What To Do About The Long-Term Implications of Automation

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Meta777, Oct 22, 2017.

  1. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course voting needs wholesale change but I don't see how we vote as a barometer of achieving consensus. Lots of people don't vote, or vote carelessly, or will always and forever vote party lines (even if there are 20 parties). I have no problem saying the collective we are no longer capable of solving complex issues...therefore little to no consensus.
     
  2. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And who exactly is going to be paying those ditch diggers that 100 dollars?

    -Meta
     
  3. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yet you seem to want humanity to throw away the idea of modern civilization and are pointing to wild animals as a justification.
    You suggest we don't need governments, police, formal educations, institutions which have helped humans to thrive for so long.
    To become so prevalent and successful. You point to animals, as if they, without these human creations, are somehow living better lives.

    But I don't buy it...I don't buy Social Darwinism in general. At least not insofar as in the sense that it should be the only law we operate by.
    E.g. the idea that we ought to compete with each-other to the death, rather than form cooperative organizational structures. No, I do not buy that at all. Because such is a nonsensical ideology. And coincidentally, just as much of a human invention as any of the things you think we ought to be getting rid of.

    Many animals survive as a species, yes, but not every species does. Many animal species go extinct every day!
    And even of the species which don't (or haven't yet) gone extinct, those animals again survive, as a species,
    but the survival of the species as a whole does not imply that individuals from that species live satisfying lives.
    Individuals from various animal species suffer and ultimately die every day!

    I'm not suggesting that human beings are superior to wild animals in every aspect, but to suggest that the way animals live ought to be used as a justification for us to shift our human societies into some sort of anarchy is simply absurd! After-all, with some exceptions, we humans tend to have longer lifespans than most animals on average. We are able to take advantage of things such as technology to enhance our lives, we are highly adaptable as individuals and as organized groups, and just generally are able to do things which make life more enjoyable. So what exactly is it that wild animals in general have that you seem to find so appealing? Would you really rather live like Tarzan or some wild ape out in the Congo somewhere than as a part of modern society??

    That isn't an inevitability. And even if we consider it as a possibility, how exactly might it come about?
    Nuclear Armageddon? Global Warming? Automation-Induced Mass Poverty?
    Whatever the case, I fail to see how turning the U.S. into an anarchy prevents any of those things from happening.
    If anything, at this point, shifting to anarchy actually makes those things more likely to occur, not less.

    Like what?

    -Meta
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  4. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly!!
     
  5. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,237
    Likes Received:
    16,160
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Talk about missing the message- you are totally derailed.
    At no point did I say we don't need government or similar things. I stated that the animal world is successful without them.
    The point was to LEARN what they know that makes things work so simply, when we can't make things work with huge complexity.

    S0- Like what?

    Mostly, how they use certain principles to make that work. And it's not just animals; once you understand you see that the some basics are present in even the grass beneath your feet. Stop thinking as you are now- and try to follow this.

    Every living thing accepts responsibility for itself *
    Now it's true that there is no other choice for animals, but it is accepted. * Exception: Human beings. Everything that happens to us is somebody else's fault.
    Thus we fail to protect ourselves, even in simple things- and we don't learn from our mistakes, because they aren't ours... they are somebody elses. Simple example:
    One person flies through a green light and get t-boned; it is the fault of the car who ran the red light. Call your lawyer.
    Another who is aware that people DO run red lights checks side traffic anyway- and sees the guy not paying attention, not stopping.
    The first goes to the hospital. The second goes on his way.
    Once we start telling ourselves that things aren't our fault, we give away the power to change them. And, we suffer the consequences.

    Every living thing's first priority is to take care of itself.*Exception: Human beings. We somehow find that we are victims far too often, and wait for someone to fix our world. And, someone will come along and try, even if they have to damage the quality of many lives to do it.
    NO, that is not "I'm number one" as most people think of it. It is accepting that if you do not keep yourself in strong shape, not only are you unlikely to survive, but
    You will have little of quality to give to anyone else! A mother lion who is to weak to hunt can't feed her cubs. The males who protect their mates can't defend. The parents who are unable to properly build nests or keep the offspring safe will lose them. The mother human on drugs does not have healthy babies, she does not care for them well. Everywhere you look in the human race, you see people failing to do that simple job.
    The principle works simply- if each individual takes care of itself, just one individual, everyone is taken care of.

