Some questions: Question #3.

[Ross Dolan]

Yes it is bitch but maybe you should just lay out your position.

I will. I have to do it at a reasonable pace...or people are more likely to go to sleep than actually consider what I am suggesting. I have the whole plan in essay form...which, because of the complexity, is 12 pages of single spaced typing.

I'm not trying to be cute here, but explaining complex things like this cannot be done in memo form.

You started out taking about productivity then leisure as if they are separate. I think the fact you started where you did shows they aren't. I think they are two sides of the same coin

There is a significant correspondence between leisure (unemployment) and productivity...but it is complicated. Actually "solving" the problem of "unemployment" and "increasing productivity" in today's highly technical society have an inversely proportional relationship. By that I mean that "solving" the problem of productivity (significantly increasing productivity) is a snap...and "solving" the problem of unemployment (seeing that there are plenty of jobs available for everyone) is also a snap.

Unfortunately the things that have to be done to solve either one...has a significant negative impact on the other.

Example: We can significantly increase productivity by inventing and using machines to do most of the jobs that machines can do (almost unlimited these days)...but doing so would have a huge negative impact on employment for humans.

Conversely, We can significantly increase the number of job openings for humans by refusing to allow machines to do much of the work that needs doing...but doing so would have a huge negative impact on productivity.

That is an example of the difficulty of discussing this at a fast pace. It gets worse. The problem is not easily discussed.

Everyone may just abandon this discussion because of that.

It has happened in the past.

If so...we can go back to all that name-calling bullshit we see in so many threads here because of our different political positions.

THAT I do not want.

 

[Yakuda]

I will. I have to do it at a reasonable pace...or people are more likely to go to sleep than actually consider what I am suggesting. I have the whole plan in essay form...which, because of the complexity, is 12 pages of single spaced typing.

I'm not trying to be cute here, but explaining complex things like this cannot be done in memo form.

There is a significant correspondence between leisure (unemployment) and productivity...but it is complicated. Actually "solving" the problem of "unemployment" and "increasing productivity" in today's highly technical society have an inversely proportional relationship. By that I mean that "solving" the problem of productivity (significantly increasing productivity) is a snap...and "solving" the problem of unemployment (seeing that there are plenty of jobs available for everyone) is also a snap.

Unfortunately the things that have to be done to solve either one...has a significant negative impact on the other.

Example: We can significantly increase productivity by inventing and using machines to do most of the jobs that machines can do (almost unlimited these days)...but doing so would have a huge negative impact on employment for humans.

Conversely, We can significantly increase the number of job openings for humans by refusing to allow machines to do much of the work that needs doing...but doing so would have a huge negative impact on productivity.

That is an example of the difficulty of discussing this at a fast pace. It gets worse. The problem is not easily discussed.

Everyone may just abandon this discussion because of that.

It has happened in the past.

If so...we can go back to all that name-calling bullshit we see in so many threads here because of our different political positions.

THAT I do not want.

Just a quick point that I would like clarified if you don't mind. I think it's important at least for my understanding. You refer to leisure as unemployment. I don't believe they are the same thing or interchangeable. Being unemployed isnt the same as leisure and vice versa.

 

[Knuckles Neanderthal]

I am further to the left on social issues than people like Bernie Sanders or Amy Klobuchar.

Holy shite Batman! Did I call it?!

 

[Knuckles Neanderthal]

But in a technological future in which a huge swath of jobs from blue-collar to white-collar are all done by machines resulting in mass unemployment, what would you do?

In your version of that future do you see a country in which a small number of capitalists reap all the rewards because they bought the machines while millions starve in the street?

Who then buys the "widgets" the machines make?

People need to work to earn their pay. No free handouts from the government. If someone is chronically unemployed, there will be some type of public service needed to qualify for pay. One example could be an assistant to the old or infirm. There are many things that people can do to benefit society without the need for flat out welfare for no work.

 

[Kafka]

People need to work to earn their pay.

But in this scenario we've eliminated many if not most of the jobs. So what do you do then?

There are many things that people can do to benefit society without the need for flat out welfare for no work.

That's one proposal. But remember, you are going to have to find things that are not currently done by machine in this scenario and of sufficient number that millions upon millions of unemployed people across the spectrum of skills can have them to do.

 

[Kafka]

Just a quick point that I would like clarified if you don't mind. I think it's important at least for my understanding. You refer to leisure as unemployment. I don't believe they are the same thing or interchangeable. Being unemployed isnt the same as leisure and vice versa.

It seems like the discussion is more centered around working vs non-working. Regardless of leisure status.

 

[Knuckles Neanderthal]

But in this scenario we've eliminated many if not most of the jobs. So what do you do then?



That's one proposal. But remember, you are going to have to find things that are not currently done by machine in this scenario and of sufficient number that millions upon millions of unemployed people across the spectrum of skills can have them to do.

Not everyone will be able to afford a personal robot.

 

[Kafka]

Not everyone will be able to afford a personal robot.

But you are missing the point of the question. The question is, in this new future where machines are used to do almost all of the work resulting in mass unemployment....what do we as a nation do? Do we sit by and watch millions upon millions of our fellow citizens starve to death on the streets?

This is not a scenario that looks anything like what we've seen before. Industrialization has steadily taken jobs away but slow enough and in only certain sectors of the economy. With future developments we might be facing job losses at nearly every level and every field.

