But it's a dynamic that's inherent to the capitalist mode of production. Not some immutable aspect of human social organization.
Improvements in productivity translate into social welfare. I wonder on the subject of primary goods prices in the situation of lack of automatisation and other things. Let's go to the wealth disparity. I could buy 1 apple more than earlier and my neighbour could buy 10 buy more than earlier. Is it worse than situation in which none of us could buy an additional apple? It's equality, wonderful. Growth of productivity is related to the technological advance. Invention of computers would not be possible without automatision. Inventors would have to have 10 employees instead a calculator P). Thanks to it corporations and scientist s have enough sources to invent new things. Life expectancy is increasing all time. We can afford electronic devices in reasonable prices. This is not 1% of population.
Tell the people pushing shopping carts and living under bushes how wonderful the technology that took their jobs is. Technology could be wonderful if the wealthy did not use it to exploit the poor. But that is exactly how it is being used. Considering were you live, I would expect you to know the fable of the people who did not speak up because it did not affect them.... until it did.
Jobs are created and destroyed all the time. The internet and e-mail put some postmen out of a job, but it creates all kinds of new jobs. Robots may build cars, but someone had to design, build, market, transport, install and maintain those robots. The issue is whether the economy as a whole is gaining to losing jobs, and technology creates more jobs than it destroys. Just look at ATMs. You would think that since ATMs went from 60,000 in the US in 1985 to over 350,000 in 2002, that would mean fewer bank tellers would have jobs. But just the opposite happened. Since you can have fewer tellers operating a branch, the banks could afford to open more branches to offer better coverage, and as such, now there are even more bank tellers than there were in 1985. So you are actually wrong. Technology does not take people's jobs. https://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20131001/19110024723/luddites-are-almost-always-wrong-technology-rarely-destroys-jobs.shtml
it will be a problem in the future, automation will create the need for socialism, that is just a fact.....
your right, as long as the majority of people have jobs, if we cross the line and the majority do not have jobs, that is when it becomes a issue
I am not sure what the solution will be.... Assuming there is a problem But IF there is this problem of.... Shall we say.... Surplus people.... What i think we can know is that the free market capitalist solution will be very brutal and likely unstable In many respects similar to the situation we faced in the great depression....
No offense, but most of the people 'pushing shopping carts and living under bushes' are not in their situation because of technology. Technology is wonderful and this is proven every day. There is no such thing regarding 'the wealthy exploit the poor'??
I will not argue with stupid. Anyone who believes automation creates more jobs than it destroys has the brain function of a box of rocks.
LOL Hey your a funny guy... You should do standup, cause an audience would laugh you out of the building for telling whoppers like that.
You're amusing. I guess facts are "stupid" because that's what you are arguing against. You do realize that the vast majority of the population used to be involved in agriculture and now only about 2% are because of labor-saving machinery. What do you think all those people do now that they "lost" their farm jobs to automation, hmm?
Surely you know there are many things we produce today that cannot be produced by humans...they require technology and automation. In all of these cases, the end-product of these processes allows us to do lots of things which creates jobs. Whether the technology/automation is a 50-ton ore truck or a computer, both do functions which allows us to follow up and create all sorts of stuff...jobs! One guy in a 50-ton ore truck creates lot of jobs...hauling ROCKS...
Perhaps you should do some research of the difference between labor saving machinery and automation. Then if you would like to really know a little about what you are talking about, do some research into the effects of imports and exports on the various people that it affects. The people who gained employment in factories did so because at the time we were experiencing a trade surplus. We now have a massive trade deficit which can be seen by your own eyes if you care to visit the rust belt of this country and see the thousands and thousands of abandoned factories which at one time employed people with good jobs who now are trying to make ends meet waiting tables and bartending.
Until technology replaces the truck driver with a self driving truck. http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...TLs4FY&usg=AFQjCNF2dFpm_K9RRsa9Cw4NoYEc0Avo-w The article above predicts as many as 30% of all jobs will be replaced by robots by 2025...
