DescentBB

...which developed after two exchanges with anti-GMO food types without a clue and an ax to grind against 'corporatists', an economic exchange with a range of folks around how to deal with coming economic revolution, and the general level of what passes for informed discourse:

I wrote--you know......as I go through exchanges and debates with my Progressive friends, and my more Conservative friends, it strikes me that we may be entering a reality in which common ideologies don't have any real application. We are snowballing into a future with massive technological and industrial changes, a very interconnected planet with far too many people on it, to be blunt, and a thus-far unchecked rapid acceleration of the distance between the economic haves and have-nots. Simplistic 'conservative' solutions, or Progressive bleating about 'evil corporations', the Libertarian denial of a role for a strong central government that includes social safety nets, NONE of it can address that reality. We need innovation in thinking, or perhaps development of an entirely new ideology. Any deep details or such are not forthcoming from me, at the moment, but I'm being struck ever more that most major ideological players and political players in the US don't even show the capacity to deal with reality honestly.


another trigger for this rant was watching Jennifer Granholm(D-former governor of Michigan) on some discussion of how the Dems need to appeal to working Americans. Just more drivel about bringing Americans 'good paying jobs' and utterly no acknowledgment that the entire industrial, economic and labor landscape is about to undergo an upheaval of massive scale. Just the usual identity politics(this time to 'blue collar workers', a quantly 19th century term), no truth, no reality. I am pretty straight about the Trump camp and the right denying reality and fudging facts, but I am quite aware the left does it too, along with assuming things about the opposition that preclude any ability to see past black and white thinking.

Good grief slick. Put your "quote" in a brighter font or something. I can barely read it on my crappy monitor.

are you using a black background?

alternate color choice:
you know......as I go through exchanges and debates with my Progressive friends, and my more Conservative friends, it strikes me that we may be entering a reality in which common ideologies don't have any real application. We are snowballing into a future with massive technological and industrial changes, a very interconnected planet with far too many people on it, to be blunt, and a thus-far unchecked rapid acceleration of the distance between the economic haves and have-nots. Simplistic 'conservative' solutions, or Progressive bleating about 'evil corporations', the Libertarian denial of a role for a strong central government that includes social safety nets, NONE of it can address that reality. We need innovation in thinking, or perhaps development of an entirely new ideology. Any deep details or such are not forthcoming from me, at the moment, but I'm being struck ever more that most major ideological players and political players in the US don't even show the capacity to deal with reality honestly.

If you have trouble reading text because of the color...just highlight it.

callmeslick wrote:are you using a black background?

I'm using the Descent board's default black background. It pretty much blended in when it was dark blue slick. Spidey, I could have highlighted it, but sometimes I'm just lazy that way.

As for that quote you posted (and fixed), isn't that the reason why wars always start? One side against the other for some inane reason or another? Both sides argue back and forth and through the very act of arguing, they end up entrenching themselves with nasty, rhetoric-filled speeches, creating a feeding frenzy of hate, with absolutely no compunction or desire to make even the smallest attempt to understand the other side's position?

well, I didn't intend it to mean such when I wrote it, I 've just been struck at how the coming changes in economics and all are leading to bizarre political responses because NO ideology has any real answer for dealing with them.

My take is to do some sort of training for blue collar types that can be done after work hours and before they are laid off. It is refreshing here in MI that the manufacturers are going into high school to trai students for specific jobs that they can walk into once the graduate or have apprentice programs for specific careers.:

http://www.michigan.gov/wda/0,5303,7-30 ... --,00.html

We do not need to have every student go to college in order to get well paying jobs.

I don't think there ARE going to be all that many 'well paying jobs', past creative types or extremely brilliant scientist types to design systems. The middle level technical jobs will pay ok, but the rest of the global workforce will be fighting for such scraps as are needed after that, so most wages will be in a race for the bottom, unless a government intervenes with a minimum. The good payinig job will be called 'stockholder'

If that were the case slick, just who will be buying any product? If the world leaders do not understand that products need to be sold for companies to profit, which in turn means more jobs, which means competition for workers. So lets keep allowing cheap labor into the country so wages fall to the point where most items will be unattainable.

That is exactly slicks point, and nobody is coming up with any particularly convincing answers. Jobs lost to automation will never return. Trump promises more jobs, but the best he will actually be able to offer is hiring more people to lick his boots clean for a kick in the face wage.

Yea, and the problem is, slick is presenting a potential future as fact, while only considering one of the variables.

Another problem that is generally overlooked:

If you introduce a government stipend, you will actually enable automation to eliminate jobs…also try to imagine what raising the minimum wage to 15.00 will do to encourage this.

And here's another issue. If a person only has a high school degree, the chances of getting a decent job drop off dramatically. Add on the high expense of actually paying for that degree and most people have a very steep climb just for the opportunity to maybe obtain a decent paying job.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/11/busi ... grees.html

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/02/ ... o-college/

woodchip wrote:If that were the case slick, just who will be buying any product?

ten percent of the planet, or even 5 percent is still several hundred MILLION people with serious enough money to be real consumers. That is enough of a market.........you don't get where labor is headed, do you? Still?

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:If that were the case slick, just who will be buying any product?

ten percent of the planet, or even 5 percent is still several hundred MILLION people with serious enough money to be real consumers. That is enough of a market.........you don't get where labor is headed, do you? Still?

