The future of capitalism

[Wry Catcher]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

I read every word and first I would like to thank you for posting a thought provoking thread. That is very rare and deserves kudos.

 

[FA_Q2]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

You're spot on. Pure capitalism is simply the best system for spawning efficiency. Humans are the definition of inefficiency with their bathroom breaks and sick days.

The solution seems to indicate that there will be a break with the capitalism we know today and movement toward a money-less society.

Why money-less?

Money is simply a method of transference – a better way to barter. What advantages does a money free system have? IMHO – there really is no reason to remove money at all – it is not the source of the problem and also has potential to be part of the solution.

Barter will be gone too.

It's a bleak (but accurate)picture you painted for today's middle income wage earners. It won't break down so much between the rich and the poor in the future but it will be the content creators, the content providers, the content consumers.

Currently the consumers and providers (to a much lesser extent) barter their labor for money; right? If the content providers can simply throw a switch and me, as a consumer downloads it be it a book, a song, a news story or whatever, there is no need to pay a trucker to deliver the product to Target. So the transportation worker is removed, the retail worker is removed and there is a direct relationship between me and the provider. The supply chain just got shorter and there are thousands of jobs at stake with every link that was removed.

So what has to stay on the truck and what has to stay in the store?

Check out last month's Fast Company magazine. There is a story about a place that churns out 4,000 cases of veggies a month. Nothing remarkable about it until you read that the place is 45 minutes from Chicago and it's a warehouse using LED lighting. There is no reason that within 10-20 years, there will be tomatoes growing on your counter top. Low/no overhead co-ops can bring eggs and dairy.

Your question was why money-less. Its pretty much the only way it can go when you have a growing population, jobs being eliminated, and frankly demand for labor being reduced.

---

I would love to hear another scenario but It escapes me.

I disagree. The loss of consumerism (essentially what you are talking about) does not necessitate the loss of money as an exchange. People have exchanged goods or services since the beginning of time and they will continue to do so even in an environment where the most common goods we see exchanged today are essentially free. There will always be want or desire and those to fill such. It just might not be as central as it is at this moment.

Money does not necessitate any particular system or require jobs tbh. One of the ideas spoken about in one of the videos was a national minimum salary – a minimum amount of money that you receive just for being here. While I do not necessarily agree with that as part of a solution (at least not yet) it does illustrate how money might not be connected with the things that you are talking about.
Sure you can grow those vegetables on your table but what if the girl down the way grows them better? And the man down the street whittles some very nice carvings by had that she wants as well.
Money is really nothing more than a medium of exchange that allows us to break all things down to a single tradable resource. I do not believe that it is anywhere near being outdated.

 

[FA_Q2]

Thank you for your response. I think you missed the overall point here though – none of this claims that the government needs to tell people where to become productive or introduce new products. People will always be productive and create new markets as long as the reward is there to do so. The problem is that new markets used to require large employment to create and maintain.

New markets will still occur BUT they will no longer require large employment to do so. It is that reality that is going to come to a head.

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

That is why I said I think that what we end up in will be something new. Capitalism might be the best we have BUT it is not sufficient unless there is a thriving middle class. The death of that middles class is, IMHO, evident at this stage.

Without that then it really becomes just as bad as communism.

But I don't agree that there won't be a middle class. I still believe new technologies don't take away jobs but simply inspire new ways to make money and that require people to make it. A single computer can now do the work that it once took dozens of people to do. But that computer didn't throw those dozens of people out of work, it just changed the way they work and the kinds of jobs there are to do.

Then watch the videos. They address the very real prospect that this is coming to a head that will be different than most other automations we have experienced in the past. The jist of this is because computers and machines are becoming better than people at EVERYTHING.
What you are talking about is when machines replaced very narrow and specific tasks. They were superior to people in a very narrow way. That is no longer true. Computers outperform people in almost every single way in every single carrier field. That is coming to fruition.
It is telling that there are now computers that diagnose and treat medical patience better than doctors. Drive better than people and handle legal paperwork better than people. Highly technical carriers. They are now learning as well. I don’t see how we can avoid a situation where most people will simply become outdated because there is no field for them to move onto. Not because they are unable but because there will already be a computer capable of outperforming them.

 

[FA_Q2]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

i think you have articulated yourself extremely well. this makes me think of ayn rand and atlas shrugged.

Thank you.
I have to ask how you relate this to Raynd though. I personally liked the message she expressed but I find it opposite of what I am stating here. She lived in a different time than I am talking about – a time where human endeavors created work for everyone. Here I have expressed concern for the idea that this will cease to work the way that Raynd spoke about and the way we have been using it to run our economic engine for the last century.

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.
The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.
The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.
I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.
Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.
So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.
I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?
The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.
I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.

I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

I read every word and first I would like to thank you for posting a thought provoking thread. That is very rare and deserves kudos.

Thanks wry. I have wanted to post this thread for awhile but have not had the time and gumption to actually type it up

 

[Foxfyre]

One of the basic flaws of capitalism is that steady growth must be maintained or an enterprise is considered a failure. Even if growth occurs at a rate equal to population growth it is still unsatisfactory. There must be a point where meaningful growth is impossible by any means. What will happen on that day when capitalism fails?

