Jobs guarantee with income support in response to technological unemployment?

Rodger

Ad Honorem
Jun 2014
6,171
US
I do worry about automation and people losing jobs because of it, because I do believe that work is good for the soul. The problem is, many people today have grown accustomed to not working and certainly not working hard. So, how many people are jumping at a job to pump gas? Especially if the wage is set by the market. I was at my local supermarket yesterday. They still had the same sign up at the deli which has been there for weeks: hiring for the deli at $10/hour. The cost of living for my area is quite low. A good entry job perhaps. Are you going to pay $20 for somebody to run a slicer? Then what will be the cost of your deli meats and cheese? I am not sure how many would do it for $20/hour.
It probably doesn't help in this instantaneous society, often void of courtesy, that customers today are so demanding and rude. I'll admit I don't like to wait for customer service much today, something I had no problem doing years ago. I don't know if this is a function of my transition into the instantaneous era or one of chronological age, or both.:) So who wants to pump gas when people are yelling at you and if you say anything back in this hyper sensitive society in which we live, you will be promptly fired and the owner will follow with the mandatory mea culpa, sincere or not.
 

GogLais

Ad Honorem
Sep 2013
5,489
Wirral
Lots of people are going to lose their jobs. Where is the money to support them supposed to come from? Even today they can't afford to pay all of the retirees. The average annual social security payment is $14,000 and falling. When social security was first conceived there were over 20 workers for every retiree. In 1960 there were 5.1 In 2007 there were 3. In 2017 there were 2.8. What happens when the AI revolution dumps even more non-productive mouths on the government teat?

Boomers Are Facing A Financial Crisis | RIA
In the automation scenario the declining number of workers is replaced by robots and other forms of automation. Companies will only automate if it makes their product cheaper, in a functioning market anyway. I entirely understand that there’s a redistribution of income issue to address but society should in theory become wealthier as a result of automation.
 

Dan Howard

Ad Honorem
Aug 2014
5,000
Australia
In the automation scenario the declining number of workers is replaced by robots and other forms of automation. Companies will only automate if it makes their product cheaper, in a functioning market anyway. I entirely understand that there’s a redistribution of income issue to address but society should in theory become wealthier as a result of automation.
Society will become wealthier but that wealth will not be equally distributed. If the company owner becomes a billionaire and his workforce of a hundred all lose their jobs and become broke, on average they are all multi-millionaires. The wealth discrepancy is going to cause major conflict in the medium term. It is beginning right now. What emerges after the fire should be pretty neat if we don't destroy the planet in the process.
 
Last edited:

GogLais

Ad Honorem
Sep 2013
5,489
Wirral
Except that the wealth will not be equally distributed. If one person becomes a billionaire and a hundred more become dead broke, on average they are all wealthy.
As I’ve said there would be a redistribution of income issue to address. There’s no point in having an entirely automated society if the public can’t afford to buy the products.
 
Mar 2019
106
Victoria, Australia
Just wondering but dan did not actually say that exactly. I assume then that Dan Howard edited his post?

Also GogLais, you could just have a money-less society. Society does not necessarily have to include money or some form of currency.
 

Dan Howard

Ad Honorem
Aug 2014
5,000
Australia
Yeah, I edited my post. Apologies

Wealth redistribution won't eventuate without an economic depression and serious social unrest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Synarix

GogLais

Ad Honorem
Sep 2013
5,489
Wirral
Just wondering but dan did not actually say that exactly. I assume then that Dan Howard edited his post?

Also GogLais, you could just have a money-less society. Society does not necessarily have to include money or some form of currency.
I think he has edited it, not that it matters, I don’t think it affects my reply. I suppose one can imagine some form of society where products and services are so cheap that they’re effectively free but that’s fantasy for now.
 
Mar 2019
106
Victoria, Australia
Yeah, I edited my post. Apologies
No worries, I was just wondering where the quote came from, that all.
Wealth distribution won't eventuate about without a major economic depression and serious social unrest.
Agreed. completely agreed.


Sorry, I'm just unusually... OCD?.... about my quotes. I think that they should always be taken as is, without any editing or difference.
 

Dan Howard

Ad Honorem
Aug 2014
5,000
Australia
The population problem is already fixing itself. Fertility rates decline as female education levels increase. Even in India the Fertility Rate has fallen below replacement rate. By the middle of this century the global population will have peaked (at around 9 billion) and afterwards it will sharply decline. This is going to exacerbate the aging demographic problem. If AI and robots aren't running things by then, there is going to be some major labour shortages.
 
Last edited:
Nov 2014
421
ph
The population problem is already fixing itself. Fertility rates decline as female education levels increase. Even in India the Fertility Rate has fallen below replacement rate. By the middle of this century the global population will have peaked (at around 9 billion) and afterwards it will sharply decline. This is going to exacerbate the aging demographic problem. If AI and robots aren't running things by then, there is going to be some major labour shortages.
What do you when the minimum IQ to get a good job goes up to 130 or so in a few years time?