The final days of capitalism is near. There is a coming piece of technology that has the potential to make capitalism obsolete. Did I peak your interest? The technology is robots. Robotics has reached the tipping point. Recently the invention of the Baxter Robot is being compared to the arrival of the PC. Before the PC, computers were only available to corporations in the form of Mainframe computers. The arrival of the 286 chip opened up computing to everyone. And what a revolution it has been. Changing our lives in ways we never imagined. Now comes the Baxter Robot. Today's version of the 286 chip. Baxter cost $22,000 which over the lifetime of the robot means it cost $3 dollar an hour. And it's easy to program. This opens up robotics to small companies. Now here is why I am saying that capitalism is going away. There is no way that a human can compete with a robot. You need vacations, days off, personal days, weekends off and sleep. Your thoughts operate at the speed of a chemical reaction. The robots "think" at the speed of electricty. The robot can work 24/7 at a cost of $3 dollars an hour. You think you can compete with that? More and more people are going to be unemployed for good. First the robot will do the jobs of blue collar workers. Once robots can think, they will do white collar jobs. So what will the future economy look like? A likely scenerio is that corporations will be fully automated. Governments will tax these fully automated corporations. Governments will give you money to live on. You go buy your stuff at businesses run by robots and the whole process starts all over again. What does this economic system sound like. Well it sure ain't capitalism. Maybe techno socialism.
Until they are free, capital will be required to buy the means of production, even if it replaces a person. The real issue is, and has been for quite some time, is productivity. If you can make 10 times what you can consume, there is excess. Productivity and volume drives prices down, and innovation up. That over productivity has allowed the level of socialism we have now (do you think the hunter gather could only work half their life (school for 1/4, retirement for 1/4) while supporting 1 person in 3 getting money from the government - and that is the US. Automation has replaced most of the unskilled and some skilled (machinist) jobs in the US, software has made a pretty big dent in the number of skilled jobs from tax preparers, engineers, lawyers, doctors. I work for a company with a large workforce in China, and they are adding automation as fast as possible. In time, development and production will require little more than an idea and raw materials. Costs will plummet further (I've heard that labor makes up about 70% of the cost for businesses). The number of hours of work required to survive will be very few. That will require some significant changes in how we live. On the other hand, if you want full employment, eliminate the industrial, and agricultural revolution - go back to hunter gathering.
Capitalism has a tendency towards economic crisis. Despite that, capitalist inefficient profit (with the integral help of government) is maintained. Doomsters referring to the end of capitalism are therefore really only playing silly blighters. We've had this 'the sky is falling' myth for yonks. All we actually see is an increase in opportunities created by the income growth engineered through production innovations. Does that cause some pain? Certainly! We can refer, for example, to structural unemployment created by deindustrialisation. However, that's only a temporary problem which can be reduced through education interventionism. Sounds like babble to me! Surprised you didn't go the full hog and applied some 'Star Trek' economics. In reality, we'll continue to see income growth and that could actually strengthen capitalism. For example, with substantial income growth, we could refer to a shift away from the visible hand (with large corporation using the managerial class to exploit economies of scale) back towards the invisible hand (with agile small firms meeting more fluid and individualistic demand)
3D printing, open source projects , not for profit research and community based economies will bring the end of capitalism . It is already happening , we are growing out of it .
Bobbins! For example, we've always had not for profit research. You'll find that the spillover effects are 'for profit' capitalism
Retrained to do what? Education to do what? MIT is already working on artificial engineers. I saw a demo of it on PBS. So engineers are going to be replaced by robots. The things is that robots are going to be able to do everything. Were are people going to work. Even corporate managers will be replaced by thinking robots. Things will change when the economy is fully automated.
The end of capitalism? Costs for equipment, designs, and advertizing, fall, productivity increases, a greater percent of the population run their own business. Looks like the golden age of capitalism.
We've always had these pathetic "the end is nigh" grunts. The reality is that, as productivity increases, we see the creation of new opportunities. Can we predict those opportunities? Of course not! They are derived from entrepreneurial activity and are therefore unknown now. However, expect higher wages and greater choice.
It does! Evolutionary economics is a multi school of thought that disputes the relevance of neoclassical economics. It leads to an understanding of the severity of market failure. You use the word 'evolution' without realising that it would shoot you in the foot
So evidentally you're talking about something different - a pretentious academic theory of some sort that I'm not versed in. Good for you. I'm talking about the basic natural concept of survival of the fittest. Which is capitalism in a nutshell (anarcho-capitalism, technically) and which the human race always defaults back to in some form or fashion no matter how hard ideologues try to fight it. Play the game as long and as hard as you want. If collectivism could succeed on a mass level, it would have done so before now. Humans have been around for awhile. There's a reason none of these collectivist utopias ever turn out the way people envision them. Because they run contrary to human nature. Unfortunately, it is easier to understand this logically than it is to accept it emotionally. Which is what creates the problem.