Since the industrial revolution first got underway, we have added 6 billion people to Planet Earth. We are highly unlikely to run out of needs and wants to fill and opportunities for businesses to grow for a very long time.

 

[candycorn]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

You're spot on. Pure capitalism is simply the best system for spawning efficiency. Humans are the definition of inefficiency with their bathroom breaks and sick days.

The solution seems to indicate that there will be a break with the capitalism we know today and movement toward a money-less society.

Why money-less?

Money is simply a method of transference – a better way to barter. What advantages does a money free system have? IMHO – there really is no reason to remove money at all – it is not the source of the problem and also has potential to be part of the solution.

Barter will be gone too.

It's a bleak (but accurate)picture you painted for today's middle income wage earners. It won't break down so much between the rich and the poor in the future but it will be the content creators, the content providers, the content consumers.

Currently the consumers and providers (to a much lesser extent) barter their labor for money; right? If the content providers can simply throw a switch and me, as a consumer downloads it be it a book, a song, a news story or whatever, there is no need to pay a trucker to deliver the product to Target. So the transportation worker is removed, the retail worker is removed and there is a direct relationship between me and the provider. The supply chain just got shorter and there are thousands of jobs at stake with every link that was removed.

So what has to stay on the truck and what has to stay in the store?

Check out last month's Fast Company magazine. There is a story about a place that churns out 4,000 cases of veggies a month. Nothing remarkable about it until you read that the place is 45 minutes from Chicago and it's a warehouse using LED lighting. There is no reason that within 10-20 years, there will be tomatoes growing on your counter top. Low/no overhead co-ops can bring eggs and dairy.

Your question was why money-less. Its pretty much the only way it can go when you have a growing population, jobs being eliminated, and frankly demand for labor being reduced.

---

I would love to hear another scenario but It escapes me.

I disagree. The loss of consumerism (essentially what you are talking about) does not necessitate the loss of money as an exchange. People have exchanged goods or services since the beginning of time and they will continue to do so even in an environment where the most common goods we see exchanged today are essentially free. There will always be want or desire and those to fill such. It just might not be as central as it is at this moment.

Money does not necessitate any particular system or require jobs tbh. One of the ideas spoken about in one of the videos was a national minimum salary – a minimum amount of money that you receive just for being here. While I do not necessarily agree with that as part of a solution (at least not yet) it does illustrate how money might not be connected with the things that you are talking about.
Sure you can grow those vegetables on your table but what if the girl down the way grows them better? And the man down the street whittles some very nice carvings by had that she wants as well.
Money is really nothing more than a medium of exchange that allows us to break all things down to a single tradable resource. I do not believe that it is anywhere near being outdated.

If you are talking about that sort of paradigm shift...okay. What I meant was that currently you barter your work for money. If you labor isn't valued or needed...you aren't going to get any money in our capitalist market-driven society.

I would have to ask though...why have the monetary resource at all if there is no thing on the other side of the equation to determine how much you get?

 

[Foxfyre]

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

That is why I said I think that what we end up in will be something new. Capitalism might be the best we have BUT it is not sufficient unless there is a thriving middle class. The death of that middles class is, IMHO, evident at this stage.

Without that then it really becomes just as bad as communism.

But I don't agree that there won't be a middle class. I still believe new technologies don't take away jobs but simply inspire new ways to make money and that require people to make it. A single computer can now do the work that it once took dozens of people to do. But that computer didn't throw those dozens of people out of work, it just changed the way they work and the kinds of jobs there are to do.

Then watch the videos. They address the very real prospect that this is coming to a head that will be different than most other automations we have experienced in the past. The jist of this is because computers and machines are becoming better than people at EVERYTHING.
What you are talking about is when machines replaced very narrow and specific tasks. They were superior to people in a very narrow way. That is no longer true. Computers outperform people in almost every single way in every single carrier field. That is coming to fruition.
It is telling that there are now computers that diagnose and treat medical patience better than doctors. Drive better than people and handle legal paperwork better than people. Highly technical carriers. They are now learning as well. I don’t see how we can avoid a situation where most people will simply become outdated because there is no field for them to move onto. Not because they are unable but because there will already be a computer capable of outperforming them.

How we work and what work there will be will change yes. It always has. But around the turn of the 20th Century it was suggested that the U.S. Patent office might as well close because everything there was to invent had already been invented. Yet most of what has been invented in the history of the world has been invented and/or developed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

No machine will ever be able to be visionary, to see possibilities, to devise solutions for the most profound problems that humankind will encounter. Just look at the massive change in photography that the digital revolution has made--no need for film or slide projectors etc. or all the people who manufactured and processed all that. But there are more photographers making a living just the same; they just do it differently and there are more people working in that industry in various ways than ever before.

All we need to fear is those who want to control our lives and tell us how to live them. That will be what will crush us, not the wonderful creations of humankind. If we can resist that, everybody who wants to work will be able to work and the possibilities are brighter and more satisfying than ever before.

