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

211–220 of 576 posts

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

#211

Post by knieveltech »

remir wrote: post #207
aidos wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you've take the uncharitable view of an implication that everyone is forced to work to fill up hours. Realistically there are loads of things that could be done to make the world a better place. Equally there are lots of people out of work. If someone can provide the funds to marry those things together, it's a win win. But who pays? Maybe Apple could go all philanthropic and depart with all that cash they're…

Bingo. It's not a work problem; there's so much work to do. The problem is who will pay and how much.

Oh really? Doing what, exactly?

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

#212

Post by cesarbs »

Another good read on the topic: http://newramblerreview.com/book-reviews/political-science/t...

I like this bit:

"the knowledge worker is under severe external constraints. Much of their work is assisted or mediated through information technology, which contributes to a de-skilling of their cognitive labor. And on top of this they are expected to fully invest themselves in their jobs in a way that manufacturing laborers never did: they must demonstrate commitment above and beyond their contracted work hours, and express constant satisfaction and happiness about their work. The whole thing is exhausting."

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

#213

Post by a3n »

nico_h wrote: post #184
a3n wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The big question is will the majority be able to maintain enough power to obtain income for those who aren't working, or will we see some kind of serious class warfare/starving populations? In the United States it will be the class warfare/starving thing. You don't deserve anything here unless you pay for it. Many people believe that taking unemployment compensation is shameful. I think a lot of us will be fed in p…

You mean made to work for insulting wages and subsistence in prison sweatshops. Prison population is a captive source of cheap labor, easily abused and exploited.

And they don't go home at night.

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

#214

Post by adentranter »

I feel there is another point we are not looking at which worries me.

The author connects work to our self-worth which I think is an important connection to be made. If our worth is defined by work completed/productivity and there is a lack of work, slowly it means there is going to be a rise of people with a lack of self-worth (And being unemployed means your at home alone alot more) Depression will come.

I worry that this trend of lack of work will begin to lead a rise in suicide due to a compounded effect of lack of self-worth/identity.

Unsure if this is a sound conclusion to draw, but it worries me.

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

#215

Post by msandford »

alexmingoia wrote: post #21
carsongross wrote: post #2

The essay suffers from Ted-talk disease: lots of grand gestures and bromides, not as much rigorous thinking. The underlying problem is an important one, however. A little-discussed solution to this problem is one I would like to see tried, distributism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism A book I am currently reading (and enjoying) on it is: https://www.amazon.com/Toward-Truly-Free-Market-Distributist...

> Under such a system, most people would be able to earn a living without having to rely on the use of the property of others to do so. Examples of people earning a living in this way would be farmers who own their own land and related machinery, plumbers who own their own tools, software developers who own their own computer Nonsense. Our abundance is increased by specialization not a lack of it. Specialization and…

Yes of course, specialization increases abundance. But if you read the given examples it wasn't suggested that farmers make their own diesel. But rather that they own their land and equipment. Same for plumbers, it's advocated that they own their own tools.

Basically it's lamenting the lack of small businesses. That's not really wrong either. Diversity in business ownership might not be maximally "efficient" in certain regards but I think most folks would prefer that there isn't just one farming conglomerate, one nationwide plumbing service, etc.

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

#216

Post by edblarney »

Animats wrote: post #79

We're there already. There are vast numbers of people who cannot make an economic contribution large enough to cover their costs. Education won't help. Teach a human how to do something, and you have one human who can do it. Teach a computer how to do something, and you can have as many computers as needed doing it. The US has already hit "peak school" in terms of economic benefit. About half of college graduates tak…

"Education won't help. Teach a human how to do something, and you have one human who can do it. Teach a computer how to do something, and you can have as many computers as needed doing it. "

This is pragmatically not true.

There are tons and tons of jobs that can't be done by computers.

The 'entertainment sector' was not even a part of the economy 100 years ago. Now it's a big chunk.

Think of how big sports are. That was all 'unpaid amateur' stuff before.

It's worth examining how much we ought to work and not, but we also should understand there will always be work to do.

Also - the industrial revolution had a far greater direct impact upon 'labour' than the computing revolution.

'Machines' could do the work of thousands of men - and the economic translation was direct - not 'soft' as we have with computers.

And yet what happened? Consumer surpluses found their way into the economy, and 'people did other stuff'.

Paradoxically - through the entire history of 'automation' unskilled labour has been getting more expensive, not less.

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

#217

Post by edblarney »

intopieces wrote: post #108
Animats wrote: post #79

We're there already. There are vast numbers of people who cannot make an economic contribution large enough to cover their costs. Education won't help. Teach a human how to do something, and you have one human who can do it. Teach a computer how to do something, and you can have as many computers as needed doing it. The US has already hit "peak school" in terms of economic benefit. About half of college graduates tak…

>About half of college graduates take jobs that don't really require a college education. Trade schools do even worse. Do you have a source for this statistic? Because there are some important questions about such a study that might clarify the true meaning of such a number. 1.) How many of the graduates employed in "jobs that don't really require a college education" move on to a job that does, how long does it take…

That 'college education' one is tough.

'Opening a restaurant' does not require a Uni education, but I'd rather the person be smarter, more educated, understand aesthetics, customers, finance etc. - and be college educated.

You don't need 'high school education' to do a lot of construction work, but I'd rather hire high school graduates.

There's a lot of intelligence that goes into many of these kinds of jobs. As people are smarter, the quality of the output goes up.

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

#218

Post by robryan »

rndmize wrote: post #162
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.

> That runs entirely counter to human nature. Not so. Tribal societies inherently function on everyone in the tribe working for the overall good rather than their individual gain. Socially, this is how we function by default - people will make sacrifices, extend loans, give gifts, and generally help out those close to them (family, friends, tribe members) without an expectation of something in return.

Yes, in small groups such as tribes. There is reciprocal altruism at play, where helping other members of the group can reasonably expected to be repaid in future, so it can be a win win.

In our modern world it is often going to be the case that you won't deal with the same people again, or the transaction is completed completely impersonally.

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

#219

Post by edblarney »

Practicality wrote: post #4

At this point I've already come to accept that fulltime labor for everyone is simply not going to happen. We just don't need it. The big question is will the majority be able to maintain enough power to obtain income for those who aren't working, or will we see some kind of serious class warfare/starving populations? This is a huge question in human history and it remains to be seen how we as a species are going to a…

"At this point I've already come to accept that fulltime labor for everyone is simply not going to happen. "

This is not true.

Total workforce participation grew radically through the last 100 years - esp. because the introduction of women into different jobs.

Demographics aside, we have really quite high participation rates - even after 200 years of automation.

Also - because of demographic changes, we're already at a stage of declining labour force participation (since 2000), and we already retire at '60-ish' and live another 30 years not doing a whole lot, but amassing massive healthcare bills.

So - people more than ever need to be 'gainfully and productively employed' while they can, in order to offset the fact they'll be hanging out for quite long time not creating direct value.

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

#220

Post by robryan »

knieveltech wrote: post #211
remir wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bingo. It's not a work problem; there's so much work to do. The problem is who will pay and how much.

Oh really? Doing what, exactly?

Not hard to imagine that there would be a lot of work out there of marginal economic value but not enough to employ someone at the minimum wage to do.
Post reply on HN