CDZ A World Without Jobs: Utopia or Hell?

JimBowie1958

Old Fogey
Sep 25, 2011
63,590
16,756
2,220
It seems to me that the availability of 3D printing and nanomanufacturing will greatly alleviate the "Hellishness" of a jobless economy, as will job mongering laws and regs to minimize the impacts of said jobless economy.

We will have to have a Robotics tax that takes the place of an income tax per Robot/human job loss, or else the government gets defunded over time.

We will have to focus on keeping every job we can reasonably justify as we enable people to make their own necessities in life.

We will have to provide a Universal Bsic Income as a replacement for all Welfare (not Social Security as that is not welfare).

We will need to provide counseling to the public so they can transition to this jobless economy successfully.

A world without work is coming – it could be utopia or it could be hell | Ryan Avent

Most of us have wondered what we might do if we didn’t need to work – if we woke up one morning to discover we had won the lottery, say. We entertain ourselves with visions of multiple homes, trips around the world or the players we would sign after buying Arsenal. For many of us, the most tantalising aspect of such visions is the freedom it would bring: to do what one wants, when one wants and how one wants.

But imagine how that vision might change if such freedom were extended to everyone. Some day, probably not in our lifetimes but perhaps not long after, machines will be able to do most of the tasks that people can. At that point, a truly workless world should be possible. If everyone, not just the rich, had robots at their beck and call, then such powerful technology would free them from the need to submit to the realities of the market to put food on the table.

Of course, we then have to figure out what to do not only with ourselves but with one another. Just as a lottery cheque does not free the winner from the shackles of the human condition, all-purpose machine intelligence will not magically allow us all to get along. And what is especially tricky about a world without work is that we must begin building the social institutions to survive it long before the technological obsolescence of human workers actually arrives.


Despite impressive progress in robotics and machine intelligence, those of us alive today can expect to keep on labouring until retirement. But while Star Trek-style replicators and robot nannies remain generations away, the digital revolution is nonetheless beginning to wreak havoc. Economists and politicians have puzzled over the struggles workers have experienced in recent decades: the pitiful rate of growth in wages, rising inequality, and the growing flow of national income to profits and rents rather than pay cheques. The primary culprit is technology. The digital revolution has helped supercharge globalisation, automated routine jobs, and allowed small teams of highly skilled workers to manage tasks that once required scores of people. The result has been a glut of labour that economies have struggled to digest.

Labour markets have coped the only way they are able: workers needing jobs have little option but to accept dismally low wages. Bosses shrug and use people to do jobs that could, if necessary, be done by machines. Big retailers and delivery firms feel less pressure to turn their warehouses over to robots when there are long queues of people willing to move boxes around for low pay. Law offices put off plans to invest in sophisticated document scanning and analysis technology because legal assistants are a dime a dozen. People continue to staff checkout counters when machines would often, if not always, be just as good. Ironically, the first symptoms of a dawning era of technological abundance are to be found in the growth of low-wage, low-productivity employment. And this mess starts to reveal just how tricky the construction of a workless world will be. The most difficult challenge posed by an economic revolution is not how to come up with the magical new technologies in the first place; it is how to reshape society so that the technologies can be put to good use while also keeping the great mass of workers satisfied with their lot in life. So far, we are failing.

Preparing for a world without work means grappling with the roles work plays in society, and finding potential substitutes. First and foremost, we rely on work to distribute purchasing power: to give us the dough to buy our bread. Eventually, in our distant Star Trek future, we might get rid of money and prices altogether, as soaring productivity allows society to provide people with all they need at near-zero cost.
 
111004122706-velshi-steve-jobs-college-00000000-story-top.jpg
 
A social revolution must happen on order for humans to exist in the current numbers if machines do all the work and humans are merely a stand alone operative to exist..yet no matter the amount of technology , you still will have to wipe your own ass..
 
A social revolution must happen on order for humans to exist in the current numbers if machines do all the work and humans are merely a stand alone operative to exist..yet no matter the amount of technology , you still will have to wipe your own ass..
How would you describe this social revolution?

Merely a re-orientation of people toward their careers, or what?
 
A social revolution must happen on order for humans to exist in the current numbers if machines do all the work and humans are merely a stand alone operative to exist..yet no matter the amount of technology , you still will have to wipe your own ass..
How would you describe this social revolution?

