Europeans considering universal basic income and job guarantees

[bilby]

Not a typo. 7 people.

And thousands to drive trucks with these waffles around. Plus don't forget people who manufacture these machines.
In any case, the number I heard was 1% of the people actually produce the food (farmers) and then 10% work in processing and distribution.
Japan has a plan to have no farmers at all.
Speaking of documentaries, I saw about cotton in US, where situation is similar - tiny amount of people actually involved in that but then it gets shipped to Indonesia and then to Bangladesh with their slavery system to make t-shirts which get shipped back to US and gets thrown after a one wear by some people.

Automated vehicles are going to be the norm in the very near future.

Essentially all the jobs you can imagine where people actually manipulate or move objects are going to vanish.

Most of the rest probably aren't necessary in the first place.

Humans really don't need to work much at all - except to avoid starvation in a society that was built on the (now false) principle that labour was essential for production.

Having machines do all the work is a good thing. But we must restructure society so that this doesn't only benefit those who own automated factories.

Otherwise you end up with a neo-feudal world, where the aristocracy own everything, and the peasants can starve as long as they do it out of sight. Indeed, as the new lords and masters don't even need peasants to till the soil, the new system has no limits on its owners' depravity and neglect of the commoners.

 

[bilby]

In any case, the number I heard was 1% of the people actually produce the food (farmers) and then 10% work in processing and distribution.

Don't forget the people who make the tractors, fuel, pesticides, and fertilizers.

Yeah, the factories making those things can easily provide employment for dozens.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I saw a doco the other day about a factory in the UK that makes frozen potato waffles.

It produces a million waffles a day, enough for the entire UK market, plus significant exports (particularly to Ireland).

The factory has a staff of seven.

Not a typo. 7 people.

Almost every imaginable product could be manufactured with this level of automation. And soon will be.

In a world where seven workers can make a million waffles every single day, the idea that working is noble, necessary, and virtuous is insane.

Everyone can be a freeloader. And the only entities with the right to be upset that they are working hard while others don't have to are the machines.

The biggest barrier to the even more rapid and widespread automation of production of everything is the need for work to avoid starvation, which is a consequence of stupid moralising; And the availability of stupidly cheap labour, which is a consequence of that consequence.

But how many people make the equipment that runs the factory. What's happening is that jobs are moving from direct production to the production of the means of production.

 

[Jarhyn]

I saw a doco the other day about a factory in the UK that makes frozen potato waffles.

It produces a million waffles a day, enough for the entire UK market, plus significant exports (particularly to Ireland).

The factory has a staff of seven.

Not a typo. 7 people.

Almost every imaginable product could be manufactured with this level of automation. And soon will be.

In a world where seven workers can make a million waffles every single day, the idea that working is noble, necessary, and virtuous is insane.

Everyone can be a freeloader. And the only entities with the right to be upset that they are working hard while others don't have to are the machines.

The biggest barrier to the even more rapid and widespread automation of production of everything is the need for work to avoid starvation, which is a consequence of stupid moralising; And the availability of stupidly cheap labour, which is a consequence of that consequence.

But how many people make the equipment that runs the factory. What's happening is that jobs are moving from direct production to the production of the means of production.

...And there are nowhere near as many of them...

 

[Wiploc]

Having machines do all the work is a good thing. But we must restructure society so that this doesn't only benefit those who own automated factories.

Otherwise you end up with a neo-feudal world, where the aristocracy own everything, and the peasants can starve as long as they do it out of sight. Indeed, as the new lords and masters don't even need peasants to till the soil, the new system has no limits on its owners' depravity and neglect of the commoners.

Bingo!

 

[Wiploc]

1) I don't think we can afford UBI yet.

(1) I have no strong opinions about.

I don't understand #1 at all.

 

[Jarhyn]

Not a typo. 7 people.

And thousands to drive trucks with these waffles around. Plus don't forget people who manufacture these machines.
In any case, the number I heard was 1% of the people actually produce the food (farmers) and then 10% work in processing and distribution.
Japan has a plan to have no farmers at all.
Speaking of documentaries, I saw about cotton in US, where situation is similar - tiny amount of people actually involved in that but then it gets shipped to Indonesia and then to Bangladesh with their slavery system to make t-shirts which get shipped back to US and gets thrown after a one wear by some people.

Automated vehicles are going to be the norm in the very near future.

Essentially all the jobs you can imagine where people actually manipulate or move objects are going to vanish.

Most of the rest probably aren't necessary in the first place.

Humans really don't need to work much at all - except to avoid starvation in a society that was built on the (now false) principle that labour was essential for production.

Having machines do all the work is a good thing. But we must restructure society so that this doesn't only benefit those who own automated factories.