Indeed, I'm noting your ignorance of economics and how you put your foot in it without realising it. Then you're not talking about capitalism. You fellows come out with complete tosh and think you have something to say. You don't. Evolutionary economics makes your understanding look more than child like; it shows you off as simply ignorant of the basics of economic interaction.
I like how you're more interested in talking down to people than actually explaining anything. It shows your true motives. Not to actually convert anyone to agreeing with your beliefs but only to troll and stroke your own ego. And using silly words like "tosh" only increases your probability of being a jingoist European that can't see past his own cultural bias.
So, just because you put your foot in it, you want me to put a teaching hat on and help you? Sorry chum, doesn't work that way. I point out your errors, you put them right. Celebrate individualism dear boy, rather than expecting to be nannied. Back to the point. Next time you foolishly think of using the word evolution, try to remember that evolutionary economics thinks you're talking bobbins!
LOL! Bobbins! There's another one of those words. Okay, let me see if I can explain this to you. If you want someone to agree with you...... which is what it looks like you were going for.......... you'll have a much better conversion rate if you explain logically rather than condescend. Do you get that? Does that make sense to you? You clearly think I am beneath you, so why are you expecting me to understand your positions without explaining them? You have to realize that I have nothing to lose here. I already think your ideas are ridiculous. You're the one that wants me to agree with you that evolution somehow favors collectivism, which it doesn't. And you've thus far provided zero evidence to show otherwise. If you want to convince me that you are correct, you're going to have to lay out a pretty solid case for why that is. Which you have, thus far, not been willing to do. Calling me names doesn't really do anything. Except maybe show that you're not really prepared to back up your argument when called out on it.
Never be scared of vocabulary! I don't care if they agree with me. I merely want rational comment. That undoubtedly leads to debate and conflict. However, you've just gone for ignorant comment. I could pat you on the head and patronise you through the process, but I find that temporarily disagreeable. I've been nothing but logical, referring to the economic analysis that makes your comments look more than foolish. Take it on the chin and do better. Stop blaming me for your silly errors. You don't seem to set your standards high. My ideas? I didn't invent evolutionary economics. Try to make sense! I've referred to reality; a horrid beast for some people! Evolutionary economics certainly leads to greater anti-capitalist comment. It rejects, for example, the notion of an equilibrium that delivers efficiency. It instead understands how there are multiple equilibria and how an economy can be stuck in an inferior result. You've gone for an abuse of a concept, not realising that the economics makes you look foolish. Sorry, let me pat you on the head! You at least had very few spelling errors. Well done!
so scientific journals are giving peer reviewed articles out for free ? Equipment will be modular meaning that the tools and components to make things could be also used to make other things or scrapped from other things to make new ones , designs ? i posted open source . Open source projects do not advertise , they only need people to code and people to test if you are familiar with sourceforge think of millions of people advancing electronics at home. *Self employment is freedom.
Let's establish two defitions: Capitalism is defined as a business with two sets of people: owners and workers. Capitalism requires private ownership. The owner has full control of the means of production,rendering a service, etc. He will gather the profit or loss, depending on his acumen to operate the business. His business must operate in the free market, including the current cost for supplies/labor and prices for goods and services, and distribution. A free market is a mechanism to determine price. Price is driven by demand and supply where seller and buyer mutually agree on a price. All government regulations, taxes and other external factors are simply a part of the mutually agreed on price. So, no matter what happens in the business environment or the economic situation of the country, capitalism will continue to exist - it is the only way business can be done in a non-socialist country. Now if a country completely changes to a socialist system (including laws and government organization to support socialism) - then capitalism and the free market will not exist. However, no computer or robot is going to kill capitalism. The business owner must, adapt to new ideas which will quickly change the supply and demand equation. If he is clever, he will mass produce items now made in China (like socks) and his robots will undercut China's price. The workers in the factory will no longer be unskilled laborers, but robot repair experts.
Universities will often pay for open access, particularly if the paper has benefited from research funding.
Most of the manufacturing in America has already left the country, unfortunately. Programmed robots do not work so well in the service sector, as anyone who has ever used an automated check-out register in a supermarket well knows.
that day will come, but it's still a ways off when there is not enough jobs for everyone, either everyone will pull together and make it work or everyone will pull apart and the whole system will fail for everyone
Full employment can always be achieved in capitalism. As technical progress continues more opportunities are created. The only problem is that the profit motive in capitalism requires unemployment to be maintained.
