They aren't even talking about Capitalism. They're talking about Cronyism.
If labor's value is decreased and capital's value is amplified, it eventually leads to a feedback loop where capital easily begets more capital, the very nature of cronyism.
Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
51–60 of 174 posts
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative to capitalism that isn't communism, or some dilute form of communism. We have socialism - the erosion of capitalism to provide a reward for those that won't or can't work. What's your "new possibility"? Without a proposal, your point is moot.
I would say that a "new possibility" would be acknowledging that a 100% capitalist society (whatever that would look like) is about as sensible as a 100% socialist society. I don't want to buy food from a state controlled organisation because they'd be crap at it. However, I'm not keen on healthcare being provisioned individually and privately or relying entirely on the market for policing or national security.
That's the "dilute form of communism" I was referring to. Socialism is not a "new possibility."
I concede, though, that nationalised health and defence has major benefits.
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is assuming that capitalism is the only way to get this kind of efficiency. In fact, it's the only way we could both imagine and successfully implement, but that's it. On the other hand, we now know the limits of it, the corruption it brings, and that's a certitude. So an intelligent and educated reaction is not to say "if you want result you need a self corrupting system" but rather "we like this abundance, and…
Power brings corruption. The kind of state power brought by communism brought the worst corruption the world has ever seen.
..whereas the more balanced mix of socialism/capitalism in top eu countries make you seem like a 3d world country. The power brings corruption argument works on the premise of small local business.
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#54Without capitalist advancement, prices would rise at a frightening rate. Decide what you want - fully stocked supermarket shelves thanks to capitalist efficiency. Or rationing, shortages and civil unrest thanks to government intervention in the markets and the dissolution of business.
Considering how deeply this community has internalized the importance of creative thought your analysis is pretty limiting to any new possibility being possible.
How? Free market capitalism is the epitome of creative thought.
It's not a limiting doctrine that says you can only do this or that. It's a doctrine that says you are free to engage with others however you want so long as you respect their autonomy and freedom to make their own decisions.
If someone wants to start a voluntary socialist commune, they have the freedom to do so within a free market. Unfortunately for aspiring socialists, most people don't voluntarily want to adopt socialism (at least beyond a particular point) and socialists must then turn to force and coercion in order to enact their preferred style of society. Ignoring the emergent orders that arise from a free society of creative individuals is the truly limiting mode of thinking. (Note: I just used socialism as an example. You could substitute any style of governance that doesn't respect individual autonomy.)
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#55With all due respect to Stephen Hawking, whose expertise in theoretical physics is undoubted, how would he be in a position to "confirm" this?
Extrapolate from current trends and the general apathy of the people who could change them. Is there anything you are aware of that would prevent it, other than "it might not happen, for some reason"?
Basic economics and history? Common sense?
In the 1930s US almost all the jobs were in agriculture. Then robots took those jobs. Happened all at once, which hurt, but then what happened?
Picture the future as a few dozen capitalist overlords who own all the robots selling each other robotic goods and services (because no one else has the means, right?). Where's their value add? What's everyone else going to do? Sit on their hands and wait to starve to death?
Every year something like 10% of jobs (IIRC) disappear and are replaced by other, different jobs. That's a trend we can extropalate and economists do. The projected impact of 'robots taking our jobs' is (again, IIRC) single digits per annum.
Of course it's possible to argue that the rise of the machines or the on rushing singularity make it impossible to reason about this with any certainty, but then that applies to Dr Hawking as well, no matter how much smarter than the average bear he is.
The optimistic view is that automation will liberate humanity from all forms of drudge labour and eventually usher in a post scarcity society. This also arises simply from extrapolating current trends. Not that long ago the bulk of humanity was grubbing around in the dirt trying not to get killed by bears or die of disease. The proportion of the population for whom this an everyday reality gets thankfully smaller every decade. The long term trend of human history is that things consistently get better, usually because of technology. Why should that change?
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#56World Bank estimates that global poverty fell to less than 10% for the first time in history [0]. Perhaps this wasn't solely caused by capitalism and globalization, but considering those two idea were probably the driving forces of the last century, I believe they are instrumental in reducing global poverty.
I just don't buy the argument that absolute livings standards have always been increasing due to capitalism but eventually when we get to a certain point it will all turn into disaster. That's similar to the argument that luddites have always made and they have always been wrong.
[0] http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/10/04/wo...
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#57Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering how deeply this community has internalized the importance of creative thought your analysis is pretty limiting to any new possibility being possible.
I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative to capitalism that isn't communism, or some dilute form of communism. We have socialism - the erosion of capitalism to provide a reward for those that won't or can't work. What's your "new possibility"? Without a proposal, your point is moot.
We already live in a form of communism: "But in fact communism really just means any situation where people act according to the principle of “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs” — which is the way pretty much everyone always act if they are working together to get something done. If two people are fixing a pipe and one says “hand me the wrench,” the other doesn’t say, “and what do I get for it?”(That is, if they actually want it to be fixed.) This is true even if they happen to be employed by Bechtel or Citigroup. ... Communism then is already here. The question is how to further democratize it. Capitalism, in turn, is just one possible way of managing communism — and, it has become increasingly clear, rather a disastrous one." (http://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/david-graeber-hope-in...)
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Considering how deeply this community has internalized the importance of creative thought your analysis is pretty limiting to any new possibility being possible.
I'm still waiting for someone to come up with an alternative to capitalism that isn't communism, or some dilute form of communism. We have socialism - the erosion of capitalism to provide a reward for those that won't or can't work. What's your "new possibility"? Without a proposal, your point is moot.
I'd be happy with socialism if it meant fewer pointless jobs filled by employees that don't want to do them. I see this as a major problem with our current system.
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. When you start with ridiculous premises, you're going to reach ridiculous conclusions.
It's only ridiculous because you think in absolutes. To a large extent this has already happened.
Exactly. As a demonstration, compare our current production situation to the production situation as of, I don't know, a thousand years ago. It used to be the case that 90% or more of the population was dedicated to food production. Right now, something like 2% of the population is dedicated to food production. By their standards, we've got machines producing everything we need.
Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots
#60With all due respect to Stephen Hawking, whose expertise in theoretical physics is undoubted, how would he be in a position to "confirm" this?
He's in his "telling other fields they're wrong about everything phrase"