Labor Endgame

[bu villain]

If at some point in the future, let's say humanity has mastered robotics and renewable energy to the point that:

1) No human labor is required to produce and distribute enough food (including water) to feed every human
2) No human labor is required to maintain enough buildings/living space/basic utilities

In such a future, would you be okay with large portions of the population choosing not to do any paid work? What would the labor market look like and would you want to institute any laws to change it?

[David88vert]

There will always be a need for someone to repair the robots.....

[Vteckidd]

Basic economic principles still apply.

Lower skilled jobs
Medium skilled jobs
Highly skilled Jobs
Market pays what each job is worth

the only thing that would change is what dictates a "low skilled Job" and so forth. If they dont perform paid work, how do they survive.

The work force would just transition or have to move to areas that fit their skillset.

[bu villain]

There will always be a need for someone to repair the robots.....

Sorry, should have stated robots can fix the other robots as well.

Basic economic principles still apply.

Lower skilled jobs
Medium skilled jobs
Highly skilled Jobs
Market pays what each job is worth

the only thing that would change is what dictates a "low skilled Job" and so forth. If they dont perform paid work, how do they survive.

The work force would just transition or have to move to areas that fit their skillset.

They don't need to perform work to survive because food/water/shelter is all provided at no cost by the robots.

[Vteckidd]

They don't need to perform work to survive because food/water/shelter is all provided at no cost by the robots.

Not true

Money ceases to exist? Food water and shelter cost money, robots doesnt make things free and have no cost? are you kidding me? Economy would change, but rules of economy dont.

See Industrial Revolution

[David88vert]

Sorry, should have stated robots can fix the other robots as well.

They don't need to perform work to survive because food/water/shelter is all provided at no cost by the robots.

So, who designs the robots, programs the robots, etc?

When we can rely on the robots for everything, they will no longer need us.

[bu villain]

Not true

Money ceases to exist? Food water and shelter cost money, robots doesnt make things free and have no cost? are you kidding me? Economy would change, but rules of economy dont.

See Industrial Revolution

Why would they have to cost money. In this scenario, energy is free (renewable) and the robots, powered by this free renewable energy can provide and maintain the basic necessities of life for everyone in perpetuity. I guess my inability to craft a perfect hypothetical scenario is distracting you from understanding my underlying questions about labor itself so just answer this for me. Is it a moral/ethical imperative that everyone work or contribute to society in some similar way or is requiring labor to survive just a necessity of reality with no moral/ethical implications? Or in another way, should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

[bu villain]

So, who designs the robots, programs the robots, etc?

When we can rely on the robots for everything, they will no longer need us.

For the sake of moving the conversation forward, let's say Bill Gates originally designed and programmed the robots and said he would never charge for their use. The AI on the robots is good enough for them to become self sustaining/replicating as necessary to provide everyone the basic human necessities. Yes, the robots do not need humans at all. If these details are becoming to distracting, please see the questions I asked Vteck.

[David88vert]

Why would they have to cost money. In this scenario, energy is free (renewable) and the robots, powered by this free renewable energy can provide and maintain the basic necessities of life for everyone in perpetuity. I guess my inability to craft a perfect hypothetical scenario is distracting you from understanding my underlying questions about labor itself so just answer this for me. Is it a moral/ethical imperative that everyone work or contribute to society in some similar way or is requiring labor to survive just a necessity of reality with no moral/ethical implications? Or in another way, should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

Nothing is free in life. There will never be any such thing as free, renewable energy. There will always be a trade-off.
There will never be such as thing as free items like food, robots, etc. Someone has to put forth the effort to create and build them, and they will require payment for services and products rendered.
A basic principle - anything that someone gets for free, someone else had to pay for.

[David88vert]

For the sake of moving the conversation forward, let's say Bill Gates originally designed and programmed the robots and said he would never charge for their use. The AI on the robots is good enough for them to become self sustaining/replicating as necessary to provide everyone the basic human necessities. Yes, the robots do not need humans at all. If these details are becoming to distracting, please see the questions I asked Vteck.

