Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Guess it boils down to "Am I My Brother's Keeper?"
Your perspective changes on if you answer yes--or no.
Or if you believe in the Golden Rule of Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You. Is this practiced today very much even though it's part of just about every formal religion throughout the world?
The better question is, when automation reaches a cost effective level to put human workers out of their assembly line job, what do we do then?
I fully expect to see fully automated assembly plants in my lifetime, and they've come really close already. People are going to either have to adapt fast, to some kind of service job, or we are going to have to go socialist to provide people with all of their basic needs.
Of course, sooner or later, there will be new jobs created, and people will have to fill those, but there will be times where unemployment will be very high because of automation.
We are already experiencing part of this in the United States. As our labor costs are to high, companies went overseas to find cheap labor, to keep costs down. This is the main reason why robotics aren't catching on as fast as they normally would have. There are a bunch of chinese willing to work for next to nothing right now, but even that labor pool will run out sooner or later. The cost of living is already increasing in China, and the more it goes up, the more expensive labor will become.
That is what I have been thinking about is a new push to more autimation with things like health care and number of employeees. its like the mail;once it got so high Faxing became a faster reasonable choice.I am thinking the screwdrive type job assembing will disappear like inthe nest ten years, just as repair is losing out to repalcement in many items becasue of labor cost.
I fully expect to see fully automated assembly plants in my lifetime, and they've come really close already. People are going to either have to adapt fast, to some kind of service job, or we are going to have to go socialist to provide people with all of their basic needs.
We are already experiencing part of this in the United States. As our labor costs are to high, companies went overseas to find cheap labor, to keep costs down. This is the main reason why robotics aren't catching on as fast as they normally would have. There are a bunch of chinese willing to work for next to nothing right now, but even that labor pool will run out sooner or later. The cost of living is already increasing in China, and the more it goes up, the more expensive labor will become.
No doubt, at the same time in the areas where assembly line work is really low, automation will be a good thing. In that sense, specifically, it is good that the US moves on from this phase of production. Yes, there will be even more unemployment, but it would have destroyed the US in its day, like it will China or Canada even...
So, we only end up with more questions and no answers, what is the solution?? In that sense, there is simply no more room for capitalism, and it will have to be replaced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88
We pay them to say home. So they don't take jobs from people who want to work. So they don't contribute to commuter traffic jams. So they don't disrupt the work place. So they don't call in sick all the time and make somebody fill in for them.
Just give them half the normal pay for a grunt job, and tell them to stay home. That would be enough to live on with decent food and shelter and dignity for their family, which everybody is entitled to as a birthright, whether you personally approve of them or not. If they discover that they need or want more, they'll be back to work to earn it. If they don't, the wheels will keep turning without them.
In a perfect world this is perfect... There are ssooo many people that would complain and rant because these people are "using my dollars to live" when they really cannot even begin to understand what is being presented here. Some things in life a very difficult to accept. The fact that it is extremely difficult to get some people to do anything, that reality. However, some are put into situations because of events that are majorly out of their control or relm of understanding. In that case, we need to have more in place to help those who would actually like to have a chance at some type of success.
However, this is aside from what i was saying, what about those that wish to work, but there is just simply no place for them to work ??? scary
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound
The problem is between those who are prevented from working in comparison to those who will never work. There are some people in life that are either unable to stay at work due to an uncontrolled mental problem or have personalities that don't work well with others and they don't care.
I would say allowing more tax breaks and incentives for entrepreneurship.
Right, this is along the lines of what JT was saying, and yes, some people just have such issues that they have a very hard time fitting in with the model of society. So what do you do with the willing yet unfit?? There are services already in place for these people, but people are just to stubborn or ignorant to seek help and become something. None the less, they are those who seek employment, but simply have no place to go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chromekitty
I'm going out on a limb here ... but, I'm assuming you really didn't mean to say US labor costs are too high. Wages have stagnated for decades here, so it's not a wage cost issue.
