Automation to replace millions of workers in major cities

[Theodarzna]

I think mixed economies will try new things like UBI, whether or not it ends up working much different than current welfare is up in the air.

Yeah I don't know what the global jobs number is up to, it may be like 4.5 billion. It would be helpful if there was an aggregator for all the national labor departments.

Fascinating..... -_-

- - - Updated - - -

If anything it's just going to be increasingly important to make sure that you have a skill that can't be easily automated or replaced.

Okay, assuming we can afford to have an entire society with PhD's in STEM, the value of those positions would plummet as their main reason for being so good as jobs is their rarity.

[Deleted]

bunch of Luddites in this thread

No need to bring religion into it.

[PC2]

Fascinating..... -_-

I would like the exact numbers, but I don't know how to get them atm. If you really believe the long term trend shows that technology is taking our jobs then you are free to believe that.

[Player Twelve]

No.

Yeah, it is.

[Allerius]

Meh less scarcity is only a good thing. Automation will drive costs down immensely in the long run. Competition will ensure this and building robots is a lot easier than hiring and training a new work force if you're trying to break into a new market. People will take their disposable income elsewhere and entertainment/luxury will greatly increase. We already see a lot more people than ever before making money off stuff like youtube and instagram. That will continue into the future. It's also not necessarily true that it will always be cheaper to build robots to replace every job.

tldr itll be fine

[Shadowferal]

If you're not working, then you're not going to be able to afford anything.

[Yvaelle]

As i put it fun will replace work. But remember everyone finds different things fun.

Some will make gamed for kicks

Some will cook maybe open resteraunts just for fun

Some will play sports

Some will ponder the mysteroes of the universe

Some will want to teach

Some simply learn

Some write

And ALOT more. The mundane day to day the production of goods can all be automated away and instead i see a future of artisans and philosophers.

That is if we let it instead i see a kind of neo feudalism at least in the US and inequality the likes of which humanity has never seen in recirded history

I think both are going to occur. We are already at the peak of wealth inequality in human history - not the French kings of old or the Chinese emperors ever had such vast wealth compared to their poorest subjects, compared to the billionaires of today and the rest of us.

I don't think that's going away. Even still, automation does threaten ~every human job - eventually there will be a machine that does it faster, cheaper, more accurately, that doesn't rest, doesn't tire, doesn't take breaks, doesn't slack off, etc. At that point, hiring humans for that job becomes a waste of money.

So even if you own all the wealth in the world, your choices are either leave everyone else to starve together, or pay them a basic income. I think that's the inevitable outcome here. Automation won't cure wealth inequality - the first trillionaires this century will be the first major automators. But automation almost necessitates a UBI of some sort just to keep the peace - to prevent WW3.

So ya, the world will eventually consist of billions of 'starving artists' so to speak, and dozens of trillionaires - and nothing inbetween.

[Allerius]

I think both are going to occur. We are already at the peak of wealth inequality in human history - not the French kings of old or the Chinese emperors ever had such vast wealth compared to their poorest subjects, compared to the billionaires of today and the rest of us.

I don't think that's going away. Even still, automation does threaten ~every human job - eventually there will be a machine that does it faster, cheaper, more accurately, that doesn't rest, doesn't tire, doesn't take breaks, doesn't slack off, etc. At that point, hiring humans for that job becomes a waste of money.

So even if you own all the wealth in the world, your choices are either leave everyone else to starve together, or pay them a basic income. I think that's the inevitable outcome here. Automation won't cure wealth inequality - the first trillionaires this century will be the first major automators. But automation almost necessitates a UBI of some sort just to keep the peace - to prevent WW3.

So ya, the world will eventually consist of billions of 'starving artists' so to speak, and dozens of trillionaires - and nothing inbetween.

People could also buy equity in rocoborps or start their own. The rich being rich doesn't mean the relatively poor aren't having a decent life. Quality of life in the west atm is way better than it was during the era of French kings. Basic costs of living are ultimately derived from the accumulated labor costs at each step of the process so living in an automated future will be dirt cheap.

[segara82]

What most people forget when they compare the current evolution of industry with the first industrial revolution is:
We employ a smaller percentage of the total population than ever before.
Laws have been set up to protect children and teenagers, making it illegal to employ them under a certain age, and with retirement we removed a large portion of the people above the age of 50. Legal retirement age might be 67+ years, but companies love to fire older employees since they are more expensive. So about a third of all working people are out of the equation.
We even reduced the weekly hours one is allowed to work down to 40 from originaly 50+ hours.