Bill Gates charges for crappy Windows software - now you think that he is going to give away AI for free???
Humans will need to be paid to reboot the robots when they turn "blue" (blue screen crash).

The reality is that money is just a physical symbol of the power to get others to do what you want them to do. If you had someone that donated "free everything", someone else would find a way to manipulate it to conquer everyone else. It's human nature. There will always be people that want to rule over others, and will find ways to do so.

[Vteckidd]

so your basically saying that
Robots grow food
Robots plant food (crops)
Robots Harvest Crops
Robots Till soil
Robots butcher animals for meat

Robots produce/harvest unlimited energy

Doesnt matter, see previous post. Economy would transition , but basic rules still apply.

All you did was eliminate the need for burger flippers and coal miners, so, instead of us thinking that minimum wage is mceedees, minimum wage would be a nuclear physicist, and jobs we cannot think of yet (because technology hasnt been invented) would be the "medium and high skilled" jobs.

As long as currency exists, there will always be low/medium/high skilled jobs.

See Industrial Revolution, See CHINA

[Vteckidd]

I suspect there would be a charge for time the robots do labor, maint costs, someone would own them.

The economy would shift, but theres always 3 classes of people/jobs.

Not sure why you arent getting this

[Vteckidd]

Why would they have to cost money. In this scenario, energy is free (renewable) and the robots, powered by this free renewable energy can provide and maintain the basic necessities of life for everyone in perpetuity. I guess my inability to craft a perfect hypothetical scenario is distracting you from understanding my underlying questions about labor itself so just answer this for me. Is it a moral/ethical imperative that everyone work or contribute to society in some similar way or is requiring labor to survive just a necessity of reality with no moral/ethical implications? Or in another way, should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

see Communism

[bu villain]

Wow I didn't think this would be so difficult. Please forget the hypothetical scenario and just answer this question:

Should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for their personal survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

[bu villain]

see Communism

Communism doesn't deal with a society where the labor cost of survival approaches 0.

[.blank cd]

The Second Renaissance

[David88vert]

Should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for their personal survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

We will always have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for their personal survival. People are not content to just have the necessities. If you were content with just the necessities, you could get a few acres of land in south GA, build you own house with the timber on the land, and grow your own crops. That, coupled with a little hunting and fishing, could get you by in life. There are some people that do just that and are content with that. The vast majority of us want more than that though, and will try to work harder to have the nicer things in life. In general, people don't want to just survive, they want to thrive.

You technically don't have to work to survive at all right now. You could commit a serious crime, and live off the system in prison, and survive there with no work required. If you don't want that, you could go to the soup kitchens and homeless shelters and survive without work. Or, you could live off government assistance, welfare, and food stamps, like plenty of people do, and never actually have a job.

[.blank cd]

If at some point in the future, let's say humanity has mastered robotics and renewable energy to the point that:

1) No human labor is required to produce and distribute enough food (including water) to feed every human
2) No human labor is required to maintain enough buildings/living space/basic utilities

In such a future, would you be okay with large portions of the population choosing not to do any paid work? What would the labor market look like and would you want to institute any laws to change it?

Is there anything left for humans to do? Could the majority of humans go out and do paid work?

[Vteckidd]

Wow I didn't think this would be so difficult. Please forget the hypothetical scenario and just answer this question:

Should we have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for their personal survival and does that hold true as the amount of labor necessary for survival approaches 0?

your scenario is moot.

The fact remains that there will be low skilled jobs > medium skilled jobs > Highly technical jobs. All that changes in your scenario is the TYPE of jobs those are.

your question doesnt make any sense. Thats why I cant answer it.

YES people have to work at or more than the absolute minimum for survival. What constitutes survival can change, but the principle doesnt. Amount of labor necessary for survival never approaches 0, economies change, skillsets change, education changes, but fundamentals of economy dont.