 

[FA_Q2]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

You're spot on. Pure capitalism is simply the best system for spawning efficiency. Humans are the definition of inefficiency with their bathroom breaks and sick days.

The solution seems to indicate that there will be a break with the capitalism we know today and movement toward a money-less society.

Why money-less?

Money is simply a method of transference – a better way to barter. What advantages does a money free system have? IMHO – there really is no reason to remove money at all – it is not the source of the problem and also has potential to be part of the solution.

Barter will be gone too.

It's a bleak (but accurate)picture you painted for today's middle income wage earners. It won't break down so much between the rich and the poor in the future but it will be the content creators, the content providers, the content consumers.

Currently the consumers and providers (to a much lesser extent) barter their labor for money; right? If the content providers can simply throw a switch and me, as a consumer downloads it be it a book, a song, a news story or whatever, there is no need to pay a trucker to deliver the product to Target. So the transportation worker is removed, the retail worker is removed and there is a direct relationship between me and the provider. The supply chain just got shorter and there are thousands of jobs at stake with every link that was removed.

So what has to stay on the truck and what has to stay in the store?

Check out last month's Fast Company magazine. There is a story about a place that churns out 4,000 cases of veggies a month. Nothing remarkable about it until you read that the place is 45 minutes from Chicago and it's a warehouse using LED lighting. There is no reason that within 10-20 years, there will be tomatoes growing on your counter top. Low/no overhead co-ops can bring eggs and dairy.

Your question was why money-less. Its pretty much the only way it can go when you have a growing population, jobs being eliminated, and frankly demand for labor being reduced.

---

I would love to hear another scenario but It escapes me.

I disagree. The loss of consumerism (essentially what you are talking about) does not necessitate the loss of money as an exchange. People have exchanged goods or services since the beginning of time and they will continue to do so even in an environment where the most common goods we see exchanged today are essentially free. There will always be want or desire and those to fill such. It just might not be as central as it is at this moment.

Money does not necessitate any particular system or require jobs tbh. One of the ideas spoken about in one of the videos was a national minimum salary – a minimum amount of money that you receive just for being here. While I do not necessarily agree with that as part of a solution (at least not yet) it does illustrate how money might not be connected with the things that you are talking about.
Sure you can grow those vegetables on your table but what if the girl down the way grows them better? And the man down the street whittles some very nice carvings by had that she wants as well.
Money is really nothing more than a medium of exchange that allows us to break all things down to a single tradable resource. I do not believe that it is anywhere near being outdated.

If you are talking about that sort of paradigm shift...okay. What I meant was that currently you barter your work for money. If you labor isn't valued or needed...you aren't going to get any money in our capitalist market-driven society.

I would have to ask though...why have the monetary resource at all if there is no thing on the other side of the equation to determine how much you get?

There will be something on the other side to determine what you get. That is what an economic system is in the simplest sense.
You have a monetary system to simplify trade.

 

[FA_Q2]

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

That is why I said I think that what we end up in will be something new. Capitalism might be the best we have BUT it is not sufficient unless there is a thriving middle class. The death of that middles class is, IMHO, evident at this stage.

Without that then it really becomes just as bad as communism.

But I don't agree that there won't be a middle class. I still believe new technologies don't take away jobs but simply inspire new ways to make money and that require people to make it. A single computer can now do the work that it once took dozens of people to do. But that computer didn't throw those dozens of people out of work, it just changed the way they work and the kinds of jobs there are to do.

Then watch the videos. They address the very real prospect that this is coming to a head that will be different than most other automations we have experienced in the past. The jist of this is because computers and machines are becoming better than people at EVERYTHING.
What you are talking about is when machines replaced very narrow and specific tasks. They were superior to people in a very narrow way. That is no longer true. Computers outperform people in almost every single way in every single carrier field. That is coming to fruition.
It is telling that there are now computers that diagnose and treat medical patience better than doctors. Drive better than people and handle legal paperwork better than people. Highly technical carriers. They are now learning as well. I don’t see how we can avoid a situation where most people will simply become outdated because there is no field for them to move onto. Not because they are unable but because there will already be a computer capable of outperforming them.

How we work and what work there will be will change yes. It always has. But around the turn of the 20th Century it was suggested that the U.S. Patent office might as well close because everything there was to invent had already been invented. Yet most of what has been invented in the history of the world has been invented and/or developed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

No machine will ever be able to be visionary, to see possibilities, to devise solutions for the most profound problems that humankind will encounter. Just look at the massive change in photography that the digital revolution has made--no need for film or slide projectors etc. or all the people who manufactured and processed all that. But there are more photographers making a living just the same; they just do it differently and there are more people working in that industry in various ways than ever before.

All we need to fear is those who want to control our lives and tell us how to live them. That will be what will crush us, not the wonderful creations of humankind. If we can resist that, everybody who wants to work will be able to work and the possibilities are brighter and more satisfying than ever before.

Again, I do not disagree. You are focusing on a topic that I have not discussed.
Let’s ask it another way – do you honestly think that there are going to be 300 million ‘visionaries’ out there to perpetuate a capitalist job market? Do you think that everyone can become a capitalist visionary? By this I do not mean have the capacity but genuinely will become entrepreneurial visionaries and create their own markets.