Otherwise you end up with a neo-feudal world, where the aristocracy own everything, and the peasants can starve as long as they do it out of sight. Indeed, as the new lords and masters don't even need peasants to till the soil, the new system has no limits on its owners' depravity and neglect of the commoners.

I think a bigger problem here is going to be ennui: I know for a fact that without some way to contribute to the society of people that I would probably kill myself in short order.

Then, hopefully by that point there will be frontiers on which we can grow and expand and still need the meaningful work of people.

 

[DBT]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

 

[Jarhyn]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

I don't really think so. Have you ever TRIED being lazy for more than a month or two?

When I lost my last job, I was unemployed for about two months. I was absolutely comfortable money wise for most of that time, but I was absolutely feeling that ennui.

People need something to reach for.

I could not even in fact, be happy spending the rest of my life seeking a more complete education and understanding of the universe if I couldn't find a role also teaching what I have learned... Though eventually even this probably will be denied us via automations.

 

[DBT]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

I don't really think so. Have you ever TRIED being lazy for more than a month or two?

When I lost my last job, I was unemployed for about two months. I was absolutely comfortable money wise for most of that time, but I was absolutely feeling that ennui.

People need something to reach for.

I could not even in fact, be happy spending the rest of my life seeking a more complete education and understanding of the universe if I couldn't find a role also teaching what I have learned... Though eventually even this probably will be denied us via automations.

Perhaps something along the line of 'mens shed' would fill the need, learn new skills, arts, crafts, hobbies, sports, survivalist training/excursions, camping, hunting, fishing....?

 

[Jarhyn]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

I don't really think so. Have you ever TRIED being lazy for more than a month or two?

When I lost my last job, I was unemployed for about two months. I was absolutely comfortable money wise for most of that time, but I was absolutely feeling that ennui.

People need something to reach for.

I could not even in fact, be happy spending the rest of my life seeking a more complete education and understanding of the universe if I couldn't find a role also teaching what I have learned... Though eventually even this probably will be denied us via automations.

Perhaps something along the line of 'mens shed' would fill the need, learn new skills, arts, crafts, hobbies, sports, survivalist training/excursions, camping, hunting, fishing....?

The thing I like doing is making and programming machines that automate things.

 

[Angry Floof]

Perhaps something along the line of 'mens shed' would fill the need, learn new skills, arts, crafts, hobbies, sports, survivalist training/excursions, camping, hunting, fishing....?

The thing I like doing is making and programming machines that automate things.

A "new age" (hehe) of human creativity and global problem solving could possibly be on the horizon. I know there's a lot of right wing authoritarian morons in the world whose testicles shrivel at the thought of people everywhere (who are not like them) doing better overall in terms of peace and prosperity, so who knows? We could also be on the edge of a new dark age. I mean, we see clearly how savagely they will fight to avoid helping people outside of their in-group. That's powerful animal brain hate mojo. Just because it's rooted in stupidity and fear doesn't mean it's not effective in getting its way. I'm cautiously optimistic that younger generations have the power to make the jump from tribalist, aggressive baboon cultures to a humanity that is effectively adapting to a tribe of seven billion plus. That old patriarchal tribalism is just not sustainable. People are literally fighting to maintain a hateful, conflicted world.

 

[Angry Floof]

Well, Trae Crowder just announced a doc he's been working on called "Inherent Good," which is about UBI. Screenings start this weekend.Here's the trailer.

[FBVIDEO]https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1529626607210390[/FBVIDEO]

 

[rousseau]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

I don't really think so. Have you ever TRIED being lazy for more than a month or two?

When I lost my last job, I was unemployed for about two months. I was absolutely comfortable money wise for most of that time, but I was absolutely feeling that ennui.

People need something to reach for.

I could not even in fact, be happy spending the rest of my life seeking a more complete education and understanding of the universe if I couldn't find a role also teaching what I have learned... Though eventually even this probably will be denied us via automations.

I agree, but am not convinced that wide-scale automation is happening any time soon, even in vehicles. It will absolutely be, and is, a major factor, but to me it seems like what we've automated to date is mostly low-hanging fruit. Our software really isn't that good and a lot of the hype over automation is overblown by journalists with no technical background. Now give it 100, maybe 200 years and we're likely living in an entirely different world.

But if it ever gets to a point where most of us don't need to work it will definitely be a problem psychologically. I'd actually argue that to some extent it's already a problem - most of our household tasks are automated by appliances, we don't need to grow or produce food, we can buy a pre-made vehicle and travel anywhere.. etc. To survive in the modern economy one only needs a single, trivial skill, and then to do it repetitively throughout their career. It's better than doing literally nothing at all, but not by much.