What do we do then? What does capitalism look like at that point?

 

[Yakuda]

It seems like the discussion is more centered around working vs non-working. Regardless of leisure status.

I get that but the reasons we are working vs. not working are relevant i think. Leisure suggests a break from work. At least as i see it but may need to put that aside.

 

[Althea]

It's because we created a thing called a "work ethic" and to talk about more time off work for fun stuff means you're promoting slackers and moochers. We've all seen how the RW calls anyone receiving public assistance, no matter how short of a time, by those epithets. It's almost as hated and feared as "socialism." Most Europeans enjoy fewer working hours, more paid time off including more weeks of vacation, paid health care, etc. Woe unto us to even speak of doing that here.

When the ACA was passed, it touched on the fact that one parent could now leave a low paying job that only afforded a bad health insurance policy. Time would be better spent being home for kids. Quite frankly, being around for kids pays very well when you consider the cost for quality childcare. Say nothing about the psychological benefits.

If people got paid a decent wage, they could afford leisure time. No need to work weekends. No need to work 2 jobs to pay bills.

But manufacturing is gone, so the better paying jobs are hard to find.

 

[Althea]

Work give you more than just sustenance. It gives you self esteem.

And stuff needs to get done to have a garage to clean up.

This is why work is emphasized, because it's a good thing.

Even Pinocchio realized this in the end.

'Work' isn't the correct term. This is earning vs. not earning. Earn when you have to, and have spare time to do whatever you want.

Those who 'earn' the most in this nation actually do very little work.

 

[Kafka]

I get that but the reasons we are working vs. not working are relevant i think. Leisure suggests a break from work. At least as i see it but may need to put that aside.

Agreed. I think in this case "leisure" is probably an inappropriate word. While I don't know for certain what the OP is driving at completely, it does raise some good questions. What does our economy look like if most of the jobs are taken over by machines, not just manual labor but even knowledge work.

At that point a lot of people will have "enforced leisure time" whether they want it or not.

I'm genuinely curious what sort of strain that puts on a capitalist economy such as ours.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Holy shite Batman! Did I call it?!

I have mentioned that fact dozens of time here and in all the forums where I participate.

Not sure what you think you called....but hold off with patting your back.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Just a quick point that I would like clarified if you don't mind. I think it's important at least for my understanding. You refer to leisure as unemployment. I don't believe they are the same thing or interchangeable. Being unemployed isnt the same as leisure and vice versa.

I will get back to this later. I have to cut this session short. Ole Mary Todd is calling.

If for some reason I do not get back later today, Yakuda, please tell me to return to this post of yours and respond. It is important that I do.

And it is something I want to do.

 

[Knuckles Neanderthal]

I have mentioned that fact dozens of time here and in all the forums where I participate.

Not sure what you think you called....but hold off with patting your back.

Well it was a 1st for me.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Just a quick point that I would like clarified if you don't mind. I think it's important at least for my understanding. You refer to leisure as unemployment. I don't believe they are the same thing or interchangeable. Being unemployed isnt the same as leisure and vice versa.

Okay…it is reasonable to ask that I “define” certain parts of what I am addressing in these posts.



When I talk about leisure time…I am not talking about not working. I am talking about not attending to the “earning a living” aspect of our lives.



Obviously, mowing the lawn, trimming the hedges, and pruning the trees; cleaning the attic, cellar, or garage is a hell of a lot of work…but that is a reasonable part of the stuff that is done during what I refer to as “leisure time.”



The work that is done in order to survive…in order to “earn a living” is the opposite of “leisure time”…no matter that, often more arduous that the non-leisure time work, is being done.



Leisure time is that time when an individual is not doing “earning a living.” It often is just laying around doing very little; or watching TV; or playing golf, tennis, fishing or such. It is the time spent enjoying life…even if it involves hard work…adding a deck to the back patio; replacing worn windows, painting a house or such.



What I am essentially saying is that since so much mechanical help has come into the workforce…most people should be able to do the leisure time…instead of the “earning a living” time.

Yakuda, if this explanation does not do the job...come back at me. Don't give me a break on this. I want people reading this to understand where I am coming from.

 

[Ross Dolan]

People need to work to earn their pay. No free handouts from the government. If someone is chronically unemployed, there will be some type of public service needed to qualify for pay. One example could be an assistant to the old or infirm. There are many things that people can do to benefit society without the need for flat out welfare for no work.

Not correct.

 

[Ross Dolan]

Well it was a 1st for me.

Okay...it may have been.

I am merely informing you that I have mentioned that very often.

 

[Knuckles Neanderthal]

Not correct.

There may be new industries that develop that we don't have an inkling about now.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

When the ACA was passed, it touched on the fact that one parent could now leave a low paying job that only afforded a bad health insurance policy. Time would be better spent being home for kids. Quite frankly, being around for kids pays very well when you consider the cost for quality childcare. Say nothing about the psychological benefits.

If people got paid a decent wage, they could afford leisure time. No need to work weekends. No need to work 2 jobs to pay bills.

But manufacturing is gone, so the better paying jobs are hard to find.

Well said. Those countries who tax their citizens but use the money to provide them with good public transportation, free educations including college, health care, child care, and that mandate generous paid time off consistently rank in the world's happiest populations.

It would seem that conservatives suspect happiness is a gift from the Devil and want to make sure it doesn't happen here. lol