[Yvaelle]

People could also buy equity in rocoborps or start their own. The rich being rich doesn't mean the relatively poor aren't having a decent life. Quality of life in the west atm is way better than it was during the era of French kings. Basic costs of living are ultimately derived from the accumulated labor costs at each step of the process so living in an automated future will be dirt cheap.

Yes I didn't say quality of life would decline, just that we will all essentially be 'starving artists' - content creators and craftsman and hobbyists and etc, with massive expertise in multiple fields, but no professions.

The UBI might afford a better quality of life than any of us have today, while still - by comparison to the nouveau trillionaires of automation and asteroid mining and so on - essentially leave us as 'starving' by comparison, all living on a stipend to explore our passions (as artists).

Quality of life could potentially improve significantly even under a UBI, due to the economic forces of a fully automated society, new technology, and the fathomless wealth gained from efficiency and innovation - while simultaneously wealth inequality continues to skyrocket to literally astronomical heights.

[Vorkreist]

How much would the government have to pay you per month to not become a murderer?

Enough until the commie kids grow up and their brain fully develops so about till ~25

[Allerius]

Yes I didn't say quality of life would decline, just that we will all essentially be 'starving artists' - content creators and craftsman and hobbyists and etc, with massive expertise in multiple fields, but no professions.

The UBI might afford a better quality of life than any of us have today, while still - by comparison to the nouveau trillionaires of automation and asteroid mining and so on - essentially leave us as 'starving' by comparison, all living on a stipend to explore our passions (as artists).

Quality of life could potentially improve significantly even under a UBI, due to the economic forces of a fully automated society, new technology, and the fathomless wealth gained from efficiency and innovation - while simultaneously wealth inequality continues to skyrocket to literally astronomical heights.

That sounds pretty good to me. Not sure why it's a problem that some people are ultra rich while everyone is chilling and taken care of.

[Yvaelle]

Enough until the commie kids grow up and their brain fully develops so about till ~25

Given that doesn't answer the question at all, should I read that as $25/mo is enough to deter you from murdering?

- - - Updated - - -

That sounds pretty good to me. Not sure why it's a problem that some people are ultra rich while everyone is chilling and taken care of.

It might not be - I'm not saying the existence of tomorrow's trillionaires is necessarily a problem - in a post-scarcity world where we maintain democracy, and rights, and a UBI that affords us a better quality of life than we have today - I agree that we're potentially drifting toward a possible technological utopia.

Of course, most good dystopia's begin with a utopian future setting where one slight thing goes horribly wrong. That's also a possibility.

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" - inequality is inherently dangerous to democratic values, liberty, egality, fraternity, etc. Perhaps we are all artists and live in mansions, but we live in a police state where the only thing we are allowed to sculpt or paint or craft or compose is different statutes in the image and glory of Bill Gates.

[Shadowferal]

There seems to be a disconnect here; where is the money coming from that will keep people fed, clothed, sheltered, and healthy?

[Elegiac]

There seems to be a disconnect here; where is the money coming from that will keep people fed, clothed, sheltered, and healthy?

Taxing the people that still have incomes.

[Vorkreist]

Given that doesn't answer the question at all, should I read that as $25/mo is enough to deter you from murdering?

Why don't you ask the commie who spams about murdering people in a video game forum ?

[melodramocracy]

I would like the exact numbers, but I don't know how to get them atm. If you really believe the long term trend shows that technology is taking our jobs then you are free to believe that.

I thought this already had been established. Employment-to-population ratio is declining (slowly, but it's happening), and population numbers are going up.

How large of a non-working population percentage can be supported with the safety nets already in place, and what can be done to start to expand those? That's the immediate future sort of question that needs to be asked and solved.

[Allerius]

"Absolute power corrupts absolutely" - inequality is inherently dangerous to democratic values, liberty, egality, fraternity, etc.

Maybe, but I don't see how shifting all the power to the govt instead of private individuals solves that issue. If anything individuals are less of a unified body than the govt. I wouldn't really worry until you can automate a military.

[PC2]

So ya, the world will eventually consist of billions of 'starving artists' so to speak, and dozens of trillionaires - and nothing inbetween.

Not from automation. Automation is only referring to jobs that are about a physical input. Businesses will still have to hire massive amounts of people based on knowledge and creativity. For example many of the people at Apple who design the next generation of smartphones are getting paid to think, there's nothing physical to automate about those jobs.

[Elegiac]

Not from automation. Automation is only referring to jobs that are about a physical input. Businesses will still have to hire massive amounts of people based on knowledge and creativity. For example many of the people at Apple who design the next generation of smartphones are getting paid to think, there's nothing physical to automate about those jobs.

Because mental processes can't be automated, apparently.