 

[Angry Floof]

Bread and circuses? Could having one's physical needs met, and abundant entertainment be sufficient to keep the majority happy?

I don't really think so. Have you ever TRIED being lazy for more than a month or two?

When I lost my last job, I was unemployed for about two months. I was absolutely comfortable money wise for most of that time, but I was absolutely feeling that ennui.

People need something to reach for.

I could not even in fact, be happy spending the rest of my life seeking a more complete education and understanding of the universe if I couldn't find a role also teaching what I have learned... Though eventually even this probably will be denied us via automations.

I agree, but am not convinced that wide-scale automation is happening any time soon, even in vehicles. It will absolutely be, and is, a major factor, but to me it seems like what we've automated to date is mostly low-hanging fruit. Our software really isn't that good and a lot of the hype over automation is overblown by journalists with no technical background. Now give it 100, maybe 200 years and we're likely living in an entirely different world.

But if it ever gets to a point where most of us don't need to work it will definitely be a problem psychologically. I'd actually argue that to some extent it's already a problem - most of our household tasks are automated by appliances, we don't need to grow or produce food, we can buy a pre-made vehicle and travel anywhere.. etc. To survive in the modern economy one only needs a single, trivial skill, and then to do it repetitively throughout their career. It's better than doing literally nothing at all, but not by much.

What a slap in the face to millions of people who work their asses off just to meet their basic needs. What a lovely world you live in where everyone can afford all this automation and no one scrapes by.

 

[bilby]

I saw a doco the other day about a factory in the UK that makes frozen potato waffles.

It produces a million waffles a day, enough for the entire UK market, plus significant exports (particularly to Ireland).

The factory has a staff of seven.

Not a typo. 7 people.

Almost every imaginable product could be manufactured with this level of automation. And soon will be.

In a world where seven workers can make a million waffles every single day, the idea that working is noble, necessary, and virtuous is insane.

Everyone can be a freeloader. And the only entities with the right to be upset that they are working hard while others don't have to are the machines.

The biggest barrier to the even more rapid and widespread automation of production of everything is the need for work to avoid starvation, which is a consequence of stupid moralising; And the availability of stupidly cheap labour, which is a consequence of that consequence.

But how many people make the equipment that runs the factory. What's happening is that jobs are moving from direct production to the production of the means of production.

The equipment that runs the factory needs to be made once, replaced maybe every twenty or fifty years, and maintained perhaps every couple of months, by a guy who either maintains hundreds of factories, or does maintenance part of the time, and manufacturing of machines the rest. The total number of people required is an utterly minuscule fraction of the number who can be provided for by the output of the factories. And most of those need to be amongst the most intelligent of humans - because anything that can be done without much intelligent thought can be automated.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I saw a doco the other day about a factory in the UK that makes frozen potato waffles.

It produces a million waffles a day, enough for the entire UK market, plus significant exports (particularly to Ireland).

The factory has a staff of seven.

Not a typo. 7 people.

Almost every imaginable product could be manufactured with this level of automation. And soon will be.

In a world where seven workers can make a million waffles every single day, the idea that working is noble, necessary, and virtuous is insane.

Everyone can be a freeloader. And the only entities with the right to be upset that they are working hard while others don't have to are the machines.

The biggest barrier to the even more rapid and widespread automation of production of everything is the need for work to avoid starvation, which is a consequence of stupid moralising; And the availability of stupidly cheap labour, which is a consequence of that consequence.

But how many people make the equipment that runs the factory. What's happening is that jobs are moving from direct production to the production of the means of production.

The equipment that runs the factory needs to be made once, replaced maybe every twenty or fifty years, and maintained perhaps every couple of months, by a guy who either maintains hundreds of factories, or does maintenance part of the time, and manufacturing of machines the rest. The total number of people required is an utterly minuscule fraction of the number who can be provided for by the output of the factories. And most of those need to be amongst the most intelligent of humans - because anything that can be done without much intelligent thought can be automated.

I have worked full time for one company on making in-house systems--and I wasn't the only one in the company doing it, either.

 

[lpetrich]

THE FUTURE OF EMPLOYMENT: HOW SUSCEPTIBLE ARE JOBS TO COMPUTERISATION? - from 2013
By Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne at Oxford University

The authors estimated which jobs are the most vulnerable to automation and which jobs the least. They did that for 702 kinds of jobs by using the skills needed for each one, using the US Labor Department's O-NET data and its Standard Occupational Classification (SOC). They trained a "Gaussian process classifier" on a subset of 70 kinds of jobs, finding a success rate of 90%, and they then extrapolated back to the remaining 693 kinds of jobs.

