone higher up is really stupid. That or someone's using it to hide stuff.

 No.1403

File: 1567014944304.gif (1.5 MB, 320x240, 4:3, a389b95e47eed9fae2dd95c9fe….gif) ImgOps Google

>It is conceivable that, in the coming decades, automation of jobs increases unemployment to above 50%.

I hear that floated around *a lot* and I'm still confounded as to why it continues. It inevitably goes into bizarre political directions without stopping for a second to consider the economics of the situation. Like an over-abundance of goods and a widespread shortage of capital wouldn't have intense deflationary pressures and how that would affect the scenario. Everybody is dead in this thought experiment except at the ballot box!

My theory is at that point prosperity is no longer an option.

 No.1409

Yea, as automation keeps rolling forward, we need to move equally towards socialism with it. An automated socialist state is a utopia, an automated capitalist state is hundreds of millions dying of hunger as oligarchy takes root. Let them eat cake and all that.

Assuming the former, i think it would be a great thing! People could pursue their passions! Even if you're "useless to the economy", you could literally pursue anything you wanted! Want to try painting? Landscaping? Medicine? Go for it! You could actually be whatever you wanted to be. It would be beautiful! More art would be made, there would be lots of tight-knit friendships over common passions! More people would be free to truly live life to the fullest!

 No.1424

File: 1567035419451.jpg (421.95 KB, 1137x766, 1137:766, 1503256105152.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>>1403
>I hear that floated around *a lot* and I'm still confounded as to why it continues. It inevitably goes into bizarre political directions without stopping for a second to consider the economics of the situation.
I don't think economics plays into it much.  It's simply about the trend of increasing AI, automation, and robotics.  If this trend continues, then many jobs will be done better by machine than by man, enough so that eventually a majority of the working-age population isn't desirable to be hired.

 No.1560

File: 1567388015154.png (167 KB, 401x567, 401:567, O50.png) ImgOps Google

Hopefully with the increased automation and demand for more specific jobs the population of the planet will decrease along with it. Say in 50 years robots are able to do most any blue collar job at a cheaper rate, the best idea would be for there to be population control to prevent people from suffering starvation/homelessness and other such examples of poverty from unemployment.

Or the ideal could be reached where we have some sort of Dyson sphere that collects unlimited energy and everyone on Earth gets a free ride. Population control would still be a good idea though.


[]
[Return] [Go to top]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]