Merely a re-orientation of people toward their careers, or what?
A reorganization which would allow people to exist without the old fashioned idea of having to earn it through the sweat of ones brow...But even with technology and robots as it is now will take many years to eventually get to the point of no humans working at mill..
One way I can envision is in a total robotic society,, is wealth sharing or resource sharing as a cooperative or Utopian society...
 
A reorganization which would allow people to exist without the old fashioned idea of having to earn it through the sweat of ones brow...But even with technology and robots as it is now will take many years to eventually get to the point of no humans working at mill..
One way I can envision is in a total robotic society,, is wealth sharing or resource sharing as a cooperative or Utopian society...
Do you think the "sharing" is going to be voluntary through individual barter or through government imposed redistribution?

Do you see the latter as the same thing as a Universal Basic Income?
 
A reorganization which would allow people to exist without the old fashioned idea of having to earn it through the sweat of ones brow...But even with technology and robots as it is now will take many years to eventually get to the point of no humans working at mill..
One way I can envision is in a total robotic society,, is wealth sharing or resource sharing as a cooperative or Utopian society...
Do you think the "sharing" is going to be voluntary through individual barter or through government imposed redistribution?

Do you see the latter as the same thing as a Universal Basic Income?
I do believe that either a consensus must be reached or it will be a forced situation by the govt..But who knows, it may take another world war to put it in place...
 
I do believe that either a consensus must be reached or it will be a forced situation by the govt..But who knows, it may take another world war to put it in place...
I doubt it will take a world war, but a civil war is definitely in play.

We will have to have two of three things before the situation becomes stable:

1. A huge culling of the human population

2. A Universal Basic Income to allay fears and insecurity

3. A revolution in mind set about jobs and careers, with the ending of this mental need for a career, and an emplacement of job mongering policies by the government to protect its own revue stream.

I feel confident we will have the last two and not the first, though some prefer we reduce the human population by about 90% world wide.
 
I do believe that either a consensus must be reached or it will be a forced situation by the govt..But who knows, it may take another world war to put it in place...
I doubt it will take a world war, but a civil war is definitely in play.

We will have to have two of three things before the situation becomes stable:

1. A huge culling of the human population

2. A Universal Basic Income to allay fears and insecurity

3. A revolution in mind set about jobs and careers, with the ending of this mental need for a career, and an emplacement of job mongering policies by the government to protect its own revue stream.

I feel confident we will have the last two and not the first, though some prefer we reduce the human population by about 90% world wide
.

After all the years of hard humping I did, to see it go down the drain would mean I would have to become a human-cyborg...To revolt against the system...
 
After all the years of hard humping I did, to see it go down the drain would mean I would have to become a human-cyborg...To revolt against the system...
If it went down the drain, what would be the system you would revolt against?

There are a number of routes this whole thing can go down, but three things here:

1) job killing robotics are coming and I dont see much way to prevent them from developing into androids that can do 95% of all human jobs, and the few they cant do will become over supplied, meaning all jobs will be either replaced by robots or oversupplied and thus very few jobs.

2) the government will protect its revenue stream by imposing special robot taxes of some kind. The corporations will still be making money hand over fist with virtually free robotic labor, but some of it will have to be taken to keep the government funded and to provide funds for social stability programs.

3) Some form of universal hand out will be required to not throw the whole country into revolt. A Universal basic income would be the most efficient means of handling this, rolling all welfare other than Social Security into the mix and could provide about $10k annually under current federal funding, without a special UBI tax imposed. Even if we doubled the UBI to $20k a year, and added a tax onto the robotics tax to cover it, the profits the corporations will be making with free robot labor would be stupid.

This is all very doable and totally without any need for war of any kind. But I think the elites my fight a war to try and avoid any added costs in taxes or otherwise. Dont think it will have to be a long one and they will lose certainly.
 
After all the years of hard humping I did, to see it go down the drain would mean I would have to become a human-cyborg...To revolt against the system...
If it went down the drain, what would be the system you would revolt against?

There are a number of routes this whole thing can go down, but three things here:

1) job killing robotics are coming and I dont see much way to prevent them from developing into androids that can do 95% of all human jobs, and the few they cant do will become over supplied, meaning all jobs will be either replaced by robots or oversupplied and thus very few jobs.

2) the government will protect its revenue stream by imposing special robot taxes of some kind. The corporations will still be making money hand over fist with virtually free robotic labor, but some of it will have to be taken to keep the government funded and to provide funds for social stability programs.