They note that some things remain difficult:

• Perception and manipulation tasks: "Robots are still unable to match the depth and breadth of human perception. ... The main challenges to robotic computerisation, perception and manipulation, thus largely remain and are unlikely to be fully resolved in the next decade or two."
  • Finger Dexterity
  • Manual Dexterity
  • Cramped Work Space, Awkward Positions
• Creative intelligence tasks: "The psychological processes underlying human creativity are difficult to specify. ... In the absence of engineering solutions to overcome this problem, it seems unlikely that occupations requiring a high degree of creative intelligence will be automated in the next decades."
  • Originality
  • Fine Arts
• Social intelligence tasks: "Human social intelligence is important in a wide range of work tasks, such as those involving negotiation, persuasion and care. ... While algorithms and robots can now reproduce some aspects of human social interaction, the real-time recognition of natural human emotion remains a challenging problem, and the ability to respond intelligently to such inputs is even more difficult."
  • Social Perceptiveness
  • Negotiation
  • Persuasion
  • Assisting and Caring for Others

 

[lpetrich]

[TABLE="class: grid"]
[TR]
[TD]Risk[/TD]
[TD]Prob[/TD]
[TD]Frac[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Low[/TD]
[TD]0 - 0.3[/TD]
[TD]33%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Medium[/TD]
[TD]0.3 - 0.7[/TD]
[TD]19%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]High[/TD]
[TD]0.7 - 1[/TD]
[TD]47%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
The bimodal distribution that they found in ability to automate seems to me an artifact of their classifier algorithm.

To get a hint as to which parts of the economy are vulnerable, let us consider Sectors of the Economy - Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary

1. Primary. Extraction and harvesting of resources. Farming, mining, fishing, ...
2. Secondary. Manufacturing. Including construction and refining of metals and the like.
3. Tertiary. Services. Sales, transport, food preparation, entertainment, news media, tourism, finance, medicine, law, protection, religion, ...
4. Quaternary. Intellectual activity. Education, research, libraries, info tech, ...
5. Quinary. Leadership and management. Political, organizations, ...

The fourth is sometimes considered a subset of the third, and the fifth a subset of the fourth.

Understanding Capitalism Part V: Evolution of the American Economy
Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Employment in the U.S.

[TABLE="class: grid"]
[TR]
[TD]Year[/TD]
[TD]Farming[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1800[/TD]
[TD]74%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1840[/TD]
[TD]67%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1900[/TD]
[TD]36%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Approximately linear in between. From graph on male occupations in the first reference,

[TABLE="class: grid"]
[TR]
[TD]Year[/TD]
[TD]Primary[/TD]
[TD]Secondary[/TD]
[TD]Tertiary[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1900[/TD]
[TD]42%[/TD]
[TD]38%[/TD]
[TD]21%[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1988[/TD]
[TD]4%[/TD]
[TD]38%[/TD]
[TD]58%[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Primary declined almost linearly to 5% in 1970, then stayed close to stable. Secondary peaked in 1960 at 50%.

The second reference's numbers are similar, with similar trends.

I've found numbers for some other nations, and they also follow these trends. Fall of primary, rise and then stagnation or fall of secondary, rise of tertiary.

 

[lpetrich]

[TABLE="class: grid"]
[TR]
[TD]Sector
[/TD]
[TD]Automatability
[/TD]
[TD]What
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3, 5
[/TD]
[TD]Low, (High)
[/TD]
[TD]Management, Business, and Financial
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3, 4
[/TD]
[TD]Low
[/TD]
[TD]Computer, Engineering, and Science
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3, 4
[/TD]
[TD]Low
[/TD]
[TD]Education, Legal, Community Service, Arts, and Media
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]Low
[/TD]
[TD]Healthcare Practitioners and Technical
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD](Medium) - High
[/TD]
[TD]Service
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD](Low - Medium), High
[/TD]
[TD]Sales and Related
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD](Medium) - High
[/TD]
[TD]Office and Administrative Support
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1
[/TD]
[TD]High
[/TD]
[TD]Farming, Fishing, and Forestry
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]1, 2
[/TD]
[TD](Medium) - High
[/TD]
[TD]Construction and Extraction
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2, 3
[/TD]
[TD]Medium - (High)
[/TD]
[TD]Installation, Maintenance, and Repair
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2
[/TD]
[TD](Medium) - High
[/TD]
[TD]Production
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]3
[/TD]
[TD]Medium - High
[/TD]
[TD]Transportation and Material Moving
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

So sectors 1 (extraction) and 2 (manufacturing) are the most vulnerable, 3 (services) is moderately vulnerable, and 4 (intellectual) and 5 (leadership) are the least vulnerable. Sector 1 has already declined dramatically in industrialized nations, from most of the population to a few percent of the population, and sector 2 is following.