Millions of jobs to dissapear as robotics advance

Retired people are old and tired, they deserve their rest. I'm talking of the people of "independent means" who have existed throughout time. Most have done something though we know of only an infinitesimal number as very few have accomplished anything notable. Taken altogether, however, it adds up to a large segment of the total human achievment

- - - Updated - - -

Then maybe it's time we stopped seeing jobs as necessary. Why should we do anything when we don't have to? Why should we work when there's no need for it. That makes no sense at all.

 

How are you going to purchase the robot when your job is replaced by a robot?

Once again the problem is that the advancements in Artificial Intelligence and Technology (AI&T) is going to make virtually all human labor obsolete and we depend upon our labor to provide income. When the robot provides all of the basic goods and services we require then there will be no jobs to provide income because the robot does them better and for less cost. Without the job the person has no income to purchase anything the robot provides.

Once again I'm a huge supporter of the advancements in AI&T because it can provide all that we require but it's a double-edged sword. AI&T creates an economic problem because the AI&T eliminates our jobs that provide the income so that we can purchase what the AI&T provides.

It's the economic problem that this thread attempts to address.

 

You are confusing the desire to work with the opportunity to work.

 

Me: "Good news, honey, I just lost my job to a robot so I won't be away on business this week after all, so you can get busy with me instead of the robot this week!"
Spouse: "That's great, honey, but, nah, I'll go ahead and sleep with the Mandingo-atron again tonight, no need to bother yourself with pleasuring me dear - good night."
Me: "Frickin robots! CourtJester was right."

 

I'm not confusing them, I'm saying they should be one and the same.

 

(last said while getting Angelina-tron out of closet and programming it for "Group")

 

In point of fact the "wealthy" (those of independent means) have only existed since they learned to exploit the labor of others (workers) that actually create the wealth often leaving the majority of those that created the wealth in absolute poverty. Only the worker creates wealth.

When society was based upon the "hunter-gatherer" there were none of "independent means" and the first record we have of those with "independent means" was when religion, that controls the workers, was introduced into society. All of the early civilizations where people with "independent means" came into existance were based upon religion where the religious leaders exploited the labor of the people. For example ancient Egypt was based upon the pharaohs being gods as were all early civilizations that I'm aware of. Monarchy rule was based upon the self-proclaimed "Divine Right of Kings" by the monarch and was based upon religion.

What most today don't realize, and that many will dispute, is that our statutory laws of property today are still based upon the "Divine Right of Kings" and are not based upon the "Natural Right of Property" of the person. We still grant "statutory title" (explicit or implied) which was established under the Divine Right of Kings.

 

See, robots won't be so bad!
Hopefully they'll come with a back-door/front-door toggle switch, too. That will be a change.

But if the spouse controls all the finances, however, (I lost my job to a robot, remember), I might only be given enough money to afford the Rosie-atron, I'm afraid. Fortunately, I assume that a Kevorkian-atron will come as standard equipment when one buys the Rosie-atron, just in case.

 

While I agree there must be a transitional phase it must be outlined as a part of the entire process of tranistioning from what exists today and what will exist in the future. If that's not done where compelling arguments that can't be disputed are presented then people will rationalize opposition to the transitional phase.

People are very reluctant to change and without the whole picture being laid out, and the arguments supporting the actions, then they will resist. We need to overcome all of the objections first. Even when the arguments are compelling the "conservative" will always remain opposed to progress because that's the very nature of conservatism.

 

Since robots will take our jobs, couples will likely be able to only afford ONE (uh, robot "friend"), so perhaps this version would be a good compromise. (Look, I'm just trying to help out.)

 

MOD EDIT - Rule 3 The government is the tool of the wealthy and will always do their bidding.
The poor have no friend in government. Taxes hurt everyone especially the poor. Eliminate taxes and the poor would not be poor, MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...OgFDV7hk9vrAfIsLq2fm4g&bvm=bv.105454873,d.cGc
Take a tour of Detroit and come back and talk to me MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

Cheap human labor is a temporary solution until humans can be replaced by machined altogether. There are only two kinds of people, those who see the future and adapt, and those who keep their heads in the sand and become extinct.

 

When was the last time the people of the US stood up for anything? The people of the US are spineless cowards looking for the government to be their mommy. If public unrest becomes a problem all that's needed is a false flag operation to justify a war that you feed the poor and the malcontents into like so much fodder to reduce the excess population.