 

[Iceweasel]

Capital has to be created by individuals or the state. I trust the people to work it out more than government. Governments are politically driven, free markets are results oriented. Very little in contracting and trade fields can be automated. People who come up with this capitalism is doomed shit obviously make a living in a cubicle. IF they work at all.

 

[Iceweasel]

Let’s ask it another way – do you honestly think that there are going to be 300 million ‘visionaries’ out there to perpetuate a capitalist job market? Do you think that everyone can become a capitalist visionary? By this I do not mean have the capacity but genuinely will become entrepreneurial visionaries and create their own markets.

Most people make better employees and are not self sufficient. If it were up to me we would all be private contractors.

 

[candycorn]

You're spot on. Pure capitalism is simply the best system for spawning efficiency. Humans are the definition of inefficiency with their bathroom breaks and sick days.

The solution seems to indicate that there will be a break with the capitalism we know today and movement toward a money-less society.

Why money-less?

Money is simply a method of transference – a better way to barter. What advantages does a money free system have? IMHO – there really is no reason to remove money at all – it is not the source of the problem and also has potential to be part of the solution.

Barter will be gone too.

It's a bleak (but accurate)picture you painted for today's middle income wage earners. It won't break down so much between the rich and the poor in the future but it will be the content creators, the content providers, the content consumers.

Currently the consumers and providers (to a much lesser extent) barter their labor for money; right? If the content providers can simply throw a switch and me, as a consumer downloads it be it a book, a song, a news story or whatever, there is no need to pay a trucker to deliver the product to Target. So the transportation worker is removed, the retail worker is removed and there is a direct relationship between me and the provider. The supply chain just got shorter and there are thousands of jobs at stake with every link that was removed.

So what has to stay on the truck and what has to stay in the store?

Check out last month's Fast Company magazine. There is a story about a place that churns out 4,000 cases of veggies a month. Nothing remarkable about it until you read that the place is 45 minutes from Chicago and it's a warehouse using LED lighting. There is no reason that within 10-20 years, there will be tomatoes growing on your counter top. Low/no overhead co-ops can bring eggs and dairy.

Your question was why money-less. Its pretty much the only way it can go when you have a growing population, jobs being eliminated, and frankly demand for labor being reduced.

---

I would love to hear another scenario but It escapes me.

I disagree. The loss of consumerism (essentially what you are talking about) does not necessitate the loss of money as an exchange. People have exchanged goods or services since the beginning of time and they will continue to do so even in an environment where the most common goods we see exchanged today are essentially free. There will always be want or desire and those to fill such. It just might not be as central as it is at this moment.

Money does not necessitate any particular system or require jobs tbh. One of the ideas spoken about in one of the videos was a national minimum salary – a minimum amount of money that you receive just for being here. While I do not necessarily agree with that as part of a solution (at least not yet) it does illustrate how money might not be connected with the things that you are talking about.
Sure you can grow those vegetables on your table but what if the girl down the way grows them better? And the man down the street whittles some very nice carvings by had that she wants as well.
Money is really nothing more than a medium of exchange that allows us to break all things down to a single tradable resource. I do not believe that it is anywhere near being outdated.

If you are talking about that sort of paradigm shift...okay. What I meant was that currently you barter your work for money. If you labor isn't valued or needed...you aren't going to get any money in our capitalist market-driven society.

I would have to ask though...why have the monetary resource at all if there is no thing on the other side of the equation to determine how much you get?

There will be something on the other side to determine what you get. That is what an economic system is in the simplest sense.
You have a monetary system to simplify trade.

.
Okay, right now, its the hours I work. In other atmospheres, it was the amount of product I churned out. Again, without the need for me to come into work or churn out product, what do you think that "something" will be?

 

[candycorn]

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

That is why I said I think that what we end up in will be something new. Capitalism might be the best we have BUT it is not sufficient unless there is a thriving middle class. The death of that middles class is, IMHO, evident at this stage.

Without that then it really becomes just as bad as communism.

But I don't agree that there won't be a middle class. I still believe new technologies don't take away jobs but simply inspire new ways to make money and that require people to make it. A single computer can now do the work that it once took dozens of people to do. But that computer didn't throw those dozens of people out of work, it just changed the way they work and the kinds of jobs there are to do.

Then watch the videos. They address the very real prospect that this is coming to a head that will be different than most other automations we have experienced in the past. The jist of this is because computers and machines are becoming better than people at EVERYTHING.
What you are talking about is when machines replaced very narrow and specific tasks. They were superior to people in a very narrow way. That is no longer true. Computers outperform people in almost every single way in every single carrier field. That is coming to fruition.
It is telling that there are now computers that diagnose and treat medical patience better than doctors. Drive better than people and handle legal paperwork better than people. Highly technical carriers. They are now learning as well. I don’t see how we can avoid a situation where most people will simply become outdated because there is no field for them to move onto. Not because they are unable but because there will already be a computer capable of outperforming them.

