Unless the human being is genetically altered to accommodate robotics we are doomed.

[healthmyths]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

 

[Mac1958]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

 

[The Great Goose]

We can all work in the human resources department.

 

[saveliberty]

The Earth seems to have many, some undiscovered, methods of balancing things out. I am sure a plague or other event will bring the population back to an equilibrium.

 

[The Great Goose]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

It's in science fiction books.

 

[healthmyths]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

So how much should a person who has to make life or death decisions make i.e. Captain Kirk/Picard versus a lesser responsible person?
Because your "universal salary" sounds all well and good, BUT unless we have a non-human with non-emotions make decisions, that
won't work. I know I would work for the same salary as the person who doesn't have to make those decisions.
That's one of the reasons capitalism has worked so well. People that are willing to take risks and be responsible for others get paid more!

 

[healthmyths]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

It's in science fiction books.

Sorry not an answer.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

 

[healthmyths]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

Maybe....we have bigger more pressing problems. You're bordering on science fiction.

 

[The Great Goose]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

It's in science fiction books.

Sorry not an answer.

 

[yiostheoy]

Someone still needs to oil and tune those robots.

There will always be human jobs just not as many.

 

[yiostheoy]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

Maybe....we have bigger more pressing problems. You're bordering on science fiction.

So what worries you BuckToothMoron ??

Ukraine?

IRS?

Wall Street?

Global warming?

Rising sea levels?

Population explosion?

You did not say.

 

[yiostheoy]

The White House states:
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it
“Researchers’ estimates on the scale of threatened jobs over the next decade or two range from 9% to 47%,” they write, but add that the economy has always proved to be resilient to take existing rates of change and shrinking of industry in stride.
White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

So what can be done when the human being has been genetically pre-disposed to originally hunt, then grow food to survive. What with agriculture productivity growing food has been no longer a primary activity.
Manufacturing took it's place. But with cheaper labor offshore we've seen that disappear leaving service industry to replace at lower wages. Now with minimum wage advocates this segment of the economy will be replaced with robots/kiosks.
So what is left?
What will we do with 100 million active productive humans in the USA?
Should we go the way of the Luddites? (a member of any of the bands of English workers who destroyed machinery, especially in cotton and woolen mills, that they believed was threatening their jobs (1811–16).a person opposed to increased industrialization or new technology.)

What will our economy do with robots fighting our wars, building our products, serving us food?
Which leads me to the next question...
How did crew members on Star Trek get paid and for what? Was Captain Kirk/Picard paid higher as
they were more responsible? If so what did they spend their money on?? Or was there "money"???

So unless we genetically change our attention span, our need to consume energy and we don't have
any outlets for that attention span or energy consumption what is the result?

This is a conversation we've had regarding some kind of universal salary. I know it sounds like socialism and all that, but it's almost inevitable.

Because of technology and robotics, there will be a time when there simply is not enough work to go around. We're getting there pretty quickly.

Unfortunately, our "leaders" are either blind to this or don't have the balls to bring it up. It really should be a topic of conversation.
.

So how much should a person who has to make life or death decisions make i.e. Captain Kirk/Picard versus a lesser responsible person?
Because your "universal salary" sounds all well and good, BUT unless we have a non-human with non-emotions make decisions, that
won't work. I know I would work for the same salary as the person who doesn't have to make those decisions.
That's one of the reasons capitalism has worked so well. People that are willing to take risks and be responsible for others get paid more!

We don't have starships cruising deep space yet.

Probably not in your or my lifetimes either.

 

[Theowl32]

Culling of the herd, is around the corner.

 

[yiostheoy]

The Earth seems to have many, some undiscovered, methods of balancing things out. I am sure a plague or other event will bring the population back to an equilibrium.

It will likely either be a plague, or a famine, or a drought, or a war, or a meteor.

Speculative science tells us that dinosaurs were overpopulating until that meteor came crashing into the Gulf Of Mexico. Then rat sized mammals took over.

We have been overdue for some kind of cleansing.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

Maybe....we have bigger more pressing problems. You're bordering on science fiction.

So what worries you BuckToothMoron ??

Ukraine?

IRS?

Wall Street?

Global warming?

Rising sea levels?

Population explosion?

You did not say.

Not within the scope of the thread.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

If your scenario was accurate, automation would lead to fewer people working which has not been the case. Following your logic, you would predict that computers would eliminate more jobs than they have created, erroneous again.

 

[The Great Goose]

We can all work in the human resources department.

bendog the soviet union's government apparatus will seem as an ant next to a dinosaur when compared with the vastness of the future human resources industry.

Don't laugh, it's probably going to happen!

 

[imawhosure]

Technology doesn't necessarily destroy the number of jobs, but it does alter where and what the jobs are. A Robot serving fries and burgers doesn't build itself, it doesn't create the software it runs on, or the electronics that are inside it. It doesn't mine the raw materials required to build it. In the early part of the last century, buggy makers were replaced with an assembly line of men and machinery manufacturing cars.

But at some point the robots serving fries are built by robots mining raw material and building the robots. It is a diminishing point.
That's why I asked given humans genetics of hunting/farming/manufacturing all to grow/sell/get paid salaries has to be altered as there
will be NO need for any of the even more sophisticated, i.e. designers of robots people. Replaced by robots.

If your scenario was accurate, automation would lead to fewer people working which has not been the case. Following your logic, you would predict that computers would eliminate more jobs than they have created, erroneous again.

Suppose for a minute, the OP is accurate. Then tell us, who decides who sits on their rearends! Which group of people tells everyone that THEY want to, they no longer need to work!

Listen, no matter what anyone tells you, someone ALWAYS has to work! NOTHING is self sustainable.

The left wants you to believe utopia is just around the corner. BULL! Utopia for the left is just around the corner, if you fall asleep.

The bottom line is simple-----------> it doesn't make any difference how we can get robots, or slaves, or women, or white people, or brown people, to do our bidding! Automation is not going to fix the world as we know it, any time soon. The government of the United States, Russia, Israel, and Iran amongst others, are going to bring down upon the snowflakes heads, REALITY!

ANYONE who thinks that they can be isolated from reality by being leftist, is only fooling themselves. If you think America (as the leftists would say----> Amerika) wait until the communists get ahold of your rearends! And guess what! You would think that likeminded people were kept alive LONGER than those who would fight the new way of doing things. NOT! The people who accept the idiocy are the 1st to get clobbered, lol.

Why? You read by calling up links and such leftists. I am not here to save you, but rather here to help you. Still, nobody can help any of you until you are willing to help yourselves!

Look at what is going on, then get back with us! All fun and games, along with getting a few bucks for sticking it in the nose of conservatives anonymously! The government knows who you are, lol! And if your side gets hosed, you know what Obama did to Tea Party people.

Are you suggesting that Trump has more morals then your people ever did!

Honestly...........cya, wouldn't want to be ya! And oh by the way........don't cry! Remember.....to the victor goes the spoils, and that is exactly what Obowelmovement did. Now, because of his incompetence, YOU get the same treatment. Enjoy!