 

Did the robots build themselves? Who operates those robots? These are not Completely autonomous. When the robots malfunctions, do we just push a button and another robot comes and fixes the robot? MOD EDIT - Rule 3

 

Then by your line of reasoning, manufacturing should be increasing.. right? https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...2.html&usg=AFQjCNG7-YJrKzU66axxH5YGDT9k0D1R-Q

Fact is that manufacturing jobs have fallen off a cliff. Meanwhile millions of jobs have been replaced by automation. So the facts prove your position is false, and that automation has replaced humans and will continue to do so. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...9.html&usg=AFQjCNHP_gNoCd5TWCywO1pA90ucFNMmLw

 

If we're so spineless and detrimental, eradicate us.

 

Taxation doesn't solve the problem of income and wealth inequality but the belief that we're over-taxed is also a myth.

The primary source of taxation for general expenditures of the federal government is the income tax. Based upon the authorized general expenditures for the federal government in 2013 the tax burden on the personal income to fully fund all Congressionally authorized federal general expenditures was only 14.5% (we paid less which is why there was a deficit). The problem wasn't the income tax burden but instead that it's not being funded by those that can afford the tax burden. A household with tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in annual income can easily afford to pay a 50% or more tax on their personal income without it effecting their personal standard of living or negatively effecting the US economy. A household of four with just $50,000 in income couldn't afford to even live a reasonably comfortable lifestyle with a 14.5% income tax rate and a household with an income of $30,000 would literally see food being taken off their table.

Welfare assistance does not resolve the problem if income/wealth inequality but it does mitigate the effects of poverty. It is not a "fix" but it is a necessary expenditure of government that must be funded with taxation. If we want to address the primary problem of government spending to mitigate the effects of poverty then we need to increase compensation so that working households are not forced to live in poverty due to undercompensation for employment.

 

For the most part robots do build robots. Robots are now often self-autonomous not requiring human operators. In many cases robots today do fix themselves when a problem occurs.

Within the foreseeable future all robots will be built by robots, they will be totally autonomous, and they will fix themselves without any human intervention at all.

 

Your Definition of Autonomous is wrong. Almost all living things are autonomous, in that they will seek water, food, shelter, companionship when their mind feels the need for it. Living things can self replicate or reproduce. Machines can't do any of that without intervention by humans.
No artificial machine made by humans to this day has that level of automation, because developments in Artificial Intelligence have not progress pass ability to calculate Chess Moves beyond normal human capability.
Even the Chess playing machine was built by humans with very sophisticated "Tools" , not by Robots.

 

Where have I stated that Manufacturing should be increasing? But I do believe automation makes products cheaper to produce, making them affordable to the masses.
The loss of manufacturing jobs in the US at least, is due to Outsourcing and not manufacturing automation. This is a fact that anyone following the news should have known already

 

This is true and in fact this is what is getting the rich richer and the poor poorer. Top notch business people want their firms or industries totally manless since it will give them a long term profit despite the fact that in the short run they will have to invest a huge sum of money to buy very expensive hardwares and softwares but once they get set up and start generating they will make so much money.

Automation is needed no doubt in this technology driven world but there must be some spaces for menial works since there are some people who are blue collared who are very inefficient and even in a country like the US.

 

The only answer is that MOST of the money that used to go to the now displaced workers has to go to them. That is, if you are looking at ultimate consequences. Otherwise, there will be no money to purchase the products that the robots produce and the entire system shuts down. A snake eating it's own tail. Poof! Robots, outsourcing, it's all the same. We're looking at that now in the U.S. The people with the robots end up fabulously wealthy (the snake ends up full until it's dead) until they dry up their own demand.

 

Your knowledge of the current state of Artificial Intelligence and Technology is woefully out of date. I spent over 45 years in manufacturing predominately in aerospace[ manufacturing engineering and what computers and robotics can do even today is simply amazing. Are you aware of the fact, for example, that most state-of-the-art aircraft can takeoff, fly to their destination, and land without any human intervention. The fact that most modern aircraft are overwhelmingly designed by computers with little human intervention with parts built by CNC machines without the need for human intervention? All of this work could be fully automated with today's computers and robots if we wanted to but that technology does come with a pricetag. The technology is there but the pricetag remains a bit high but that's only today and not tomorrow because the price of technology is dropping rapidly.

I assume the reference is to Deep Blue that played world champion chess player Garry Kasparov in the mid-1990's. While the parts were fundamentally made by robotics it was hand assembled and some of the software was designed specifically for it. Of course that was then and this is now and some of the existing chess programs for today's laptops are equally well suited to defeating virtually any opponent. Referring to the "dark ages" of computer technology is understandable but that's not anywhere near where we're at today.