How we work and what work there will be will change yes. It always has. But around the turn of the 20th Century it was suggested that the U.S. Patent office might as well close because everything there was to invent had already been invented. Yet most of what has been invented in the history of the world has been invented and/or developed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

No machine will ever be able to be visionary, to see possibilities, to devise solutions for the most profound problems that humankind will encounter. Just look at the massive change in photography that the digital revolution has made--no need for film or slide projectors etc. or all the people who manufactured and processed all that. But there are more photographers making a living just the same; they just do it differently and there are more people working in that industry in various ways than ever before.

All we need to fear is those who want to control our lives and tell us how to live them. That will be what will crush us, not the wonderful creations of humankind. If we can resist that, everybody who wants to work will be able to work and the possibilities are brighter and more satisfying than ever before.

Again, I do not disagree. You are focusing on a topic that I have not discussed.
Let’s ask it another way – do you honestly think that there are going to be 300 million ‘visionaries’ out there to perpetuate a capitalist job market? Do you think that everyone can become a capitalist visionary? By this I do not mean have the capacity but genuinely will become entrepreneurial visionaries and create their own markets.

Visionares? I doubt it. There is room for more content providers in the form of authors, musicians, the experimental sciences area (some will hit) etc... Most people work because that is what their fathers did. The older you get the less you utilize that creative muscle so it atrophies.

 

[Foxfyre]

That is why I said I think that what we end up in will be something new. Capitalism might be the best we have BUT it is not sufficient unless there is a thriving middle class. The death of that middles class is, IMHO, evident at this stage.

Without that then it really becomes just as bad as communism.

But I don't agree that there won't be a middle class. I still believe new technologies don't take away jobs but simply inspire new ways to make money and that require people to make it. A single computer can now do the work that it once took dozens of people to do. But that computer didn't throw those dozens of people out of work, it just changed the way they work and the kinds of jobs there are to do.

Then watch the videos. They address the very real prospect that this is coming to a head that will be different than most other automations we have experienced in the past. The jist of this is because computers and machines are becoming better than people at EVERYTHING.
What you are talking about is when machines replaced very narrow and specific tasks. They were superior to people in a very narrow way. That is no longer true. Computers outperform people in almost every single way in every single carrier field. That is coming to fruition.
It is telling that there are now computers that diagnose and treat medical patience better than doctors. Drive better than people and handle legal paperwork better than people. Highly technical carriers. They are now learning as well. I don’t see how we can avoid a situation where most people will simply become outdated because there is no field for them to move onto. Not because they are unable but because there will already be a computer capable of outperforming them.

How we work and what work there will be will change yes. It always has. But around the turn of the 20th Century it was suggested that the U.S. Patent office might as well close because everything there was to invent had already been invented. Yet most of what has been invented in the history of the world has been invented and/or developed in the 20th and 21st centuries.

No machine will ever be able to be visionary, to see possibilities, to devise solutions for the most profound problems that humankind will encounter. Just look at the massive change in photography that the digital revolution has made--no need for film or slide projectors etc. or all the people who manufactured and processed all that. But there are more photographers making a living just the same; they just do it differently and there are more people working in that industry in various ways than ever before.

All we need to fear is those who want to control our lives and tell us how to live them. That will be what will crush us, not the wonderful creations of humankind. If we can resist that, everybody who wants to work will be able to work and the possibilities are brighter and more satisfying than ever before.

Again, I do not disagree. You are focusing on a topic that I have not discussed.
Let’s ask it another way – do you honestly think that there are going to be 300 million ‘visionaries’ out there to perpetuate a capitalist job market? Do you think that everyone can become a capitalist visionary? By this I do not mean have the capacity but genuinely will become entrepreneurial visionaries and create their own markets.

Visionares? I doubt it. There is room for more content providers in the form of authors, musicians, the experimental sciences area (some will hit) etc... Most people work because that is what their fathers did. The older you get the less you utilize that creative muscle so it atrophies.

I wasn't speaking of music though that is a good example. Think of all the thousands and thousands of years that people have been creating new music. But people still come up with entirely unique and compelling melodies that feed the soul. (Not so much in the current generation but I have confidence that the tuneless noise and monotonous lyrics that passes for most of the music these days will be a passing fad.)

And I do not believe creative juices ever atrophy by those with vision and insight, no matter how old they get. Some of the worlds greatest music, some of the greatest books, some of the most magnificent painting, some of the greatest medical and technological advances have been made by people in their advanced years.

The point is, we should never underestimate the ability of a free people, unhindered by those who would seek to control and shut them down, to see solutions and new possibilities. We should not fear technology. We should only fear those who won't let us try.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Something has been bothering me lately and has challenged my base political beliefs is capitalism's ability to deal with the long term future as a valid economic system for us to follow. For those of you that do not know me I am an avid advocate for both free market capitalism in as pure a sense as we can reasonably attain and libertarian ideals. I do not believe government interference leads to desirable outcomes in most situations. There is a very long term problem that I face with this belief structure though.

