So in other words he is professionally unemployable.
A World Without Work
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
So in other words he is professionally unemployable.
What would you do?
What if you never had to worry about rent or food?
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/27/technology/y-combinator-basic-income-research/index.html
What if you never had to worry about rent or food?
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/27/technology/y-combinator-basic-income-research/index.html
That's the big threat. It looks like Utopia, but in the end, that tech is held in private hands. Jobs will be lost faster then prices drop. The robotic-AI revolution basically represents the end of work. So if people aren't supplemented with income via nationalization or the printing press, well, that creates a nation of useless eaters ready to riot.
My prediction is once the tech is ready and in place, a world war will be engineered to get rid of surplus labor that otherwise would turn against them, rise up and overthrow the elite. How genius is that? Have the surfs create a robotic paradise, and then engineer a war so they kill themselves off, leaving the holy grail in your hands.
Everybody will be just doing trading at home! Everybody! lol
http://fortune.com/2016/01/28/college-kids-are-now-high-frequency-trading-from-dorm-rooms/
Self-Driving Cars Could Save Millions Of Lives -- But There’s A Catch
The robot revolution will be complicated.
02/18/2016 11:23 am ET | Updated 8 hours ago
David Freeman Senior Science Editor, The Huffington Post
"Will the rise of intelligent machines transform our lives for the better -- or push us into the abyss? It depends on whom you ask.
"Some people say self-driving vehicles, personal robots and the like will usher in a new era of convenience and leisure while freeing workers from dull and often dangerous jobs. Others worry that the emergent robotic workforce will mean economic devastation for workers, who, after all, depend on those jobs to support their families.
"And then there is the fear -- expressed by the likes of Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking -- that as intelligent machines grow ever smarter and more capable, they may threaten our very existence.
"Dr. Moshe Vardi, a computer scientist who has studied automation and artificial intelligence (AI) for more than 30 years, has his own nuanced view. As to whether intelligent machines are beneficial or detrimental, the Rice University professor says simply, "I view them as both."
"Intelligent machines will bring convenience and safety as well as higher productivity, he continues, but they will also throw millions of Americans out of work.
"Vardi spoke about smart machines last week in Washington, D.C., at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The Huffington Post caught up with him afterward to pose some pointed questions.
"Industrial robots have been around for decades. Why are they and other autonomous systems suddenly such a hot topic?
"We seem to have reached a tipping point with industrial robots, as their cost has continued to come down and their capabilities have continued to go up. Take a look at U.S. manufacturing. We have reached an all-time high in output, but employment is below its 1950's level.
"The myth is that all the jobs are going to China. Actually it's mostly because of factory automation. There are already about 260,000 robots at work in U.S. factories, and the annual growth is in the double digits..." More >>
The robot revolution will be complicated.
02/18/2016 11:23 am ET | Updated 8 hours ago
David Freeman Senior Science Editor, The Huffington Post
"Will the rise of intelligent machines transform our lives for the better -- or push us into the abyss? It depends on whom you ask.
"Some people say self-driving vehicles, personal robots and the like will usher in a new era of convenience and leisure while freeing workers from dull and often dangerous jobs. Others worry that the emergent robotic workforce will mean economic devastation for workers, who, after all, depend on those jobs to support their families.
"And then there is the fear -- expressed by the likes of Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking -- that as intelligent machines grow ever smarter and more capable, they may threaten our very existence.
"Dr. Moshe Vardi, a computer scientist who has studied automation and artificial intelligence (AI) for more than 30 years, has his own nuanced view. As to whether intelligent machines are beneficial or detrimental, the Rice University professor says simply, "I view them as both."
"Intelligent machines will bring convenience and safety as well as higher productivity, he continues, but they will also throw millions of Americans out of work.
"Vardi spoke about smart machines last week in Washington, D.C., at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The Huffington Post caught up with him afterward to pose some pointed questions.
"Industrial robots have been around for decades. Why are they and other autonomous systems suddenly such a hot topic?
"We seem to have reached a tipping point with industrial robots, as their cost has continued to come down and their capabilities have continued to go up. Take a look at U.S. manufacturing. We have reached an all-time high in output, but employment is below its 1950's level.
"The myth is that all the jobs are going to China. Actually it's mostly because of factory automation. There are already about 260,000 robots at work in U.S. factories, and the annual growth is in the double digits..." More >>
"...Almost half of U.S. jobs are at high risk of computerization over the next 20 years, according to Oxford academics Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne..."