At issue is the freetraders and the neoconfused taking advantage of inappropriately written tax law which encourages them (the oh-so-struggling corporations) to move overseas. Whilst the same Neanderthals bemoan taxes out of one side of their mouths, they secretly love the higher profits, aka slave wages, no health care costs, no environmental costs, ad nausem. These half-wits do NOT want any re-structuring in the tax law whatsoever.
Stay out of walmart and buy American made products/services. It takes time, commitment, and a willingness to shake off the hooray for me, and to hell with everyone else attitude.
But, their end will come. They are short-sighted, driven by greed, and dumber than a common, everyday fencepost.
Mostly off of what i was originally getting at, but i'll allow it Its true, the problem is systemic, the higher ups, people supposedly running said business do not care about people at any level, their only goal is to make money, and those are the stipulations under which they are employed. Publicly traded companies have one goal and thats to make money.. Thats not to say there aren't good corporations, some of them publically traded, some not, but isn't this a social issue?? If people are so messed up as to compound a problem to their own ruin, original topic aside for this, what do you even begin to do??
Back on topic, it is ultimately these people which create the majority of the issue in the first place. We won't buy American because f you all its me and mine. So you don't buy American, those at the top see falling profits, they cut out whatever they feel like so they themselves don't take pay cuts, and the circle continues. Jobs move overseas and American companies are no longer American, so what is the solution now??
Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleDolphin
Guess it boils down to "Am I My Brother's Keeper?"
Your perspective changes on if you answer yes--or no.
Or if you believe in the Golden Rule of Do Unto Others As You Would Have Them Do Unto You. Is this practiced today very much even though it's part of just about every formal religion throughout the world?
This is whats called a loaded question. For me, everything is circumstantial. If i take in said brother will i ultimately fall with him for whatever reason it may be?? then no, if it is within my limits to help said brother then yes, i would. Ether way, people as a majority are not like this or we wouldn't have the problems we do. That is the reality
Right what do you do?? There are many possibilities but all of which require drastic changes. We aren't near these critical mass levels, but i think Memphis is right. We will see the day of wholly automated assembly lines. At that point we will have a real issues.
I don't see anything wrong with requiring people to work. When there aren't any jobs my solution is for government to spend the money to create more. Of course, the physically and mentally handicapped would be exempt from being required to obtain work. I think having the government put people to work makes more sense than paying people to do nothing. Government can directly employ people to do 1000 useful things. Litter needs to be picked up. Trails in national forests need to be maintained and restored. Old houses and fences need to be painted in many urban areas. Trees need to be planted. Potholes in roads need to be filled. Tax breaks can be given to businesses to employ the unemployed and train them with useful job skills.
Work is good for the individual and society. Almost anyone I have met wants to be productive. Very few truly want to be a leech on society. Work conditions the mind. It occupies us with positive duties, so that we don't have idle time on our hands to work mischief on others. Earning a wage and getting a paycheck gives us a yardstick on value. In my field, some of my greatest difficulties have been with those on assistance. They seem to have no comprehension what $1,000 or $10,000 really is. Give them a job at $10 an hour and suddenly they get a really good idea what those sums represent in terms of labor and effort.
We aren't going to change the way capitalism works. And, I agree there is a hardcore class out there that is harder to put to work than other people. This shouldn't stop us from putting as many unemployed people to work doing productive labor as we can. That is our role and our moral obligation to others in a civilized country.
I don't see anything wrong with requiring people to work. When there aren't any jobs my solution is for government to spend the money to create more. Of course, the physically and mentally handicapped would be exempt from being required to obtain work. I think having the government put people to work makes more sense than paying people to do nothing. Government can directly employ people to do 1000 useful things. Litter needs to be picked up. Trails in national forests need to be maintained and restored. Old houses and fences need to be painted in many urban areas. Trees need to be planted. Potholes in roads need to be filled. Tax breaks can be given to businesses to employ the unemployed and train them with useful job skills.