It's not headed there slick, it is already here to a certain degree. Look in any warehouse or large manufacturing plant and you'll see loads of robots performing jobs.

get it through your head: You HAVEN"T SEEN ANYTHING, yet. Did you read that piece on self-teaching, non-programmable AI drones the Air Force is field testing? You don't grasp the EXTENT to which robotics can not only replace human labor but vastly improve upon it. It is entire believeable, although completely uncertain, that you could have, on Earth, maybe 100 million people doing REALLY well economically, with maybe another half billion living in a revamped version of affluence, with the rest basically competing for what labor is available, largely in service to the well off folks. Another overlooked factor, is that this economic reality will be global to an even greater degree that is currently seen. The big X factor is the extent to which politics, local government and public dismay throw Luddite style disruptions into the progress. What that will do is determine the areas that ultimately proper, as those will the the nations or regions which embrace some sort of societal flattening of asset discrepancies to a level that is tolerable for most of their people.

And when those thinking AI's figure out they don't need humans?

that will be interesting. Lots of moral, social and economic redefinition and upheaval ahead. See any pols addressing it, or are most, on all sides, still jabbering about 'creating good paying jobs' and 'putting everyone who wants to work a good job'? Start to look through the bull★■◆● and realize that the generations behind us especially have some serious readjustment ahead and the changes will either be radical or very violent and counterproductive.

So you are saying that the only recourse will be for the AI displace worker is to revolts. Hope you are not caught in the crossfire.

hell,no, can you read? I suggested that might be one of many yet unknown outcomes. That, in fact, is the counterproductive outcome. The winners in the process will be, as I tried to state, regions and nations that establish a livable society for all. That will require incredibly robust central governance, unless you see some other plan.

Well, if AI's are given rights and they start running for public office, at that point the politicians will start enacting laws to dumb them down and control them.

ok, you're determined to run with fanstasy. My point is that standard Liberal, Conservative, Libertarian, other models don't address the coming reality. We need folks willing to think up and then advocate for a far different set of ideological rationales and solutions, and I don't see them at present in the US. Not so other nations. A few Asian folks are pondering all this, and some out of the box thinking has come from Scandanavia and Canada.

And we need laws controlling this would you not agree?

Yeah, but laws blaming it on Mexicans/China/excessive regulations aren't going to work.

The foundation of every economic model since the dawn of humanity is going to be eliminated soon, if you are pissed off at the government now, imagine how pissed off you will be when the Chinese and Mexicans figure out a new system first and get to rule the world for the next 30,000 years as a result because you were too busy playing the blame game.

woodchip wrote:And we need laws controlling this would you not agree?

controlling what? Need clarification to answer, as I'm not at all clear on what you're suggesting.

Krom wrote:Yeah, but laws blaming it on Mexicans/China/excessive regulations aren't going to work.

The foundation of every economic model since the dawn of humanity is going to be eliminated soon, if you are pissed off at the government now, imagine how pissed off you will be when the Chinese and Mexicans figure out a new system first and get to rule the world for the next 30,000 years as a result because you were too busy playing the blame game.

wasn't quite pondering THAT many thousands of years down the road, but you get my gist, perfectly.......

I think the Chinese have done a pretty good job figuring out that you need an employed population.

stay tuned, Spidey, you will find differently, or at least that SOMEONE is going to figure out how to work it out.

People don't figure out the kinds of things that happen at this scale...they happen organically.

My guess is...you are pushing this future doomsday scenario in an attempt to butter people up for more socialism.

nope, Socialism, as currently formulated, won't address this reality.

some Europeans are thinking about the matter. Oh, and a strong government with high taxes and a vigorous social safety net is not socialism unless it demands control of production, which is NOT what is being discussed here:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ ... li=BBnbfcL

“nope, Socialism, as currently formulated, won't address this reality.”

Yea, I would imagine a workers paradise would be pretty hard without the workers.

“Oh, and a strong government with high taxes and a vigorous social safety net is not socialism unless it demands control of production”

Funny…but that is what I’ve been saying all along.

While reading that link, I noticed they barely mention the “cons” but when they do, they only express a few, and immediately dismiss them. (no bios on that site, right)

Well let me give you one of the most serious cons, not based in some right wing hate rant:

Starting a universal income will only enable the process of automation.

all I applaud them for is STARTING a frank discussion based on a realistic view of where industrial employment is heading. The details have an ENORMOUS way to go.

Spidey wrote:Starting a universal income will only enable the process of automation.

not doing something in time will affect people far worse, I'd suspect. Now, my question to you is what do you see as the BENEFIT of NOT enabling a process to proceed? Wouldn't that just allow others to proceed apace and leave us behind?

I’d rather feel the pain that natural checks and balances place on total automation, then face the prospect of some feeling like a large segment of the population will need culling.

(see I can do the scare tactic as well as you)

...........................

“Wouldn't that just allow others to proceed apace and leave us behind?”

It's not a race.

callmeslick wrote:all I applaud them for is STARTING a frank discussion based on a realistic view of where industrial employment is heading. The details have an ENORMOUS way to go.

This is an interesting take on what's being discussed here and yes, it's a scary prospect to behold, at least during the changeover.

https://hbr.org/2014/12/what-happens-to ... ce-workers

Good read TC. What I wonder, happens when people refuse to buy things wholly AI made? Kinda like where we are with GMO food.

woodchip wrote:Good read TC. What I wonder, happens when people refuse to buy things wholly AI made? Kinda like where we are with GMO food.

What if there's no choice?

tunnelcat wrote:

woodchip wrote:Good read TC. What I wonder, happens when people refuse to buy things wholly AI made? Kinda like where we are with GMO food.

What if there's no choice?

doubt you'd ever get to that, but I can easily see the 'artisan'(ie-man made) product costing ten fold more, and readily available to the segment of the population that is willing to pay for that. There are a lot of paradigms that will be tested in the near future.