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/09/how-robots-will-kill-the-gig-economy.html
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/03/09/how-robots-will-kill-the-gig-economy.html
Six-hour workday good for Sweden, not necessarily the US: Expert
Workers in Sweden are proving that spending less time in the workplace may actually be more productive.
In an experiment last year, nursing home employees in Gothenburg, Sweden, switched to a six-hour workday, with no cut in pay. An audit in mid-April concluded the program improved productivity and worker health, and reduced absenteeism, The New York Times recently reported.
As one employee told the publication, "a happy worker is a better worker," and the report added to a chorus of social scientists calling for fewer hours to boost work output. Can that formula be replicated across the Atlantic?...
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/27/six-hour-workday-good-for-sweden-not-necessarily-the-us-expert.html
Workers in Sweden are proving that spending less time in the workplace may actually be more productive.
In an experiment last year, nursing home employees in Gothenburg, Sweden, switched to a six-hour workday, with no cut in pay. An audit in mid-April concluded the program improved productivity and worker health, and reduced absenteeism, The New York Times recently reported.
As one employee told the publication, "a happy worker is a better worker," and the report added to a chorus of social scientists calling for fewer hours to boost work output. Can that formula be replicated across the Atlantic?...
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/27/six-hour-workday-good-for-sweden-not-necessarily-the-us-expert.html
"A World Without Work" -- otherwise known as Bernie's World.
Jobs Threatened by Machines: A Once ‘Stupid’ Concern Gains Respect
They replaced horses, didn’t they? That’s how the late, great economist Wassily Leontief responded 35 years ago to those who argued technology would never really replace people’s work.
Horses hung around in the labor force for quite some time after they were first challenged by “modern” communications technologies like the telegraph and the railroad, hauling stuff and people around farms and cities. But when the internal combustion engine came along, horses — as a critical component of the world economy — were history.
Cutting horses’ oat rations might have delayed their replacement by tractors, but it wouldn’t have stopped it. All that was left to do, for those who cared for 20 million newly unemployed horses, was to put them out to pasture.
“Had horses had an opportunity to vote and join the Republican or Democratic Party,” Leontief wrote, they might have been able to get “the necessary appropriation from Congress.”
Most economists still reject Professor Leontief’s analogy, but the conventional economic consensus is starting to fray. The productivity figures may not reflect it yet but new technology does seem more fundamentally disruptive than technologies of the past. Robots are learning on their own. Self-driving cars seem just a few regulations away from our city streets.
As the idea sinks in that humans as workhorses might also be on the way out, what happens if the job market stops doing the job of providing a living wage for hundreds of millions of people? How will the economy spread money around, so people can afford to pay the rent?
What if, say, the bottom quarter of the population in the United States and Europe simply couldn’t find a job at a wage that could cover the cost of basic staples? What if smart-learning machines took out lawyers and bankers? Or even, God forbid, journalists and economists?
ECONOMIC SCENE
A Universal Basic Income Is a Poor Tool to Fight Poverty MAY 31, 2016
If you read my column last week you know the dim view I take of the Universal Basic Income — a minimum level of money offered to every citizen — as a tool to combat poverty in a country like the United States where there is still plenty of work for most people to do. Paying for it would require either shredding the safety net as we know it or raising taxes to Scandinavian levels.
On Sunday, an overwhelming majority of Swiss voters apparently agreed,voting down a proposal to give every adult roughly $2,560 a month, regardless of their work status, and $640 for each child under 18.
Photo
The economist Wassily Leontief, in a 1975 photograph. CreditAssociated Press
But that doesn’t end the case for a universal income, as many of the brightest minds in Silicon Valley will tell anyone who asks. If we are facing a not-so-distant future of robot-fueled growth and rising potential for mass disemployment, maybe it’s time to start thinking about how to provide a lot more income that isn’t directly tied to a job....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/b...a-once-stupid-concern-gains-respect.html?_r=0
They replaced horses, didn’t they? That’s how the late, great economist Wassily Leontief responded 35 years ago to those who argued technology would never really replace people’s work.
Horses hung around in the labor force for quite some time after they were first challenged by “modern” communications technologies like the telegraph and the railroad, hauling stuff and people around farms and cities. But when the internal combustion engine came along, horses — as a critical component of the world economy — were history.
