How will we make a living?

[Teenforpaul08]

In a free market system if all the jobs are sent, not overseas, but to machines?

http://www.controldesign.com/articles/2008/131.html

http://hiringopportunities.suite101.com/article.cfm/computers_taking_our_jobs

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/11874/are_we_losing_our_jobs_to_machines.html

Even if we get all our manufacturing jobs back from overseas, they are or will go to machines in a matter of time. How will the free market function if there's no buying and selling of goods and services because people have no jobs?

 

[ClockwiseSpark]

Hopefully our robot overlords will take care of us.

 

[libertythor]

Somebody has to maintain and manufacture these machines. Also most have computer programming involved.

Another aspect to this is that the products must be transported, the business managed, and production monitored.

There would still be jobs resulting from the automated manufacture of products.

In a free market system if all the jobs are sent, not overseas, but to machines?

http://www.controldesign.com/articles/2008/131.html

http://hiringopportunities.suite101.com/article.cfm/computers_taking_our_jobs

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/11874/are_we_losing_our_jobs_to_machines.html

Even if we get all our manufacturing jobs back from overseas, they are or will go to machines in a matter of time. How will the free market function if there's no buying and selling of goods and services because people have no jobs?

 

[Kludge]

Until robots are given true artificial intelligence (if possible), they will not be able to effectively administer over people nor over factories. It's also unlikely that they would be able to effectively harvest the raw materials required for manufacturing for a good while.

I think we're safe in our lifetime... Or most of it at least.

 

[tremendoustie]

"Sent" to the machines? Give me a break -- machines are tools that make us more efficient, and if machines get better and cheaper, that means goods get better and cheaper for all of us. Supply meets demand -- for each worker there is a price at which they are in demand -- scarcity is an economic fact, so there will always be something for each person to do. Furthermore, the efficiencies you suppose ensure that even that small wage will have large buying power.

The foreign worker issue you compare this with is not an overall lack of wealth, only a transfer of wealth to the foreign workers who have been underpaid.

Again, I've said this before, the question you need to ask yourself is, "Why would I oppose the freedom of people to interact and trade as they choose without coercion or force?" Because that freedom is the definition of the free market. Also, as I've said before, instead of opposing the free market, perhaps what you really oppose is the choices people are currently making --- perhaps you think people should choose jobs that are more humanizing, or only buy products produced by these kinds of jobs.

Instead of opposing freedom, seek to convince people to make choices you believe to be wise, and I will have infinitely more respect for your position.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Somebody has to maintain and manufacture these machines. Also most have computer programming involved.

Another aspect to this is that the products must be transported, the business managed, and production monitored.

There would still be jobs resulting from the automated manufacture of products.

You think this will make up for the jobs lost to machines? You're really funny then. Remember the U.S. (and world) poplulation is increasing, not decreasing. Jobs are decreasing not increasing. How will free market work in a world where robots can't buy things?

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Until robots are given true artificial intelligence (if possible), they will not be able to effectively administer over people nor over factories. It's also unlikely that they would be able to effectively harvest the raw materials required for manufacturing for a good while.

I think we're safe in our lifetime... Or most of it at least.

Tell that to the 1,000 guys at ebay that lost their jobs because "bill me later" stepped in.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

"Sent" to the machines? Give me a break -- machines are tools that make us more efficient, and if machines get better and cheaper, that means goods get better and cheaper for all of us. Supply meets demand -- for each worker there is a price at which they are in demand -- scarcity is an economic fact, so there will always be something for each person to do. Furthermore, the efficiencies you suppose ensure that even that small wage will have large buying power.

The foreign worker issue you compare this with is not an overall lack of wealth, only a transfer of wealth to the foreign workers who have been underpaid.

Again, I've said this before, the question you need to ask yourself is, "Why would I oppose the freedom of people to interact and trade as they choose without coercion or force?" Because that freedom is the definition of the free market. Also, as I've said before, instead of opposing the free market, perhaps what you really oppose is the choices people are currently making --- perhaps you think people should choose jobs that are more humanizing, or only buy products produced by these kinds of jobs.

Instead of opposing freedom, seek to convince people to make choices you believe to be wise, and I will have infinitely more respect for your position.