    Every living thing uses a consistent set of values it trusts. * Exception: Human beings. Most of us don't really know what our values are; what our identity is, and we are willing to adjust our ethics and values to every situation to serve the immediate desires- we are near-sighted .
    In the rest of the species on earth, their objectives are kept more orderly, and part of long-term plans. For example many understand they must being be prepared to survive a winter by storing food or building fat, and they consistently do. We, on the other hand- make short term decisions, and continually get caught unprepared. From the individual lever to the federal government, we are continually in crisis, taken by surprise because we failed to prepare for what obviously was coming. We are usually shocked, and yet we still do not fix things for the long term... we patch to get by until the next crisis. Today is always the tomorrow we failed to plan for yesterday. We are terrible managers of everything in this respect- our health, our finances... and our state of mind.

    The values here include how we trust, how we treat others of our own kind and of different kinds around us- and the human track record is mostly one of constant conflict and abuse. These things are the key to morality, to self-respect, to self-confidence and identity, but only deliver that when they are wise and consistent. Our are usually not, thus a great many of us lack those benefits. Not so in the rest of the world, however.
    How many non-human species have you seen that didn't seem to understand what it was and how to be that?
    All of them- from woodpeckers to dolphins to bugs to grass- have that down pat. They are masters of their world.

    How many humans have you seen that can't figure out any of it? Have you seen any that have truly mastered their own lives?

    It's not Darwinism. It's not about moving into the wild or abandoning technology. It's about LEARNING how "dumb animals" manage to do these things so well, when humans with all our intelligence, and all our constructs (governments, religions, etc) designed to keep allow us to function better- barely survive our own continuous flow of mistakes, and very well may wind up responsible for our own extinction. Every animal has natural enemies of one kind or another. Our natural enemy- is us.

    It's not that we could not do far better, it is that we refuse to. In the long run, survival of any species depends on understanding your own strengths and limitations- and using those
    effectively in the real world around you. When you see something working, doing what you obviously have not learned to do- It's time to pay attention and see if you can learn.

    On a personal note- I assure you, those three basic principles work wonderfully in the human world. I came to understand them long ago, and quickly changed my life by using them, living by them.
     
  6. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hmm...but if they're out of work, how are they going to produce anything?

    Hmm...that could probably help a little bit...but...if people don't have jobs, can they really still benefit from an income tax credit?

    Whats he going to make them out of? ;-)

    Well, if the two guys are the only ones who exist in this economic system, since, like you said, neither of them would likely be able to compete in the larger capitalist economy, the way I see this playing out is that, assuming the second guy is able to scrounge up enough land and other resources to grow enough food for at least two or more people, and assuming the first guy is somehow able to find enough resources to produce a bunch of low-quality shoes. The second guy is probably going to trade the first guy some food in exchange for like one or two pairs of shoes. Then the first guy would be out of luck because there isn't anyone else to sell too after that, and yet he still needs to eat.

    Even if the shoes are so poorly made that they wear out quickly and need to be replaced often, the second guy is still going to have a bit of an advantage, because in the end, shoes are really not something he needs to survive, whereas the first guy wont last long with no source of food. As a matter of fact, shoes are basically considered a luxury item in a lot of third-world countries.

    A more likely scenario, is that the second guy would agree to pay the first guy with food in exchange for the first guy helping out with harvesting his garden or whatever. In which case, the second guy, as the supposed owner of the garden, would have a lot of control over how much food the first guy got paid in. See where this going? When all else hits the fan, those who find themselves in possession of the various resources needed to meet the more basic human needs will tend to have a leg up over everyone else.

    Yes. :smile:

    -Meta
     
  7. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems to me that rather than come up with a plan as Just thinking suggested, you want us to instead simply have faith that things will change on their own...that jobs will just come along out of nowhere to replace all of those lost to automation. But I'll ask you what I asked another poster...if we ever get to a point where we start to see a significant rise in the unemployment and or underemployment levels, just how high should we allow that unemployment/underemployment to get before we start thinking about doing something other than having faith??

    -Meta
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  8. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is another factor that needs to be considered in this "faith" scenario. If no significant alternative employment opportunities arise and no arrangement has been provided to accommodate the real needs of food and shelter there will be an increase in crime driven by the desperation of those falling into poverty.

