mikl Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 After seeing this video, it seems pretty inevitable that increasing automation of everything will cause the demand for humans doing stuff to shrink rapidly. All the ideas we have about economy are based on the basic assumption that human labour is valuable, so any person can have economic freedom by selling his labour, and thus generating the necessary capital to sustain himself (and hopefully, more than that). But as demand for human labour dwindles, the supply side is more difficult. We have long lifespans, and take 10-20 years to become productive. And the production of humans is governed by highly irrational forces, namely our desires to self-reproduce. All this taken together could work to drive the price of human labour below the cost of living for billions of people. What happens then? The statists would simply prescribe more redistribution of wealth, likely creating a huge, permanent underclass of “undesirables”. I see this as a huge threat to the creation of a free society, because as long as we have large groups of people depending on the state, they will (violently) oppose freedom. Can you imagine some way we could achieve equilibrium? Some way we can preserve the ability of all humans to contribute something they can be paid for?
shirgall Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 Labor Theory of Value? Flee! In all seriousness, isn't this why the US is primarily a service economy and not a manufacturing economy anymore? People will always look for ways to make their time valuable to someone else and get their living from that. It's the low-skill/high-rote stuff that's getting eaten up by technological process. In the meantime everyone's standard of living is improving.
wdiaz03 Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 For those interested See https://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf - CHAPTER 7 The Curse of Machinery
William VL Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 My biggest concern with this is that government will sustain and be impossible to wipe out afterwards. As Stefan said, an increase in liberty result in an increase in state because the state feed itself on the productivity rise of the increase of liberty. Here we face a giant leap in productivity, and an enormous increase of government dependent people, combined the two and you have a bigger state, a more backed state and a much more sustainable state. I wonder what are the thoughts of the FDR community on the subject, it seems like we face inevitable doom. For those interested See https://mises.org/books/economics_in_one_lesson_hazlitt.pdf - CHAPTER 7 The Curse of Machinery But robots are not only machines. They are intelligent machines, and bot have the ability to learn. As explain in the video posted on top, this is not like the industrial revolution, because the radius of tasks available for automation is not restricted by repetitivity. The "high end" jobs, the creatives jobs, the services jobs face automation, and these are the ones people needed to go into when machines arises. And as Stefan pointed out on the video on Ana Kasparian, the IQ is pretty constant throughout human life, and the bell curve pretty constant in the society(even if peaceful parenting become broadly practiced), a LOT of people would not be able to produce enough to justify their paycheck in the future, even as the productivity of the society as a whole skyrocket. I think people will simply stop making children to reduce this number of unemployable people, but they are rough times ahead. The question is, wich jobs will not be affected and if and how we can escape this zeitgeist like future... [sorry for my bad grammar if there is any, English is not my first language]
wdiaz03 Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 My biggest concern with this is that government will sustain and be impossible to wipe out afterwards. As Stefan said, an increase in liberty result in an increase in state because the state feed itself on the productivity rise of the increase of liberty. Here we face a giant leap in productivity, and an enormous increase of government dependent people, combined the two and you have a bigger state, a more backed state and a much more sustainable state. I wonder what are the thoughts of the FDR community on the subject, it seems like we face inevitable doom. But robots are not only machines. They are intelligent machines, and bot have the ability to learn. As explain in the video posted on top, this is not like the industrial revolution, because the radius of tasks available for automation is not restricted by repetitivity. The "high end" jobs, the creatives jobs, the services jobs face automation, and these are the ones people needed to go into when machines arises. And as Stefan pointed out on the video on Ana Kasparian, the IQ is pretty constant throughout human life, and the bell curve pretty constant in the society(even if peaceful parenting become broadly practiced), a LOT of people would not be able to produce enough to justify their paycheck in the future, even as the productivity of the society as a whole skyrocket. I think people will simply stop making children to reduce this number of unemployable people, but they are rough times ahead. The question is, wich jobs will not be affected and if and how we can escape this zeitgeist like future... [sorry for my bad grammar if there is any, English is not my first language] Seriously brother? Lets start worrying about unicorns too while we are at it. By the time humans build sentient machines how do you know how things will look like? will you even be alive?