No, machines literally do not need human help. If humans do anything in a manufacturing plant, it's inspecting. Haven't you seen those "how it's made" videos. Machines are the future. People will have no more jobs. Free-market at its best huh?

 

[tremendoustie]

You think this will make up for the jobs lost to machines? You're really funny then. Remember the U.S. (and world) poplulation is increasing, not decreasing. Jobs are decreasing not increasing. How will free market work in a world where robots can't buy things?

There will be more cheap stuff for all of us, since the robots didn't use it. And please consider my earlier post, and please study economics.

Because of the amazingly cheap production in this society you propose, you are right, stuff could be so abundant that people might only need to work a couple hours to earn all they need. Horrors!!!

 

[Teenforpaul08]

There will be more cheap stuff for all of us, since the robots didn't use it. And please consider my earlier post, and please study economics.

Because of the amazingly cheap production in this society you propose, you are right, stuff could be so abundant that people might only need to work a couple hours to earn all they need. Horrors!!!

Uhh, cheap? But if you have no job, you won't be able to buy even the cheapest things right?

Remember supply and demand. If there is a high demand, prices do up, low demand, prices go down. No demand...companies go down.

 

[tremendoustie]

Tell that to the 1,000 guys at ebay that lost their jobs because "bill me later" stepped in.

Because those 1000 people lost their jobs, and efficiency was improved, everyone else got richer -- profits increased at ebay, and/or fees were reduced, and the company that wrote the software made money. Since people in general got wealthier, and have more to spend, the economy can now support more than 1000 new jobs at that level or better, and these new 1000 jobs will be more productive than the old ones. Basic econ -- increasing efficiency increases total wealth.

No, machines literally do not need human help. If humans do anything in a manufacturing plant, it's inspecting. Haven't you seen those "how it's made" videos. Machines are the future. People will have no more jobs. Free-market at its best huh?

GAwd, if we're going to have this discussion, THINK PLEASE, and don't just spout ignorant sarcasms. I've studied economics, and I'm happy to take the time with you on this, but I don't stand ignorant people with arrogant attitudes well. Increasing efficiency ALWAYS increases wealth. If those machines make shirts dirt cheap, that means everyone can now afford shirts. What's more, these employees will find something else to do that benefits people, and the newly enriched populace (and shirt company shareholders) will now be able to pay for these services.

And again, please explain to me why you oppose people being free.

 

[tremendoustie]

Uhh, cheap? But if you have no job, you won't be able to buy even the cheapest things right?

Remember supply and demand. If there is a high demand, prices do up, low demand, prices go down. No demand...companies go down.

SCARCITY!! Look it up, you somehow managed to stumble upon the words "supply" and "demand", perhaps you can get this one. There will always be jobs, at some price. And if you really learned supply and demand, you'd already know that. Lower the price enough and there will be demand.


I'm happy to talk with you about this, but you've GOT to lose the attitude.

 

[Conza88]

In a free market system if all the jobs are sent, not overseas, but to machines?
http://www.controldesign.com/articles/2008/131.html
http://hiringopportunities.suite101.com/article.cfm/computers_taking_our_jobs
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/11874/are_we_losing_our_jobs_to_machines.html
Even if we get all our manufacturing jobs back from overseas, they are or will go to machines in a matter of time. How will the free market function if there's no buying and selling of goods and services because people have no jobs?

We? Ohhh so collective.

How will you is more more appropriate...

[Rocks back & forth]

"The robots will come, the robots will come" ...
"End scarcity they will" ...
"Cure all human desires, bring Nirvana upon the earth" ...
"The robots will come, the robots will come" ...

[Rocks back & forth]

​

 

[Teenforpaul08]

SCARCITY!! Look it up, you somehow managed to stumble upon the words "supply" and "demand", perhaps you can get this one. There will always be jobs, at some price. And if you really learned supply and demand, you'd already know that. Lower the price enough and there will be demand.

I'm happy to talk with you about this, but you've GOT to lose the attitude.

Name a few jobs people can make a living in that does not require a high level of education?

How do you know my attitude when all you see is text?