    This increase in crime will occur at all levels because when adult males are incarcerated for burglary/theft that leaves adult females, who also cannot find jobs, engaging in criminal acts in order to feed their children. This in turn leads to exploitation of children.

    It is a vicious spiral into abject poverty that occurs when no one has taken the proactive steps necessary to ensure that this does not happen. Providing basic food and shelter is essential in order to prevent the sort of crime that rapidly degrades a society.

    So the warning signs are not just increased levels of unemployment/under employment but also an increase in crime levels across the board.

    The link below describes how poverty levels varied from the Middle Ages through to the end of the last century.

    http://www.localhistories.org/povhist.html

    The levels of poverty have fluctuated as have levels of crime. What is noteworthy is when minimum wages and unemployment compensation enacted poverty levels decreased significantly.

    It is worth noting that violent crime is a different issue to property crime.

    https://www.poverties.org/blog/poverty-and-crime

    If we just have "faith" that employment will come from "somewhere" we are setting ourselves up to repeat the mistakes of the past.

    The price we will pay in terms of poverty, crime and overall human misery if we continue to neglect the shrinking number of jobs could be considerably higher than anticipated.
     
  9. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Explain...
    Are you suggesting that the Four-Phased Approach wont work because America has never had a federal jobs program before?
    Well first of all, I think that Americans are perfectly capable of trying new things....and second....What about the WPA???

    -Meta
     
  10. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,237
    Likes Received:
    16,160
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Meta, it seems you are endorsing some kind of "master plan", and I see that as entailing a sort of socialist society where everybody is required to be part of it. It's not a matter of having faith that things will change on their own- because that has never been otherwise, it is the constant of history, not the exception. Do we need a plan to insure the sun will rise next week? No- nor do we need faith. It's a function that is natural and will happen without our interference either way. While it is true that some people will fail to rise with the sun- it's also true that most will. Most people have a natural ability and drive, even if they don't realize it, but it will appear when it's most needed.

    People (at least enough of us to make the world work) are problem solvers. Seekers of opportunity, of ways to do things better. When a creative person sees an unused resource, even if it is considered trash or waste- they realize that it is an opportunity to explore. That is how sawdust became composite building materials like particle board. That idea then carried over to taking larger scraps of wood and creating chip board, then OSB, which is now the roof decking universally used. Another person looked at the tons of trash poly bottles (milk jugs) and took that same sawdust, created a blended product that is now weatherproof decking. The resource of ourselves, of people- perhaps displaced by automation, becomes more available, it too provides opportunity as well as motivation and need. I started my first business because I was out of a job.... now I run the seventh of my career, and a brother and nephew have also become millionaires as well operating one I chose to give away.

    WE are the prime resource. WE are the building blocks as well as the architects. WE do not need a "parent" to protect us anymore- at least most of us don't. WE find opportunities, we make things happen, WE turn problems into opportunity. It is the challenge as well as the opportunity that makes us capable of that. If we get to the point where we need some master plan because WE have lost the ability to think and create on our own.... it's too late. We would all be drones- functional beings without spirit or drive, destined to extinction.
     
  11. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm not saying don't learn from nature, that isn't my argument at all.
    What I'm saying is that something existing within nature is not enough grounds on its own to justify emulating it as humans.
    For instance, many animal species regularly cannibalize their young. And that might sometimes make sense for them given their limited access to resources, but surely you'd agree with me that its not something that we as humans should aspire to imitate ourselves?

    Also, I question how one measures success in the animal world. Some species of wild animals may outclass humans in a number of individual categories; speed, strength, ability to stick to walls...but there's really no denying that humans are by far the most dominant species on the planet overall, due in large part to our superior ability to think, to use tools, to solve complex problems, to organize ourselves into large cooperative groups. And it may be that we humans are the only ones significantly threatening our own survival, but that's simply because no other species on earth is up to the task. Perhaps we should be thankful for that fact...

    -Meta
     
  12. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    20,296
    Likes Received:
    7,744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, the faith idea is really delusional thinking. It would be different if anyone had an idea of what new sector would replace the jobs lost to robotics and AI but no one does. And it would have to be a large enough sector, or sectors to replace jobs lost to robotics and AI. And jobs that robots and AI can never do. And therein is the problem. For you are putting faith in an impossibility.
     