Overpopulation is probably something that should have been thought about before it could be called overpopulation. As it is, each day brings new mouths to feed and regardless of the Earth's potential for food production, it is the human's realized food production AND distribution that makes the difference. And right now humans don't feed all the humans. People are starving. There aren't enough doctors or medicine and the nations that have the medicine are overusing them so much that diseases are developing immunities to them because doctors prescribe antibiotics for just about anything, and we put it in our animals too. Humanity, when taken as a whole, is an incredibly stupid selfish short-sighted species and we've convinced ourselves so much and so often of our own superiority that we can't even see the forest for the trees anymore.
Well...your Americans DEMAND cheap goods and services which is what drives the success of Walmart, Kmart, Sears, Macy's, Ace Hardware, Best Buy, basically all electronics and clothing and shoes and linens and furniture and steel and plastics and glass and you name it are made offshore...IMPORTS. Sure all of this stuff can be produced in the USA but to do so requires a huge decrease in the cost of doing business in the US and reduced regulations and tax policy, etc. ALL of which Americans are not interested in doing. It is impossible to bring back the manufacture of low-priced goods to the US. If you wish to balance the trade deficit then you must find those areas in which US industry can compete and greatly increase exports...
Think how absurd your comment is about replacing 30% of all jobs in less than 10 years...30% represents about 45 million workers who you think will be (*)(*)(*)(*) out of luck to a robot in less than 10 years...
Labor saving machinery and automation are the same thing. And having a trade "surplus" doesn't mean anything, if you understand economics. There actually is no such thing as a trade surplus or deficit, how could there be? The balance of payments has to eventually be balanced. What's happening in the US is that financial instruments are what is being purchased by other countries in order to maintain the balance of trade. I doubt you understand what that means, but the gist is that because the US government is selling so much debt, that is why the US imports more goods than it exports. If the US ran a balanced budget, that would no longer be possible.
But humanity isn't a whole; it's divided up into nations, and some nations have their population under control and others do not.
Americans must come to the realization that the cost of low priced imports have a much higher hidden cost in the deterioration of the overall economy. - - - Updated - - - It is the conclusion of the article. If you can dispute what the article says then provide your evidence or proof.
You are wrong on all points. A shovel is a labor saving device, but is not automation in any way. If there is no such thing as trade surplus and deficit you need to inform all the worlds economists and the US government because they are under the impression there is. So far as the economic impact of trade surpluses vs. deficits one need look no further than the history of the US to see the impacts. In the 50's we had a trade surplus and the strongest economy ever. Today we have the largest deficits, and the worst economy ever. China has a large trade surplus and is quickly becoming a world power. Manufacturing is the basis of profits which produce positive economic factors. When you produce a product and sell it to someone in a foreign country their money comes here. When we buy a product from them, our money goes there.
I wouldn't call a shovel "machinery." And you need to publish your radical economic theory, because my point comes directly from economists about trade surpluses and deficits. I'm sure you would win the Nobel prize for your radical theory. Economists would tell you that the balance of payments will cause surpluses and deficits to eventually have to even out. You cannot run a surplus or deficit for long because the flow of money in one direction will cause price inflation on one side and deflation on the other, changing the relative prices of goods in order to make them flow in the other direction. As I explained (and which clearly went over your head) the US is financing trade deficits by selling financial instruments (mainly government bonds) to other countries. Thus their money comes in (to buy the bonds) and US money goes out to buy goods). The balance of payments is thus maintained. So who makes money selling financial instruments? The banks. So the banks and the top 1% are making huge money while the rest of us struggle to keep up. You point out that the situation was different in the 1950s, but you don't understand why. The reason is that the US was still on the gold-exchange standard during that time. It could not just issue money willy-nilly, and finance government spending through limitless borrowing. As soon as the dollar was completely detached from gold, then the trade "deficits" began to rack up. Go to a gold-backed currency, and it will force trade imbalances to level back out.
It's inherent in monetary fascism which uses the police powers of the state to move wealth from the producers to the plutocracy. That won't change under other models, it'll just mean more slavery by central planning.