Work is good for the individual and society. Almost anyone I have met wants to be productive. Very few truly want to be a leech on society. Work conditions the mind. It occupies us with positive duties, so that we don't have idle time on our hands to work mischief on others. Earning a wage and getting a paycheck gives us a yardstick on value. In my field, some of my greatest difficulties have been with those on assistance. They seem to have no comprehension what $1,000 or $10,000 really is. Give them a job at $10 an hour and suddenly they get a really good idea what those sums represent in terms of labor and effort.
We aren't going to change the way capitalism works. And, I agree there is a hardcore class out there that is harder to put to work than other people. This shouldn't stop us from putting as many unemployed people to work doing productive labor as we can. That is our role and our moral obligation to others in a civilized country.
Create more doing what exactly?
Name some jobs where only people can do them, and I will show you a robotic story that shows that a robot can do it.
They may even be able to do things like take care of a baby, in the not so distant future. Its all a matter of cost right now. AI is moving at a break neck pace, and robots are only physically restricted in their physical operation by how much their creators are by the money.
I don't see anything wrong with requiring people to work. When there aren't any jobs my solution is for government to spend the money to create more. .
If this "work" produces anything of value, who gets the profit from it? If it does not produce anything of value, why force people to do it? If productive but not having to make a profit, does it unfairly undercut the private sector?
There are already tens of millions of children who are not being raised by their mother. Is being a Mom one of the things that you think people can be put to work doing at government expense? Great. Let's just start paying moms full-time wages for staying home with their kids, and see if everything else just works itself out. Maybe if the moms all stayed at home, there would be jobs for everybody else, and the problem is solved.
I'm going out on a limb here ... but, I'm assuming you really didn't mean to say US labor costs are too high. Wages have stagnated for decades here, so it's not a wage cost issue.
S/he's talking about stuff being cheaper than labor. When stuff is much cheaper, you can get the stuff to make other stuff. More clearly: when its cheaper to build a robot to do it than hire someone, then that is surely what a business will do. Technology and automation get cheaper and cheaper. Labor then, comparatively, gets more expensive.
Of course, even robots need people to maintain them at some point. But the number and nature of jobs change.
If this "work" produces anything of value, who gets the profit from it? If it does not produce anything of value, why force people to do it? If productive but not having to make a profit, does it unfairly undercut the private sector?
The public gets the value or "the profit" from people picking up litter on the highways, painting dilapidated buildings in urban areas, doing maintenance on trails in national forests, etc.
There are all kinds of things in this society that need to be done that are valuable that aren't done because of this capitalist economic system. We can use "docents" or guides in museums and historical landmarks. In my state there is too high a teacher/pupil ratio in classrooms. Why not have more "teacher's assistants" who could work one-on-one with kids to help with reading skills? The kids are not getting enough physical fitness. Why not create a special "after-school" program involving exercise and intra-mural sports. People could be employed by the school district to do this? The elderly often can't afford help, but need help to clean their homes and get around. The government could help pay for this.
I think you would assert that these things aren't really necessary if a profit can't be made from them. Further, people shouldn't be forced to work if a profit isn't made.
I disagree with this. My ultimate goal is not preserving some notion of capitalism. What I value and what I would hope others would value is the simple notion that the state and community should encourage all people to work and be productive. Quite honestly, its much less important to me whether this work "make a profit". There are other ways besides dollars and cents to determine "value".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its true, the problem is systemic, the higher ups, people supposedly running said business do not care about people at any level, their only goal is to make money, and those are the stipulations under which they are employed. Publicly traded companies have one goal and thats to make money.. Thats not to say there aren't good corporations, some of them publically traded, some not, but isn't this a social issue?? If people are so messed up as to compound a problem to their own ruin, original topic aside for this, what do you even begin to do??