Again, SEE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.

We are far more educated and mechanized now than we were in the 1700s. But the main aspects of the economies havent changed. Poor, middle class, upper class.

[David88vert]

Is there anything left for humans to do? Could the majority of humans go out and do paid work?

No, we will all be confined and forced to discuss politics all day on internet forums.
Oh, crap.

[.blank cd]

No, we will all be confined and forced to discuss politics all day on internet forums.
Oh, crap.

I've already mentioned that I'm not paid enough to be on here

[Vteckidd]

FYI Labor is what is exchanged for goods and services, money is just the vehicle to measure your labor with. So there will always be a class of people who will work at or near the minimum for survival.

[David88vert]

I've already mentioned that I'm not paid enough to be on here

What? You're getting paid??? Now I see why you want minimum wage raise - you just want a pay increase!

On another note - is the robot that is bringing your food to you running Windows 4,569,489? I know that it can't be running Windows 7 or 8.

[Sinfix_15]

If at some point in the future, let's say humanity has mastered robotics and renewable energy to the point that:

1) No human labor is required to produce and distribute enough food (including water) to feed every human
2) No human labor is required to maintain enough buildings/living space/basic utilities

In such a future, would you be okay with large portions of the population choosing not to do any paid work? What would the labor market look like and would you want to institute any laws to change it?

It's already happening today. At my place of employment, we're already replacing people with robots. I think in the short term it's going to have a negative effect on the job numbers, but in the long run people will adapt. They will have no choice but to do so. It could be a good thing in terms of quality of life for everyone. Maybe the absence of labor based jobs will force people to focus on providing services.

Do we need any laws to prepare for it???? God no........ whatever the future brings.... the government will most certainly fuck it up. If anything, we need less laws.

[.blank cd]

Y'all scared him off. Now he'll never answer my question

[Vteckidd]

SEE WALL-E

[.blank cd]

Watch "The Second Renaissance, pt1"

[David88vert]

SEE WALL-E

Watch "The Second Renaissance, pt1"

...because cartoons are the answer to all serious economic questions.....

[David88vert]

It's already happening today. At my place of employment, we're already replacing people with robots. I think in the short term it's going to have a negative effect on the job numbers, but in the long run people will adapt. They will have no choice but to do so. It could be a good thing in terms of quality of life for everyone. Maybe the absence of labor based jobs will force people to focus on providing services.

Do we need any laws to prepare for it???? God no........ whatever the future brings.... the government will most certainly fuck it up. If anything, we need less laws.

So, what happens when all the guns are made by robots, and are then designed by the robots to only be usable by the robots?

[Sinfix_15]

zomg the machines are taking are jobs!!! the world is coming to an end!!!!..... What are we ever gonna do!?!?!?!?!?!



Probably the same thing we've been doing for the last 100 years of machines taking our jobs.

[Sinfix_15]

So, what happens when all the guns are made by robots, and are then designed by the robots to only be usable by the robots?

Easy!!....

We steal one of the robots, program it to be on our side, send him back in time to kill the person who invented robots and protect the person who figured out how to program a robot to go back in time.

[David88vert]

Easy!!....

We steal one of the robots, program it to be on our side, send him back in time to kill the person who invented robots and protect the person who figured out how to program a robot to go back in time.

Monkey wrench time! The robots have to invent the time machine, because we will be to busy sipping on our "Big and Large" drinks!

[bu villain]

your scenario is moot.

The fact remains that there will be low skilled jobs > medium skilled jobs > Highly technical jobs. All that changes in your scenario is the TYPE of jobs those are.

your question doesnt make any sense. Thats why I cant answer it.

YES people have to work at or more than the absolute minimum for survival. What constitutes survival can change, but the principle doesnt. Amount of labor necessary for survival never approaches 0, economies change, skillsets change, education changes, but fundamentals of economy dont.

Again, SEE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION.