William VL Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 I must guess you haven't watched the video of the OP, if not, I strongly encourage you to do it, you'll see that bot are able to create music undistinguishable of the one made by men and that 45% of today's jobs are on direct threat of automation/bot-isation.
luxfelix Posted August 21, 2014 Posted August 21, 2014 If machines advance to the point of sentience and are truly rational beings, than I imagine they won't stand for violence or their own enslavement and we'll have more highly-skilled free-thinkers to help humanity. If machines can't/don't reach sentience than we remain valuable in other ways unique from machines. I guess transhumanism is an option too if you're in to that as well. Since we're all building the future together, it's ultimately up to us and what we decide as individuals.
luxfelix Posted August 21, 2014 Posted August 21, 2014 Kevin Beal posted a cool topic thread with a video describing, in part, an automated market as well: https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/41402-self-owning-machine-market/
wigins Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 After seeing this video, it seems pretty inevitable that increasing automation of everything will cause the demand for humans doing stuff to shrink rapidly. All the ideas we have about economy are based on the basic assumption that human labour is valuable, so any person can have economic freedom by selling his labour, and thus generating the necessary capital to sustain himself (and hopefully, more than that). But as demand for human labour dwindles, the supply side is more difficult. We have long lifespans, and take 10-20 years to become productive. And the production of humans is governed by highly irrational forces, namely our desires to self-reproduce. All this taken together could work to drive the price of human labour below the cost of living for billions of people. What happens then? The statists would simply prescribe more redistribution of wealth, likely creating a huge, permanent underclass of “undesirables”. I see this as a huge threat to the creation of a free society, because as long as we have large groups of people depending on the state, they will (violently) oppose freedom. Can you imagine some way we could achieve equilibrium? Some way we can preserve the ability of all humans to contribute something they can be paid for? If the question is: What happens, in a free society, when people's labor can no longer support their survival? Then the answer is: Unless someone else takes care of them, they die.
LovePrevails Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 people should only have to work a few hours a week and that will be it
ProfessionalTeabagger Posted August 22, 2014 Posted August 22, 2014 If automation is so advanced then why will they need to work?
surfingthoughts Posted August 23, 2014 Posted August 23, 2014 That video was interesting. My question: What will people do with this free time? My answer: 1 - People will increase consumption of media thus the demand for media will increase dramatically. This can not be automated when talking about fiction/novels, tv, games or anything programmed for that matter. Yes computers can make music but they can't make songs with meaningful lyrics people will demand the human touch so to speak. Yes computer might be able to write an news snip it on stats but how will they be able to do creative writing such as fiction. 2 - There will still be a thirst for knowledge that automation cannot solve it may be able to make calculations faster but it needs to be told what and when to do such calculations. 3 - People when they go out will require or at least will be willing to pay for the human touch in allot of jobs such as when going to a restaurant I want to be greeted and looked after by a human that can connect with me on an emotional level. This is the kind of thing we already are wiling to pay extra for think of tips... 4 - People will need to be able to afford all the things above to be able to do this they must either spend value or earn value to spend. I am sure I have missed some things "people will do" that will require jobs and for those jobs to be payed for. My conclusion: People will work less, people will still have to work as technology advances. If it is possible for us to reach the stage where computers can program themselves then perhaps we could consider something zeitgeist esk. As far as I know there is no evidence that this is even possible never mind achievable within my lifetime (I am in my 20's...). This is what I am watching now thanks to this topic. Zeitgeist Versus the Market - Peter Joseph Debates Stefan Molyneux
Tree Frog Posted August 23, 2014 Posted August 23, 2014 In 1870 about 80% of the US population was employed in agriculture. Today, because of mechanized farming only about 2% of Americans are employed in agriculture. Over a span of only 144 years free market fueled innovation has destroyed 78% of our jobs. Thanks Capitalism... HA HA The thing about this is, all of these jobs have been replaced by safer, higher paying, and less labor intensive jobs. An uneducated 18 year old no longer has to spend 16 hours a day in coal mines, they can now get service jobs that didn't exist 70 years ago. If you even look back at the past 10 years jobs such as a mobile app developer were unimaginable to the consumer or future employee. Humans will always continue to produce. We will just take on more highly skilled means of production and leave the grunt work for the robots. The global communism in a mechanized world argument is extremely thought destroying and impossible. A world in which humans only consume and produce no value would be a purposeless existence. Lots of time on your hands does not equal using your time to pursue self knowledge. Like I stated earlier, jobs have become less intensive and allow a shorter work day. In modern times we have more recreation time then ever and have practically all of human knowledge at our finger tips. How do we (for the exception of FDR listeners) spend our recreation time and utilize these resources? With Social media, Selfies, Cat videos, Twerking, Planking, Harlem Shake, Sports and other pointless applications.
luxfelix Posted August 23, 2014 Posted August 23, 2014 I just remembered... http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_kvk3497Aw31qzbmsz.jpg http://allfunnypic.com/wp-content/uploads/funny-Wall-E-fat-people-iPad.jpg
Recommended Posts