The reality that we face today is that more and more sectors are being automated. Workers in these fields are becoming more and more productive as a result. This is, at its base, a very good thing as we are getting more out of our work we will have to do less of it. Hundreds of years ago work would have consumed virtually 100 percent of peoples time. Better tools, automation and increased productivity have allowed us a great deal of freedom in our lives where we are able to work far less and even have almost 40% of our population not working at all. This is a good thing.

The actual value of labor becomes a problem when you have so much productivity though. Increased productivity does not necessarily increase the value of labor even though that labor produces more goods. The increased productivity might do so IF you are not increasing the labor pool. As labor is a commodity like any other, steeply decreasing the number of jobs will devalue even skilled labor as everyone is pushed into those few remaining jobs. I think this is somewhat reflected in today's society as we see so many young people with degrees making very little - literally everyone needs a degree these day simply because there are so many people looking for those few jobs.


I think that we are coming to a tipping point though where labor is going to become so rare that a capitalist system can no longer be reasonably sustained. Automation has been occurring for a long time and it really has not been that big of an issue because there were always other areas that people could move into - more high tech jobs or entirely new industries created from such automation. That was all fine and well as long as the automated machines were simple and narrow. If you go to an assembly line where cars are manufactured you will see many machines that replaced many workers. Those machines, however, are a FAR cry from actual human labor. They are repetitive and can only do a single task though they do it well. There is no intelligence there.

Today, the automation is completely different. Machines are no longer simple minded or extremely narrow. Cars are already capable of being completely controlled by computers - the entire transportation industry essentially no longer needs people to move product. As soon as society catches up, you are going to see thousands of jobs gone from the transportation industry. Such vehicles do not sleep, require medical care breaks or 401K's and (most importantly) do not get in accidents. They are FAR cheaper and they are poised to replace the largest employment sector in the nation right now. Even pilots are essentially passengers on automated aircraft these days. Aircraft take off, fly to their destination and land without a single command from the pilot. And as a side bonus, they never crash into the side of a mountain when they get depressed.


So far these machines have been fairly narrow machines but the truth is that machines are even getting into skilled professional jobs like writing or doctors or even creative endeavors like composing music. They are expanding into those specialized sectors as well eliminating need for highly skilled labors as well. In the video below it talks about WATSON - a diagnosis machines that is superior to a doctor for basic diagnosis.

I think that it is a given that machines are going to take a huge chunk out of modern employment. The question that we face is how to deal with a population that is largely unemployed simply because there is little to no need for those jobs to exist. This is a given - we see it happening all around us. Can capitalism cope with the future or are we going to need to come up with something different?

The right seems married to capitalism to the point that there can be no other solution or economic method to follow. I think that it is folly to assume that such must be the case forever - eventually change will occur as it must. The left seems stuck in 'solutions' that do nothing but perpetuate a broken system. Infrastructure cannot employ the nation and raising minimum wage does nothing to address the fact that jobs will disappear. Even safety nets are rather misguided as the value of money adjusts to the number of pieces of paper that you force into everyone's pockets. Personally I think there might very well be a new economic system that is unlike anything that we have used thus far to replace the current system when that time comes.


I may have not articulated myself well here (and a lot of posters are going to trash this without even reading it) but I would like to hear some of your thoughts on what the future might hold and what you think it might take to get there.



I am particularly interested in
dblack Foxfyre
opinions here. Am I completely off base?

You have articulated yourself well enough. It's called evolution. 100 years ago - we were a manual labor society. We BUILT everything ourselves. I had a friend (an electrician) who worked for Ford in the late 70s through the 90s. His job? Maintain the robots who were assembling autos. At first, they took only a few jobs. Now? 70% of every auto is built by robotics.

This is happening more and more. Now? Amazon wants to deliver packages by drone. Take it from a guy in his 70s - it sounds like Science fiction to me, but it will - no doubt- come to pass. Look at the Post Office and how they have been relegated to obscurity.

I suppose it can be looked at in two ways - either "Things fall apart, the center does not hold" - or "Welcome to today - the future".

Either way, it's coming, it is here, and it's going nowhere. It will continue to grow and get larger and larger. I can't remember the movie my Granddaughter was watching a while back - but it concerned humans in like the 25th century. They had lost their hands and legs and sat in chairs all the time. They had lost all reason to "motivate" because it was being "done" for them. Some damned robot cartoon movie. At the time, I thought it was ridiculous. Now? Not so sure.

 

[RandallFlagg]

That was a loooooong OP FA and forgive me for just scanning it instead of reading it carefully. It would have helped if you had concluded with a summary and a specific question you wished addressed. But you took a lot of time and obviously put a lot of thought into that, and it deserves an answer.

In my opinion, in order to have the free market sustain the needs of the people, all we have to do is to mostly back big government out of the equation and let the people live their lives.

Throughout history people didn't have to be told to build Conestoga wagons for the expansion west---people just figured out there was a need and adapted to it. People didn't have to be told to build railroads. People didn't have to be told to start building all the things necessary to have railroads--they saw the need and filled it.

People didn't have to be told to start closing down the buggy whip and carriage factories and retooling to build auto parts and other components necessary for the rapidly developing automobile industry. They saw that this was happening and they did it.