We are far more educated and mechanized now than we were in the 1700s. But the main aspects of the economies havent changed. Poor, middle class, upper class.

I really don't know how else to say it. Is work good in and of itself or is it just a necessity with no moral implication?

Is there anything left for humans to do? Could the majority of humans go out and do paid work?

Sure, humans could still do whatever they wanted and charge money just as they do now. The only difference is that basic necessities for everyone is not a concern for anyone. People could use their time to pursue whatever they wanted be it playing video games, starting a business, studying science, etc.

We will always have a system that requires people to work more than the absolute minimum necessary for their personal survival. People are not content to just have the necessities. If you were content with just the necessities, you could get a few acres of land in south GA, build you own house with the timber on the land, and grow your own crops. That, coupled with a little hunting and fishing, could get you by in life. There are some people that do just that and are content with that. The vast majority of us want more than that though, and will try to work harder to have the nicer things in life. In general, people don't want to just survive, they want to thrive.

You technically don't have to work to survive at all right now. You could commit a serious crime, and live off the system in prison, and survive there with no work required. If you don't want that, you could go to the soup kitchens and homeless shelters and survive without work. Or, you could live off government assistance, welfare, and food stamps, like plenty of people do, and never actually have a job.

Yes people who want more than the basic necessities would be free to pursue that. They could start businesses, charge for their product/services etc. Your statement about living on a piece of land in south GA is getting close to what I am getting at, except the house would already be built and the robots would do the farm work for you. If everyone in the world lived such a life, do you see anything wrong with that?

[Sinfix_15]

Monkey wrench time! The robots have to invent the time machine, because we will be to busy sipping on our "Big and Large" drinks!

No doubt the robots will also send someone back in time to thwart our plan. They'll probably have a more advanced robot too, but our robot will ultimately win the fight because we will program it to be a "goddamn american". It will ride motorcycles, shoot shotguns and be able to fist fight.

[Vteckidd]

So, what happens when all the guns are made by robots, and are then designed by the robots to only be usable by the robots?

[Sinfix_15]

I really don't know how else to say it. Is work good in and of itself or is it just a necessity with no moral implication?



Sure, humans could still do whatever they wanted and charge money just as they do now. The only difference is that basic necessities for everyone is not a concern for anyone. People could use their time to pursue whatever they wanted be it playing video games, starting a business, studying science, etc.



Yes people who want more than the basic necessities would be free to pursue that. They could start businesses, charge for their product/services etc. Your statement about living on a piece of land in south GA is getting close to what I am getting at, except the house would already be built and the robots would do the farm work for you. If everyone in the world lived such a life, do you see anything wrong with that?

who creates the need to work for monetary compensation????????????

[Vteckidd]

Is work good in and of itself or is it just a necessity with no moral implication?

Yes, unless you can come up with some other way to measure the cost of goods and services.

See UTILITY

[Vteckidd]

except the house would already be built and the robots would do the farm work for you. If everyone in the world lived such a life, do you see anything wrong with that?

[David88vert]

Yes people who want more than the basic necessities would be free to pursue that. They could start businesses, charge for their product/services etc. Your statement about living on a piece of land in south GA is getting close to what I am getting at, except the house would already be built and the robots would do the farm work for you. If everyone in the world lived such a life, do you see anything wrong with that?

Like I said, you could get yourself thrown in prison, and all of your necessities would be provided for you, and you wouldn't have to work at all.
Or you could move to the ghetto and get on government assistance and not have to work for necessities.
Benefits.gov - Your Path to Government Benefits

[Sinfix_15]

Maybe in the future when labor is no longer needed, we will focus our efforts towards medical care, preservation of life, space travel.................

The people not educated enough to do those things can be strippers, maids, chefs, masseuse....



The question is, how can we make sure the united states gets there first???? oooooo........... i have an idea, lets take money from the people who are the driving force of economic progress and give it to bums who sit at home smoking weed all day!