 

[RickyJ]

You think this will make up for the jobs lost to machines? You're really funny then. Remember the U.S. (and world) poplulation is increasing, not decreasing. Jobs are decreasing not increasing. How will free market work in a world where robots can't buy things?

You are a smart teenager and you are correct. But slave labor or close to slave labor beats even using a machine cost wise. That's why instead of keeping manufacturing plants in the USA and converting to machines to do most of the work companies are hiring dirt cheap labor in third world nations. The elite really would rather have us all as salves at their beckon call than have us as employees. That's where we are headed, world wide slavery.

 

[tremendoustie]

Name a few jobs people can make a living in that does not require a high level of education?

How do you know my attitude when all you see is text?

Scarcity means people will always want more. E.g: I don't pay a housekeeper now because it would be too expensive and I don't really need one, but if someone wanted to do it for $5 a day, I'd hire them. If someone wanted to wash my car every day for 50c, I'd do that. And I'd probably pay a few cents for someone to walk around behind me with a fan.

I could sit here and keep making up any number of ridiculous jobs that would benefit me in some way, which require no education, but people are more expensive than that, so I won't be hiring for any of these positions. Take away minimum wage laws, however, and everyone that wants a job would have one, at some price.

And I get your attitude with the "free market at it's best, huh?" type comments, which are sarcastic and indicate you think you have nothing to learn, when in fact you have everything to learn, at least on this particular subject.

And once again, please explain to me why do you oppose freedom? Are you ultimately proposing to implement your ideal society by the threat of violence, harming those who do not agree or comply? Or are you simply trying to convince people to freely make different choices, in which case you do not oppose the free market, you simply think people would be better off using their freedom differently?

 

[tremendoustie]

duplicate (sorry)

 

[Teenforpaul08]

You are a smart teenager and you are correct. But slave labor or close to slave labor beats even using a machine cost wise. That's why instead of keeping manufacturing plants in the USA and converting to machines to do most of the work companies are hiring dirt cheap labor in third world nations. The elite really would rather have us all as salves at their beckon call than have us as employees. That's where we are headed, world wide slavery.

The biggest problem with free market (that they don't in economics) is the importance of jobs. Things need to be bought for a free market system to work. If things aren't being bought, more people will get fired, less things will be bought. If people have no jobs, things can't be bought.

Result of this will be mass riots, governments will become dictatorships to control the riots. Poverty and war at home will destroy the country. That's what economics don't teach you. And I'm a College student taking a business class. I know enough to refute anyone here's crap.

 

[Teenforpaul08]

Scarcity means people will always want more. E.g: I don't pay a housekeeper now because it would be too expensive and I don't really need one, but if someone wanted to do it for $5 a day, I'd hire them. If someone wanted to wash my car every day for 50c, I'd do that. And I'd probably pay a few cents for someone to walk around behind me with a fan.

I could sit here and keep making up any number of ridiculous jobs that would benefit me in some way, which require no education, but people are more expensive than that, so I won't be hiring for any of these positions. Take away minimum wage laws, however, and everyone that wants a job would have one, at some price.

And I get your attitude with the "free market at it's best, huh?" type comments, which are sarcastic and indicate you think you have nothing to learn, when in fact you have everything to learn, at least on this particular subject.

And once again, please explain to me why do you oppose freedom? Are you ultimately proposing to implement your ideal society by force, harming those who do not comply? Or are you simply trying to convince people to freely make different choices, in which case you do not oppose the free market, you simply think people would be better off using their freedom differently?

Wow, double trouble presented here (pun intended).

So if you happen to be "sucessful" in life, you would "help" people out by paying them 50 cents to clean your house and wash your car. I don't think prices will go that low so one support himself on 50 cents/day. But, it seems like you're willing to be the "good" guy and help these people out. Bravo.

Seriously, is that all you got? Free market will create a multibillion dollar industry where nice people like you will hire some of us out of pity to scrub your toilets. Get real.

 

[TGautier421]

A Technocracy is not only inevitable, it is necessary for the continued development and evolution of humans as a species.

Most of you are aware of the 'curving' affect of inflation in regards to the direct correlation between value and debt. The same curving affect is applied to technology and information; whereas previously discovered technology is then used as foundation for new technology, making it profoundly easier and easier to accumulate information. Embrace this fact.