Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots • Hacker News Board

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#121

Post by branchless » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:41 PM UTC

Overtonwindow wrote: post #118

"In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history, are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade. If you want to know where the masses are worse off, worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that." -Milton Friedman

"There's a sense in which all taxes are antagonistic to free enterprise – and yet we need taxes. ...So the question is, which are the least bad taxes? In my opinion the least bad tax is the property tax on the unimproved value of land, the Henry George argument of many, many years ago."

-Milton Friedman

This is the root of the problem.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#122

Post by AndrewUnmuted » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:43 PM UTC

mtbcoder wrote: post #115

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Industrial revolution resulted malnutrition and deterioration of absolute living standards. What? Capitalism did not create poverty or famine - it inherited it, and then swiftly solved it. The industrial revolution, if anything, obliterated it from the Western world. Compared to the centuries of pre-capitalist starvation, the living conditions of the poor in the early years of capitalism were the first chance the p…

Malnutrition, abysmal living standards, etc certainly have not been "swiftly solved" or obliterated. These are battles we are still facing today, even in Western societies.

The concepts of malnutrition and abysmal living standards, on their own, are proof to the contrary. Prior to the industrial revolution, most human beings faced these realities. Today, a tiny fraction of individuals deal with these issues.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#123

Post by SolaceQuantum » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:45 PM UTC

branchless wrote: post #116

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you actually read any muckrake pieces of that time? The industrial revolution brought about the redunancy of weavers who were skilled workers that were brought to poverty[1]. 1. http://webs.bcp.org/sites/vcleary/ModernWorldHistoryTextbook...

I think the main problem is workers lacked choice due to access to alternative means of employment due to land enclosure laws. Had they been able to choose between say farming and working 12 hour shifts in bad conditions they would have looked at the risk/reward. As it was the choice was work or starve. Wages are therefore set at subsistence levels rather than at the floor set by the alternative. Land enclosure creat…

Would that be a capitalistic move to suppress land prices?

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#124

Post by ArkyBeagle » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:47 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #100

bko wrote: post #56

World 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 bu…

>That's similar to the argument that luddites have always made and they have always been wrong. Industrial revolution resulted malnutrition and deterioration of absolute living standards. It took almost hundred years from the start of the industrial revolution before real wages started to grow. You can see it from the historical records. The height of enlisted men in Britain decreased. Luddites were mostly right. The…

The Industrial Revolution is a very large, complicated suite of changes. If we hold as a spectrum capitalism in one direction and mercantilism in the other direction, on a single line ( for simplicity's sake ) then most of the excesses attributed to capitalism begin to look more like mercantilism than actual capitalism.

People like Henry Frick just didn't know any better because it was all new.

Capitalism works well at eliminating production as a bottleneck. The rest is up to us. There's generally another bottleneck. Much of the 20th Century was about logistics.

But it's sort of dangerous to say that "capitalism was limited" - the thing that limits capitalism is economic busts. It's dangerous for two reasons. One, it's extremely hard to do at all, much less well, and two, you have to ask yourself if it ever actually was done to start with.

Peter Whybrow has a very good presentation on one of the CSPANs using Adam Smith as a yardstick for what may be wrong with capitalism today.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#125

Post by SolaceQuantum » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:48 PM UTC

AndrewUnmuted wrote: post #120

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you actually read any muckrake pieces of that time? The industrial revolution brought about the redunancy of weavers who were skilled workers that were brought to poverty[1]. 1. http://webs.bcp.org/sites/vcleary/ModernWorldHistoryTextbook...

Of course they were brought to poverty. They were obsoleted by technology. The link you provide proves my point readily: > Since population was increasing in Great Britain at the same time that landowners were enclosing common village lands, people from the countryside flocked to the towns and the new factories to get work. At the time, Europe's population was increasing 300% per century, whereas in prior eras the po…

Your claim is that capitalism solved poverty and didn't create any instances. I'm pointing to an instance where people became impoverished because they were rendered redundant from capitalism. That's all I'm saying. You seem to be arguing against something that isn't my point.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#126

Post by alanwatts » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:49 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #114

dmichulke wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In parent's defense, I believe that needs are endless and there is always a tiny motion that can be rationalized away or a shiny item that can be obtained before the others get it (think iphone a decade back). Unless we reach the singularity, there will always be the need for something. And if you think of needs as something as abstract as "power over the universe" (which is still a limited resource, even after the s…

> a shiny item that can be obtained before the others get it > machines produce everything we need There's a difference between need and want . People want iPhones, but they don't need them, so they can decide themselves whether working more is worth it. On the other hand, people need food. The only choice is work or die, which isn't really a choice. There is an infinitely large jump between extremely cheap food and…

There already exists a renewable surplus of food, water, and shelter but so much of it goes wasted every year. So poverty is not a problem of production but of distribution.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#127

Post by ctlby » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:50 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #100

bko wrote: post #56

World 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 bu…

>That's similar to the argument that luddites have always made and they have always been wrong. Industrial revolution resulted malnutrition and deterioration of absolute living standards. It took almost hundred years from the start of the industrial revolution before real wages started to grow. You can see it from the historical records. The height of enlisted men in Britain decreased. Luddites were mostly right. The…

> It took almost hundred years from the start of the industrial revolution before real wages started to grow.

Even the most pessimistic view suggests that real wages grew, especially after the conclusion of the Napoleanic Wars. [1]

> The real benefits from industrialization were realized after hard political changes.

The real benefits of industrialization were immediately realized via mass production of widely desired and previously unobtainable goods. This should be clear from migratory patterns: workers abandoned the countryside en masse (in spite of city living/working conditions) for a reason. Enclosure laws were not a major factor until 1845.

> You don't create middle class from mid 18th century society.

Of course you do. The rise of the managerial and professional classes is a direct consequence of the Industrial Revolution.

[1] http://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/users/Allen/unpublished/pessimi...

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#128

Post by ArkyBeagle » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:55 PM UTC

warfangle wrote: post #64

asift wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 as…

There sure was a whole lot of force and coercion behind social security.

We adjusted to it and I don't know anybody who makes a coherent case for it not making everyone better off, so long as we can figure out the accounting for the temporary, "pig in the python" problem looming.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#129

Post by ArkyBeagle » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:57 PM UTC

forgottenpass wrote: post #99

arbuge wrote: post #2

With all due respect to Stephen Hawking, whose expertise in theoretical physics is undoubted, how would he be in a position to "confirm" this?

With all due respect to Stephen Hawking, whose expertise in theoretical physics is undoubted, how would he be in a position to "confirm" this? Yeah, the physicist is out of his depth on capitalism. Just ask the forum full of computer nerds and wantrepreneurs!

There is no "g" - general intelligence. We all have to watch this.

Re: Stephen Hawking confirms: The problem is Capitalism, not robots

#130

Post by alanwatts » Tue, Mar 01, 2016, 2:58 PM UTC

asift wrote: post #69

johanneskanybal wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only ridiculous because you think in absolutes. To a large extent this has already happened.

To think in absolutes would be to believe that human desires are finite. Even if I'm 100% materially comfortable in life (an unlikely occurrence given our ever increasing standards), I'm going to desire forms of consumption that can only come from human interaction.

If you're 100% materially comfortable in your life you would have increased freedom for human interaction. As it stands now we spend more time at work than we do with family or friends.