People didn't have to be told to change their ways of doing things to accommodate the almost instant electronics revolution. They just did it.

For all of human history people have recognized opportunity as new inventions and possibilities and technologies, saw the needs (i.e. market possibilities) and filled it.

And in almost every single case, the most prosperous and productive new innovations and resulting jobs and prosperity occurred in a free market without any government interference of any kind.

There is no reason to think that a free people will not continue to see developing opportunities and step up to fill the new needs (i.e. new markets) that result. It is only when government over regulates and tries to micro manage emerging industries that they get bogged down and all the possibilities aren't realized.

That was a loooooong OP FA and forgive me for just scanning it instead of reading it carefully. It would have helped if you had concluded with a summary and a specific question you wished addressed. But you took a lot of time and obviously put a lot of thought into that, and it deserves an answer.

In my opinion, in order to have the free market sustain the needs of the people, all we have to do is to mostly back big government out of the equation and let the people live their lives.

Throughout history people didn't have to be told to build Conestoga wagons for the expansion west---people just figured out there was a need and adapted to it. People didn't have to be told to build railroads. People didn't have to be told to start building all the things necessary to have railroads--they saw the need and filled it.

People didn't have to be told to start closing down the buggy whip and carriage factories and retooling to build auto parts and other components necessary for the rapidly developing automobile industry. They saw that this was happening and they did it.

People didn't have to be told to change their ways of doing things to accommodate the almost instant electronics revolution. They just did it.

For all of human history people have recognized opportunity as new inventions and possibilities and technologies, saw the needs (i.e. market possibilities) and filled it.

And in almost every single case, the most prosperous and productive new innovations and resulting jobs and prosperity occurred in a free market without any government interference of any kind.

There is no reason to think that a free people will not continue to see developing opportunities and step up to fill the new needs (i.e. new markets) that result. It is only when government over regulates and tries to micro manage emerging industries that they get bogged down and all the possibilities aren't realized.

Thank you for your response. I think you missed the overall point here though – none of this claims that the government needs to tell people where to become productive or introduce new products. People will always be productive and create new markets as long as the reward is there to do so. The problem is that new markets used to require large employment to create and maintain.

New markets will still occur BUT they will no longer require large employment to do so. It is that reality that is going to come to a head.

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

Nope. Capitalism turned this wild country into the envy of every country on the planet. That is, until Barry arrived. If we allow business to work again - we will jump right back on top. But not until we rid ourselves of those like Obama.

 

[Foxfyre]

That was a loooooong OP FA and forgive me for just scanning it instead of reading it carefully. It would have helped if you had concluded with a summary and a specific question you wished addressed. But you took a lot of time and obviously put a lot of thought into that, and it deserves an answer.

In my opinion, in order to have the free market sustain the needs of the people, all we have to do is to mostly back big government out of the equation and let the people live their lives.

Throughout history people didn't have to be told to build Conestoga wagons for the expansion west---people just figured out there was a need and adapted to it. People didn't have to be told to build railroads. People didn't have to be told to start building all the things necessary to have railroads--they saw the need and filled it.

People didn't have to be told to start closing down the buggy whip and carriage factories and retooling to build auto parts and other components necessary for the rapidly developing automobile industry. They saw that this was happening and they did it.

People didn't have to be told to change their ways of doing things to accommodate the almost instant electronics revolution. They just did it.

For all of human history people have recognized opportunity as new inventions and possibilities and technologies, saw the needs (i.e. market possibilities) and filled it.

And in almost every single case, the most prosperous and productive new innovations and resulting jobs and prosperity occurred in a free market without any government interference of any kind.

There is no reason to think that a free people will not continue to see developing opportunities and step up to fill the new needs (i.e. new markets) that result. It is only when government over regulates and tries to micro manage emerging industries that they get bogged down and all the possibilities aren't realized.

That was a loooooong OP FA and forgive me for just scanning it instead of reading it carefully. It would have helped if you had concluded with a summary and a specific question you wished addressed. But you took a lot of time and obviously put a lot of thought into that, and it deserves an answer.

In my opinion, in order to have the free market sustain the needs of the people, all we have to do is to mostly back big government out of the equation and let the people live their lives.

Throughout history people didn't have to be told to build Conestoga wagons for the expansion west---people just figured out there was a need and adapted to it. People didn't have to be told to build railroads. People didn't have to be told to start building all the things necessary to have railroads--they saw the need and filled it.

People didn't have to be told to start closing down the buggy whip and carriage factories and retooling to build auto parts and other components necessary for the rapidly developing automobile industry. They saw that this was happening and they did it.

People didn't have to be told to change their ways of doing things to accommodate the almost instant electronics revolution. They just did it.

For all of human history people have recognized opportunity as new inventions and possibilities and technologies, saw the needs (i.e. market possibilities) and filled it.

And in almost every single case, the most prosperous and productive new innovations and resulting jobs and prosperity occurred in a free market without any government interference of any kind.

There is no reason to think that a free people will not continue to see developing opportunities and step up to fill the new needs (i.e. new markets) that result. It is only when government over regulates and tries to micro manage emerging industries that they get bogged down and all the possibilities aren't realized.