Cutting horses’ oat rations might have delayed their replacement by tractors, but it wouldn’t have stopped it. All that was left to do, for those who cared for 20 million newly unemployed horses, was to put them out to pasture.
“Had horses had an opportunity to vote and join the Republican or Democratic Party,” Leontief wrote, they might have been able to get “the necessary appropriation from Congress.”
Most economists still reject Professor Leontief’s analogy, but the conventional economic consensus is starting to fray. The productivity figures may not reflect it yet but new technology does seem more fundamentally disruptive than technologies of the past. Robots are learning on their own. Self-driving cars seem just a few regulations away from our city streets.
As the idea sinks in that humans as workhorses might also be on the way out, what happens if the job market stops doing the job of providing a living wage for hundreds of millions of people? How will the economy spread money around, so people can afford to pay the rent?
What if, say, the bottom quarter of the population in the United States and Europe simply couldn’t find a job at a wage that could cover the cost of basic staples? What if smart-learning machines took out lawyers and bankers? Or even, God forbid, journalists and economists?
ECONOMIC SCENE
A Universal Basic Income Is a Poor Tool to Fight Poverty MAY 31, 2016
If you read my column last week you know the dim view I take of the Universal Basic Income — a minimum level of money offered to every citizen — as a tool to combat poverty in a country like the United States where there is still plenty of work for most people to do. Paying for it would require either shredding the safety net as we know it or raising taxes to Scandinavian levels.
On Sunday, an overwhelming majority of Swiss voters apparently agreed,voting down a proposal to give every adult roughly $2,560 a month, regardless of their work status, and $640 for each child under 18.
Photo
The economist Wassily Leontief, in a 1975 photograph. CreditAssociated Press
But that doesn’t end the case for a universal income, as many of the brightest minds in Silicon Valley will tell anyone who asks. If we are facing a not-so-distant future of robot-fueled growth and rising potential for mass disemployment, maybe it’s time to start thinking about how to provide a lot more income that isn’t directly tied to a job....
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/08/b...a-once-stupid-concern-gains-respect.html?_r=0
Last edited:
Mainstream economics doesn't work anymore. Mainstream rules don't work. This is only going to get worse, much much worse.
I don't have the answer, but almost certainly the axioms are the problems. What are the axioms?
US unemployed have quit looking for jobs at a 'frightening' level: Survey
Nearly half of unemployed Americans have quit looking for work, and the numbers are even worse for the long-term jobless, according to a poll released Wednesday that paints a grim picture of the labor market.
Some 59 percent of those who have been out of work for two years or more say they have stopped looking, the Harris Poll of unemployed Americans showed. Overall, 43 percent of the jobless said they have given up, according to the poll released in conjunction with Express Employment Professionals, a job placement service.
"This is a tale of two economies," Express CEO Bob Funk said in a statement. "It's frightening to see this many people who could work say they have given up."...
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/us-u...g-for-jobs-at-a-frightening-level-survey.html
I don't have the answer, but almost certainly the axioms are the problems. What are the axioms?
- Taxes. Probably get rid of the IRS. I know this seems "Republican", a huge number of people in the top 10% don't pay taxes anyway so why should anyone else?
- Credit agencies. Reset everyones' credit to 600, or make it illegal to check credit rating when evaluating a potential employee. This may be the #1 reason people can't get jobs. It is nearly impossible to get back on your feet with a job without good credit. The Great Recession and credit rating is to some people what being black is to the criminal justice system. Either reset to 600, or abolish credit agencies. it is a systemic problem.
- The relationship between economic well being and having a job. This is probably the ultimate fix, with the two above being short term fixes. See the article in the post above this one.
- Other short term fixes is more education, but this just puts people under huge stress of continuously learning to keep up to make ends meet, and further going into debt given the astronomical costs of education.
US unemployed have quit looking for jobs at a 'frightening' level: SurveyNearly half of unemployed Americans have quit looking for work, and the numbers are even worse for the long-term jobless, according to a poll released Wednesday that paints a grim picture of the labor market.
Some 59 percent of those who have been out of work for two years or more say they have stopped looking, the Harris Poll of unemployed Americans showed. Overall, 43 percent of the jobless said they have given up, according to the poll released in conjunction with Express Employment Professionals, a job placement service.
"This is a tale of two economies," Express CEO Bob Funk said in a statement. "It's frightening to see this many people who could work say they have given up."...
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/08/us-u...g-for-jobs-at-a-frightening-level-survey.html
Last edited: