White House: Robots may take half of our jobs, and we should embrace it

[The Northbreather]

They've already invented one that'll $#@!-n-suck, dishes and laundry can't be far behind....

I was waiting for that lol.

Seriously though, frees up the women folk too for the real fun stuff

 

[Anti Federalist]

Sadly, I'm pretty sure there are longtime members of this website who would consider robots taking half our jobs a bad thing.

Why sadly?

Just telling the truth.

The Futurists would have us believe that this will open a future of bliss and enlightenment and otium.

The Realists and Pessimists and Luddites...that's me...look at history and where we are and come to the conclusion that the future will more likely resemble some hideous confabulation of 1984, I Robot and Idiocracy.

Pretty moot discussion anyways...freedom is as dead as Julius Caesar anyway.

We are daily under more surveillance than the old East Germany.

 

[TheTexan]

The Realists and Pessimists and Luddites...that's me...look at history and where we are and come to the conclusion that the future will more likely resemble some hideous confabulation of 1984, I Robot and Idiocracy.

I wouldn't mind living in Idiocracy... automated/cheap healthcare, excellent TV shows,

and handjobs with your coffee

 

[BV2]

Yeah. I dont see it. The incredible amount of energy just ro run the robots... also, wouldnt ai necessarilly start at a basic level. Ie the intelligence of an ant? Or a dog? But shit... if people are worried about robot scabs they arent thinking about the bachhanalia of blood they aŕe funding and or accepting. Yeah, robot scabs are the threat...dont worry about the remaining tatters of your liberty. Boogity boogity.

 

[GunnyFreedom]

Why sadly?

Just telling the truth.

The Futurists would have us believe that this will open a future of bliss and enlightenment and otium.

The Realists and Pessimists and Luddites...that's me...look at history and where we are and come to the conclusion that the future will more likely resemble some hideous confabulation of 1984, I Robot and Idiocracy.

Maybe I fit here under "realist?" I'm certainly not a luddite, high tech is my thing. I would probably even qualify as a "futurist," but certainly not one given to believe that everything will be sunshine and rainbows just because, future. I'm the kind of techno-futurist who understands that unless we are very careful and proceed with reason, this future utopia is going to turn into a really horrible dystopia.

Automation seizing the means of production COULD be as much a golden age as the often-wrongs are predicting. More likely it will be a 3rd world hell on Earth for everyone except the "1%," and the only way to make sure it goes in the U-topia direction instead of the DYS-topia direction, is to address it as a society and come up with a new way to cause capital to flow back around to the bottom. This is possible, but unlikely in the extreme. Nevertheless it is possible, and in another 10 years or so I'm going to have to start pushing some of these reforms or in 30-40 years we will be in real trouble. That gives me 10 years to come up with a way to reallocate capital in a way compatible with the free market but not keyed directly to production. :-/

Pretty moot discussion anyways...freedom is as dead as Julius Caesar anyway.

We are daily under more surveillance than the old East Germany.

Reason #536 why the positive outcome is unlikely in the extreme.

 

[Anti Federalist]

That gives me 10 years to come up with a way to reallocate capital in a way compatible with the free market but not keyed directly to production. :-/

Probably going to take re-inventing the wheel all the way around.

The whole model of value/worth/production/value added is going to have to change.

 

[timosman]

The time are a-changin' - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...lic-church-needs-to-be-done-to-business-gurus

 

[NoOneButPaul]

Maybe I fit here under "realist?" I'm certainly not a luddite, high tech is my thing. I would probably even qualify as a "futurist," but certainly not one given to believe that everything will be sunshine and rainbows just because, future. I'm the kind of techno-futurist who understands that unless we are very careful and proceed with reason, this future utopia is going to turn into a really horrible dystopia.

Automation seizing the means of production COULD be as much a golden age as the often-wrongs are predicting. More likely it will be a 3rd world hell on Earth for everyone except the "1%," and the only way to make sure it goes in the U-topia direction instead of the DYS-topia direction, is to address it as a society and come up with a new way to cause capital to flow back around to the bottom. This is possible, but unlikely in the extreme. Nevertheless it is possible, and in another 10 years or so I'm going to have to start pushing some of these reforms or in 30-40 years we will be in real trouble. That gives me 10 years to come up with a way to reallocate capital in a way compatible with the free market but not keyed directly to production. :-/



Reason #536 why the positive outcome is unlikely in the extreme.

Many people in the 1870s thought the same thing about the industrial revolution - the automatic processing that began at that point did put people out of work and the fear then, just like now, was that there would be no work to do in the future as machines became more prevalent. I will admit that it does take time for the market to work out this particular problem but as mentioned before there are an infinite number of jobs to do. All that AI would take a ton of power and maintenance and new markets would form around that. The Rockefellers, Carnegies, Rothchilds, and Morgans will rise up but it doesnt mean people will be destitute.

We may go through a period in the future where there are no jobs to be had but ultimately people will find other jobs as the free market will think of new jobs that weren't done previously that could be done now or jobs that humans are more equipped for over machines. I think it's likely that as the world becomes more automated people will turn back towards agriculture or tasks/jobs that require a more human element to them. I suspect humans will also be better than machines at certain tasks - like farming - because there's a required sense that goes along with that type of work.

 

[Dr.No.]

Maybe I fit here under "realist?" I'm certainly not a luddite, high tech is my thing. I would probably even qualify as a "futurist," but certainly not one given to believe that everything will be sunshine and rainbows just because, future. I'm the kind of techno-futurist who understands that unless we are very careful and proceed with reason, this future utopia is going to turn into a really horrible dystopia.

Automation seizing the means of production COULD be as much a golden age as the often-wrongs are predicting. More likely it will be a 3rd world hell on Earth for everyone except the "1%," and the only way to make sure it goes in the U-topia direction instead of the DYS-topia direction, is to address it as a society and come up with a new way to cause capital to flow back around to the bottom. This is possible, but unlikely in the extreme. Nevertheless it is possible, and in another 10 years or so I'm going to have to start pushing some of these reforms or in 30-40 years we will be in real trouble. That gives me 10 years to come up with a way to reallocate capital in a way compatible with the free market but not keyed directly to production. :-/



Reason #536 why the positive outcome is unlikely in the extreme.

It is in the best interests of the top elites that the other 99% (or 99.9%) of the population is living well? Why? Because the Hamptons are not a defendable position. At some point, if wealth disparity and/or poverty become too great, the poor will simply revolt. You'll have a revolution.

 

[jmdrake]

Endgame: Why the future doesn't need us.

 

[gaazn]

When robots take over, I'd expect time vs money to be skewed toward time, life, liberty, freedom. If automation allows the top .00001% to control 99.995 of the wealth, then there would be no point in them trying to enslave people because they might as well have productive robots instead. It would mostly be power-thing and fight over resources, where the free people will end up having to try to destroy the robots or be destroyed. If the robots win, it'll be like souless society of robots. I wouldn't be surprised if we find a long-lost ghost alien planet of only machines mindlessly functioning.

 

[BV2]

When robots take over, I'd expect time vs money to be skewed toward time, life, liberty, freedom. If automation allows the top .00001% to control 99.995 of the wealth, then there would be no point in them trying to enslave people because they might as well have productive robots instead. It would mostly be power-thing and fight over resources, where the free people will end up having to try to destroy the robots or be destroyed. If the robots win, it'll be like souless society of robots. I wouldn't be surprised if we find a long-lost ghost alien planet of only machines mindlessly functioning.

Count me for the robot wars.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Apples and bowling balls, for too many reasons for me to type out right now.

Many people in the 1870s thought the same thing about the industrial revolution - the automatic processing that began at that point did put people out of work and the fear then, just like now, was that there would be no work to do in the future as machines became more prevalent. I will admit that it does take time for the market to work out this particular problem but as mentioned before there are an infinite number of jobs to do. All that AI would take a ton of power and maintenance and new markets would form around that. The Rockefellers, Carnegies, Rothchilds, and Morgans will rise up but it doesnt mean people will be destitute.

We may go through a period in the future where there are no jobs to be had but ultimately people will find other jobs as the free market will think of new jobs that weren't done previously that could be done now or jobs that humans are more equipped for over machines. I think it's likely that as the world becomes more automated people will turn back towards agriculture or tasks/jobs that require a more human element to them. I suspect humans will also be better than machines at certain tasks - like farming - because there's a required sense that goes along with that type of work.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Endgame: Why the future doesn't need us.

Bingo. Read that article.

I think that is the fundamental difference between this industrial revolution and every one that proceeded it.

We are hurtling ourselves towards a future that not only will not need us, but will view us as a dangerous and uncontrollable element, a threat to order, safety and stability.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

Endgame: Why the future doesn't need us.

Bingo. Read that article.

I think that is the fundamental difference between this industrial revolution and every one that proceeded it.

We are hurtling ourselves towards a future that not only will not need us, but will view us as a dangerous and uncontrollable element, a threat to order, safety and stability.

Did anyone actually read that entire article? With the average attention span reduced to the size of a Tweet, that is an almost impossible read.

Then again, the article is almost 20 years old, so when it was written, attention spans had not been deteriorated by the social media age of truncated communication.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

It will free us to be more productive- so the theory goes.

I am a solid gold free market guy who 100% believes that labor markets will be dramatically transformed by automation, but "presto" is not really an answer to this. ...

Yep, so many hypotheses that claim to predict or fix the future (presto!), yet so divorced from the ground level day to day reality.

 

[Zippyjuan]

We have heard cries about losing jobs to technology for almost forever. What will the carriage makers do when the horseless carriage (automobiles) take over? What will the small farmer do when tractors and harvesters make planting and picking crops by hand go away?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

We have heard cries about losing jobs to technology for almost forever. What will the carriage makers do when the horseless carriage (automobiles) take over? What will the small farmer do when tractors and harvesters make planting and picking crops by hand go away?

Indeed.

But will a government "retraining" program ease the transition, or just waste money? Will welfare and EBT take the place of real jobs?

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.

Distopian robot futures aside, automation that actually results in increased productivity at reduced price is a positive development. An automated job does not require a human that has a family, a car, a commute, a need for food and housing, or a seat at a restaurant, movie or concert. Thus, they will not occupy the same niche as people, and will not compete directly in living.

Jobs for people is the real problem. Despite long range hypotheses on how economies might react, the basic supply vs demand balance is always and immediately applicable.

What effects labor supply? That is easy. The number of people.

But the demand part of the equation is just as important. Some would say that growth is a solution, but growth is never guaranteed, sometimes there is recession. And growth that does not create jobs does not help. If employment is desired, growth must include real jobs. We need job growth, which increases labor demand.

With regard to demand, there are other arbitrary factors to consider. The 40 hour workweek is an arbitrary parameter that could be adjusted. A 32 hour workweek as as a default could increase demand for individual laborers, assuming that many businesses would be open more than 40 hours a week. Reducing the workweek could create more jobs, possibly offsetting those lost to automation.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Globally population growth is slowing. In some places, declining. Maybe we won't need as many jobs in the future.