Thank you for your response. I think you missed the overall point here though – none of this claims that the government needs to tell people where to become productive or introduce new products. People will always be productive and create new markets as long as the reward is there to do so. The problem is that new markets used to require large employment to create and maintain.

New markets will still occur BUT they will no longer require large employment to do so. It is that reality that is going to come to a head.

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

Nope. Capitalism turned this wild country into the envy of every country on the planet. That is, until Barry arrived. If we allow business to work again - we will jump right back on top. But not until we rid ourselves of those like Obama.

Isn't that what I said? Well except for the Obama part? But you're right. Unless we shed ourselves of progressive oppression and authoritarianism and allow Americans to do what Americans do best, again, we will continue to stagnate and regress.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Thank you for your response. I think you missed the overall point here though – none of this claims that the government needs to tell people where to become productive or introduce new products. People will always be productive and create new markets as long as the reward is there to do so. The problem is that new markets used to require large employment to create and maintain.

New markets will still occur BUT they will no longer require large employment to do so. It is that reality that is going to come to a head.

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

Nope. Capitalism turned this wild country into the envy of every country on the planet. That is, until Barry arrived. If we allow business to work again - we will jump right back on top. But not until we rid ourselves of those like Obama.

Isn't that what I said? Well except for the Obama part? But you're right. Unless we shed ourselves of progressive oppression and authoritarianism and allow Americans to do what Americans do best, again, we will continue to stagnate and regress.

Nope. We will cease to exist.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well I didn't address that specifically, but I still put faith in the human spirit to work it out. It is true that mechanization took millions off the farms and funneled them into the towns and cities, but they still managed to find jobs and feed their families. As people have more leisure, the more the ways to spend their money on leisure activities becomes big business. Perhaps we will have another cultural shift in which a one wage-earner marriage becomes fashionable again, and one parent will expect to stay home and take care of the kids and day to day operations of running a home which gives everybody more leisure to enjoy.

Unless you have an oppressive government that diminishes the entreprenourial spirit, people seem to figure it out as we go along.

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

Nope. Capitalism turned this wild country into the envy of every country on the planet. That is, until Barry arrived. If we allow business to work again - we will jump right back on top. But not until we rid ourselves of those like Obama.

Isn't that what I said? Well except for the Obama part? But you're right. Unless we shed ourselves of progressive oppression and authoritarianism and allow Americans to do what Americans do best, again, we will continue to stagnate and regress.

Nope. We will cease to exist.

It is possible, but I'm not ready to say that. If we do not keep fighting against it, I just think we will go the way of so many other nations that succumbed to radical leftism and became miserable places as a result of it.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Oh no, don’t get me wrong. I agree with this. What I am interested is what you think that might actually be or if you still think a capitalist type system is going to be the best we have. I don’t think it will be system that looks like capitalism tbh. I don’t see how capitalism in general can deal with an economy that does not employ most people. Further, I think it is going to be a hell of a turbulent time and cost many lives – exactly like it happened last time when the industrial revolution changed economies all over the planet.

Capitalism is an absolutely imperfect, unpredictable, inconsistent, and sorry way to run any economy. But it is far better than ANYTHING else out there. I think it is our best shot to avoid the worst of turbulent times as we adapt to new ways to work, live, and engage in recreation and other pursuits.

Nope. Capitalism turned this wild country into the envy of every country on the planet. That is, until Barry arrived. If we allow business to work again - we will jump right back on top. But not until we rid ourselves of those like Obama.

Isn't that what I said? Well except for the Obama part? But you're right. Unless we shed ourselves of progressive oppression and authoritarianism and allow Americans to do what Americans do best, again, we will continue to stagnate and regress.

Nope. We will cease to exist.

It is possible, but I'm not ready to say that. If we do not keep fighting against it, I just think we will go the way of so many other nations that succumbed to radical leftism and became miserable places as a result of it.

Well, I'm looking 20-30 years down the road (if we make it that far). I have said this for the longest time - this is NOT the country I grew up in. My God, I remember, as a High School kid, that only a few kids made it to College. Why? College was a BITCH to get into in those days. On a brighter note, however, 99% of the kids I graduated with had good paying jobs when they graduated.

Now? Kids graduate and have no clue what's next. There are no jobs to go to so everyone flocks to College - and takes up space for 4-5 years then return home to their Mom's basement. THAT is the present and the future.

All the while, companies that USED to provide good paying jobs for young Americans are gone - overseas for slave wage pay. They WILL NOT return until we have a president who penalizes the living shit out of them. Radical? You bet. But the days of corporations profiting off of slave wages overseas, and returning their products to the US for sale, needs to stop and it needs to stop YESTERDAY.

Will it happen? Very doubtful. These corporations merely pay off both sides to "turn away" and pay them no mind and while our "leaders" do that - THEY get rich while the corporations get FILTHY rich. We simply can NOT go on this way. It will eventually mean the death of this country.

Once, we were a nation of builders - now? A Nation of consumers, and 30 hours a week at minimum wage is the norm.