Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 576 posts

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#121

Post by hermitdev »

The author lost my interest after stating 6% unemployment is good without even mentioning the Labor Participation Rate. It would be if the Labor Participation Rate [1] hadn't fallen as much as it has. The US economy has lost 3.2M jobs since Jan 2006 thru Oct 2016.

tl;dr The unemployment rate is falling because people are losing their benefits and falling out of the labor force, and no longer being counted as unemployed.

[1] http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

(editted for grammar)

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#122

Post by jsmith0295 »

wott wrote: post #71
wildmusings wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm unemployed and I really don't think I have any duties to work in fast food or to deliver pizza because I must contribute. If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will. I think it's a great thing to be able to live a frugal life and still be healthy enough. Why do you think that you should have the right to live off of other people's work? Welfare checks aren't fairy money, they're money that ca…

For example, because half of other people's work is bullshit. Or because a third of other people's work output is used to take them from home to work. Or because the amount on the paycheck is totally unrelated to the value a worker produces. Or because a quarter of other people's work is not about creating value, but about destroying it and driving all of us always faster towards a catastrophe. In short, because most…

So why not try and fix the mismatch between the paycheck and the value produced by the worker rather than just abandoning the idea of producing any value at all? Even if someone is paid 10% of what they produce, I'd rather have them doing that for 40 hours a week than doing nothing and collecting a welfare check.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#123

Post by aianus »

PrimalDual wrote: post #115
wildmusings wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm unemployed and I really don't think I have any duties to work in fast food or to deliver pizza because I must contribute. If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will. I think it's a great thing to be able to live a frugal life and still be healthy enough. Why do you think that you should have the right to live off of other people's work? Welfare checks aren't fairy money, they're money that ca…

So right now it comes from other people's paycheck but does it have to? Why don't rich countries like the US, Switzerland or Japan not print money to cover their spending? Inflation is not the problem it used to be and I actually think it's a much better measure of the economy's capacity than unemployment. Would inflation of 4% be that bad for the public and financial system anyways? In the US at least I strongly opp…

The rich are even more capable of evading inflation than they are evading taxes. I'm sure Warren Buffet has proportionally less of his money in cash than I do.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#124

Post by mixedCase »

PrimalDual wrote: post #115
wildmusings wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm unemployed and I really don't think I have any duties to work in fast food or to deliver pizza because I must contribute. If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will. I think it's a great thing to be able to live a frugal life and still be healthy enough. Why do you think that you should have the right to live off of other people's work? Welfare checks aren't fairy money, they're money that ca…

So right now it comes from other people's paycheck but does it have to? Why don't rich countries like the US, Switzerland or Japan not print money to cover their spending? Inflation is not the problem it used to be and I actually think it's a much better measure of the economy's capacity than unemployment. Would inflation of 4% be that bad for the public and financial system anyways? In the US at least I strongly opp…

Because if you continue printing money the inflation doesn't stop growing at some point. This is Econ 101.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#125

Post by BurningFrog »

thesagan wrote: post #50
cperciva wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"This is economics 101" is exactly the problem: we're dealing with an economic system that isn't working. Questioning economics 101 is precisely what's needed, and I'd argue that while your arguments are sound, they've been treated as absolutes, which they're not. This makes as much sense as saying "You say that my magical spacecraft won't work due to the laws of physics, but physics is exactly the problem: We can't…

Begging the question; economics is not a physical science where you can run A/B tests on an economy and find results. It's a social study, mostly. As someone who studied it for years , institutionally and on my own, I can tell you that economists do not agree on any basic laws except that people have a long list of wants and that not all of them can be satisfied. Many economists are questioning their 101s lately. Loo…

> economics is not a physical science where you can run A/B tests on an economy and find results

The is broadly true of Macro Economics. This might even be impossible as a science, since the object of study (world economy and markets) is aware of its findings, and adapts around them.