  13. spiritgide

    spiritgide Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2016
    Messages:
    20,237
    Likes Received:
    16,160
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    We certainly should be grateful for our gifts, but we would be so much better off if more of us would actually use them.

    The measure of success IS success. While most animals spend the majority of their time foraging and hunting, a few- like dolphins, are so skilled at all the things they must do to thrive physically that they have a great deal of time to play, both physically and mentally. They create and enjoy playing games, doing many things for the sheer fun of it. But what they don't do is ignore their basic responsibility to themselves in order to play- they keep their priorities in order. Unfortunately, that is a behavioral quality poorly valued in the human race.

    It all comes down to maximizing our own potential. Not just the potential to create and invent things, but the ability to maximize relationships- which again, nature does quite well and we do quite poorly. We have the ability, for sure. I hope that some future generation actually sees us use it a lot better than we do today.
     
  14. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Aren't you contradicting yourself there?

    -Meta
     
  15. Guess Who

    Guess Who Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2014
    Messages:
    3,074
    Likes Received:
    1,190
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Minimum wage has always been minimum that what the word means. It wasn't intended for single mothers or non families to make a living wage.
    Put men in prison if they don't take care of their kids. Stop all welfare and let them starve or stop having kids they can't care for.
    My first check was $42.00 for a 40 hour week and I was so proud of it.Of course it was just spending money because I didn't have kids out of wedlock.



    My oldest daughter and SIL do a very good job singing and acting out on this song.

     
    Last edited: Apr 15, 2018
  16. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree with the first part, but why the need for the second bit?

    -Meta
     
  17. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The species that threaten our dominance are not visible to the naked eye IMO.

    History is rife with examples where overpopulation has been decimated by fatal diseases that spread rapidly.
     
  18. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As the OP explains, the difference between then and now is that back then the wave of people being displaced by automation for the most part had well paying manufacturing jobs that they could fall into; doing things which at the time could not be fully automated. Of course, automation will lead to us having an improved capacity for production, regardless. The question is what are all those displaced people going to be doing and how are they going to be supporting themselves this time around given the more all-encompassing nature of the oncoming swell of today's automation?...

    -Meta
     
  19. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
  20. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.
     
    Meta777 likes this.
  21. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Thanks! I have to step away for a bit, but I will add this to the list when I get back.
     
  22. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Full employment of capital resources is what can enable, the wealth of nations.
     
    Meta777 likes this.
  23. Meta777

    Meta777 Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    15,633
    Likes Received:
    1,736
    Trophy Points:
    113
  24. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    16,275
    Likes Received:
    4,479
    Trophy Points:
    113
    fortunately, I'm still not digging the trenches for my house's foundation. Do you know why I'm still not out there sweating under the hot sun? Well... I guess you could chalk that up to the invention of the teaspoon. Or you could chalk it up to the soup spoon, or maybe even the shovel. I managed to do it in a day using a power shovel. Really marvelous inventions that are basically a giant bucket attached to an arm using oil pressure powered by a diesel engine that can do more digging than a thousand guys armed with teaspoons in the same amount of time.

    I know that this productivity increase is seen as alarming to all of those hundreds or thousands who desire to be hired who are not used to working with teaspoons, but I didn't have the money to pay the legions of teaspoon diggers that would have been required. Instead, digging the trench took a day instead of a year, and if any of those wielders of teaspoons wish to learn how to use a power shovel, I learned how to do it while getting paid on the job.

    Or maybe there's a SJW class on women's issues that covers the subject, although I hear that they actually require people to pay for learning how to do what I was paid to do.

    As a result of this, I was able to reduce the cost of building my home by thousand of dollars. Can you imagine if this productivity was extended to other jobs? It would make things so cheap that even your average homeless guy would be thinking he might be able to afford to buy a house.

    Maybe in the near future, all people will have to do is program a power shovel with the coordinates for a trench, and there wouldn't be any need for a single shovel being pushed by flesh and blood arms.

    Or maybe you're right, and we should go back to slavery. Slaves used to be able to pick cotton at a rate that would make the concept of slavery worthwhile.

    But what if.... what if a cotton picking machine was invented that was so good, that owning slaves suddenly became a net negative in the the ol' profit margins? OMG!!!!
     
    Longshot likes this.
  25. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Computer technology is a good example; capability keeps improving and the relative cost keeps going down.
     

Share This Page