3) Some form of universal hand out will be required to not throw the whole country into revolt. A Universal basic income would be the most efficient means of handling this, rolling all welfare other than Social Security into the mix and could provide about $10k annually under current federal funding, without a special UBI tax imposed. Even if we doubled the UBI to $20k a year, and added a tax onto the robotics tax to cover it, the profits the corporations will be making with free robot labor would be stupid.

This is all very doable and totally without any need for war of any kind. But I think the elites my fight a war to try and avoid any added costs in taxes or otherwise. Dont think it will have to be a long one and they will lose certainly.
Changing social orders always comes with revolt and revolutions, even when robots were not invented..those in power and wealth accumulators are usually the victims...
 
Changing social orders always comes with revolt and revolutions, even when robots were not invented..those in power and wealth accumulators are usually the victims...
Here in the USA we have managed to change power many times without a violent revolution.

We can do it once again.
 
We will have to have a Robotics tax that takes the place of an income tax per Robot/human job loss, or else the government gets defunded over time.

We will have to focus on keeping every job we can reasonably justify as we enable people to make their own necessities in life.

Why?

Why is a "robotics tax" the thing we must have? To replace income tax? Does not the article you've cited propose that productivity will increase to the point that the cost of production becomes low enough to all but make everything free? How much revenue can government need in such an environment? Why will people need to make necessities in such an environment?

The economic and behavioral model that illustrates the scenario you've put forth exists around the world. It's called a household with children. What have we in those households? A situation wherein the kids have their necessities provided at no real cost to them and they do what they must to satisfy, purely for the sake of satisfying them, their interests. If we at some point arrive at a state whereby that is the circumstance of adults, I don't see much reason to expect terribly different behaviors and requirements.
 
Why?

Why is a "robotics tax" the thing we must have? To replace income tax? Does not the article you've cited propose that productivity will increase to the point that the cost of production becomes low enough to all but make everything free? How much revenue can government need in such an environment? Why will people need to make necessities in such an environment?

The economic and behavioral model that illustrates the scenario you've put forth exists around the world. It's called a household with children. What have we in those households? A situation wherein the kids have their necessities provided at no real cost to them and they do what they must to satisfy, purely for the sake of satisfying them, their interests. If we at some point arrive at a state whereby that is the circumstance of adults, I don't see much reason to expect terribly different behaviors and requirements.
Because:

1) the governments programs are not going to magically vanish. People will still need Medicaid, payments from the Social Security, we will still need a miltiary budget and with the ever growing "War on Terror" it will increase as well, etc.

2) The robotics tax would replace lost income taxes, yes, for each human job the robot replaces.

3) While productivity increases with robotics, that is not the sole consideration of the ipacts the Robotics Revolution will bring. People will still have needs that have to be met by the government.

4) Those products will never be free, but the costs of production will be very small. That equates to bigger profits, not free hand outs if the past is any guide on this sort of thing.

5) Most people will be able to make their own consumables but there will still be a perceived need for cash, but the less of the latter the better.

6) Adults often want what they see as just out of their reach FOR NO REASON AT ALL, and advertisers have used this for selling worthless crap for decades now. I doubt that that will change EVER.
 
It seems to me that the availability of 3D printing and nanomanufacturing will greatly alleviate the "Hellishness" of a jobless economy, as will job mongering laws and regs to minimize the impacts of said jobless economy.

We will have to have a Robotics tax that takes the place of an income tax per Robot/human job loss, or else the government gets defunded over time.

We will have to focus on keeping every job we can reasonably justify as we enable people to make their own necessities in life.

We will have to provide a Universal Bsic Income as a replacement for all Welfare (not Social Security as that is not welfare).

We will need to provide counseling to the public so they can transition to this jobless economy successfully.

A world without work is coming – it could be utopia or it could be hell | Ryan Avent

Most of us have wondered what we might do if we didn’t need to work – if we woke up one morning to discover we had won the lottery, say. We entertain ourselves with visions of multiple homes, trips around the world or the players we would sign after buying Arsenal. For many of us, the most tantalising aspect of such visions is the freedom it would bring: to do what one wants, when one wants and how one wants.

But imagine how that vision might change if such freedom were extended to everyone. Some day, probably not in our lifetimes but perhaps not long after, machines will be able to do most of the tasks that people can. At that point, a truly workless world should be possible. If everyone, not just the rich, had robots at their beck and call, then such powerful technology would free them from the need to submit to the realities of the market to put food on the table.