Micro Economics, or "Price Theory" as it maybe should be called, is OTOH a very powerful science that gives deep and counter intuitive insights into how the world works.

It is also largely ignore by decision makers :)

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#126

Post by sqeaky »

nico_h wrote: post #116
sqeaky wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you build a system that is stable where an individual is expected to leave some personal gain on the table? That runs entirely counter to human nature. If you can solve that you may have something workable, but without it "Nonsense" is as good a word as any.

a) is this worse than the current system? b) Is it really human nature? This is what social norms are for. Slavery is for now still mostly frowned upon, and in some circles even racism is. Even though using either usually results in huge personnal gains for some.

Slavery is a great example to work with. It has been made so costly to own slaves that no one in the western world can or wants to do it. In most areas just the social of ramifications of attempting to acquire slaves will cause all your customers to leave and employers to fire you. Then if you somehow do get a few slaves law enforcement or military agencies will try to stop you. Since they generally enforce their monopoly on violence they will probably succeed at stopping you.

Only in the places most removed from these incentives do we see slavery. Look at North Korea, much of the population can be seen as slaves (The subsistence farmers for example). The costs of keeping the slaves can be thought of as the cost of running their propaganda machine, arming their military, controlling the border and the loss in relations with the rest of the world. As long the leaders fail to gain a sense of compassion then the only thing that matters to them is their slaves make more than they cost.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#128

Post by swift »

gf263 wrote: post #73
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"work sets you free" As a side note, recently there's been a drive to not normalize fascist slogans or ideas in mainstream politics. Among those, "arbeit macht frei" is a particularly offensive one, since it was written on the gates of Auschwitz. Just saying. When someone quotes this kind of phrase to us, we should remind them where they got it from and refuse to treat it as normal. >I'm unemployed and I really don'…

They're just words, no?

No; they're a set of ideas and connotations existing in a historical and cultural context. What distinguishes words from mere sequences of letters is meaning.

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#129

Post by nico_h »

visarga wrote: post #76

Today most people work for companies they don't own. In the future, the unemployed will become self employed and work directly to support themselves. Some have land, and can cultivate food. Others can make furniture, or give medical consultations, or teach children. Even owning a small solar farm could be a source of income. All of them were formerly professionals, now jobless and moneyless. So they have to work dire…

Rule #1 : Anything that can be economically automated will be.

Corollary: Anything that is automated is not economically sensible for a human to do.

- Freelancing and consulting gigs have huge overhead.

- Uber drivers (for now) own the car but don't make most of the money. And they will be made redundant by self driving cars.

- Medical services have the most overhead and require years of expensive training.

- Making artisanal furniture might feed one or two person per town, but that's no way to feed a family.

- Farming is also getting automated in vertical greenhouses.

If you have health problem, or cannot make something with your hands or your brain _that people are willing to exchange enough money for_, should you be left out to die?

Re: What if jobs are not the solution but the problem?

#130

Post by thesagan »

BurningFrog wrote: post #125
thesagan wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Begging the question; economics is not a physical science where you can run A/B tests on an economy and find results. It's a social study, mostly. As someone who studied it for years , institutionally and on my own, I can tell you that economists do not agree on any basic laws except that people have a long list of wants and that not all of them can be satisfied. Many economists are questioning their 101s lately. Loo…

> economics is not a physical science where you can run A/B tests on an economy and find results The is broadly true of Macro Economics. This might even be impossible as a science, since the object of study (world economy and markets) is aware of its findings, and adapts around them. Micro Economics, or "Price Theory" as it maybe should be called, is OTOH a very powerful science that gives deep and counter intuitive…

I love you. :)

Seriously, though, your econ mind is on the same track as mine. "Economics" is a pretty broad brush, and it's difficult engaging in meaningful discussion.

You make a great point: The "economic system" is conscious and reacts/adapts to internal and external changes, which changes the rules, and the meta rules, and the meta meta meta....

Post reply on HN