Of course, we then have to figure out what to do not only with ourselves but with one another. Just as a lottery cheque does not free the winner from the shackles of the human condition, all-purpose machine intelligence will not magically allow us all to get along. And what is especially tricky about a world without work is that we must begin building the social institutions to survive it long before the technological obsolescence of human workers actually arrives.


Despite impressive progress in robotics and machine intelligence, those of us alive today can expect to keep on labouring until retirement. But while Star Trek-style replicators and robot nannies remain generations away, the digital revolution is nonetheless beginning to wreak havoc. Economists and politicians have puzzled over the struggles workers have experienced in recent decades: the pitiful rate of growth in wages, rising inequality, and the growing flow of national income to profits and rents rather than pay cheques. The primary culprit is technology. The digital revolution has helped supercharge globalisation, automated routine jobs, and allowed small teams of highly skilled workers to manage tasks that once required scores of people. The result has been a glut of labour that economies have struggled to digest.

Labour markets have coped the only way they are able: workers needing jobs have little option but to accept dismally low wages. Bosses shrug and use people to do jobs that could, if necessary, be done by machines. Big retailers and delivery firms feel less pressure to turn their warehouses over to robots when there are long queues of people willing to move boxes around for low pay. Law offices put off plans to invest in sophisticated document scanning and analysis technology because legal assistants are a dime a dozen. People continue to staff checkout counters when machines would often, if not always, be just as good. Ironically, the first symptoms of a dawning era of technological abundance are to be found in the growth of low-wage, low-productivity employment. And this mess starts to reveal just how tricky the construction of a workless world will be. The most difficult challenge posed by an economic revolution is not how to come up with the magical new technologies in the first place; it is how to reshape society so that the technologies can be put to good use while also keeping the great mass of workers satisfied with their lot in life. So far, we are failing.

Preparing for a world without work means grappling with the roles work plays in society, and finding potential substitutes. First and foremost, we rely on work to distribute purchasing power: to give us the dough to buy our bread. Eventually, in our distant Star Trek future, we might get rid of money and prices altogether, as soaring productivity allows society to provide people with all they need at near-zero cost.

But running upwards on a downward escalator is not a long term success. I predict ww3, as the 1st consequence of the jobless society. This is not that bad, because history needs a reset button anyways.
 
Why?

Why is a "robotics tax" the thing we must have? To replace income tax? Does not the article you've cited propose that productivity will increase to the point that the cost of production becomes low enough to all but make everything free? How much revenue can government need in such an environment? Why will people need to make necessities in such an environment?

The economic and behavioral model that illustrates the scenario you've put forth exists around the world. It's called a household with children. What have we in those households? A situation wherein the kids have their necessities provided at no real cost to them and they do what they must to satisfy, purely for the sake of satisfying them, their interests. If we at some point arrive at a state whereby that is the circumstance of adults, I don't see much reason to expect terribly different behaviors and requirements.
Because:

1) the governments programs are not going to magically vanish. People will still need Medicaid, payments from the Social Security, we will still need a miltiary budget and with the ever growing "War on Terror" it will increase as well, etc.

2) The robotics tax would replace lost income taxes, yes, for each human job the robot replaces.

3) While productivity increases with robotics, that is not the sole consideration of the ipacts the Robotics Revolution will bring. People will still have needs that have to be met by the government.

4) Those products will never be free, but the costs of production will be very small. That equates to bigger profits, not free hand outs if the past is any guide on this sort of thing.

5) Most people will be able to make their own consumables but there will still be a perceived need for cash, but the less of the latter the better.

6) Adults often want what they see as just out of their reach FOR NO REASON AT ALL, and advertisers have used this for selling worthless crap for decades now. I doubt that that will change EVER.

I think you totally missed the point. The author proposes in his conclusion that where we're headed is a world in which the role of money is diminished to the point that price ceases to be a determinant in people's decisions about what to obtain and what not to obtain. In such an environment, what need be there for governmental revenue on the scale and of the scope we have today? One can't very well propose as grand a paradigm shift as the author did and then attempt to consider existence under than paradigm using the same models we have controlling the current paradigm.
 
But running upwards on a downward escalator is not a long term success. I predict ww3, as the 1st consequence of the jobless society. This is not that bad, because history needs a reset button anyways.
Do you want to live in a world where 90% of the people you love have been killed in such a war?

IT wont be a nice tidy little thing, these wars.
 

Forum List

Back
Top