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

251–260 of 576 posts

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

#251

Post by stale2002 »

enraged_camel wrote: post #176
Pyxl101 wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying that people have had to struggle less to achieve or retain financial security in the past? During what time period and in what country? Can you share some specific data substantiating the claim? Average wealth has increased in America over the last 50 years, and real family income has been rising overall since the 1950s. Wealth concentration today is lower than it was in the 1930s. Poverty has fallen…

>>Average wealth has increased in America over the last 50 years Average wealth doesn't matter. Relative wealth does. The reason is simple: wealth is a proxy for political power. Let's say Bob had 10 dubloons yesterday and Alex had 20, and today Bob has 20 and Alex has 100. Sure, Bob is twice as wealthy as he was, but Alex is five times as wealthy and also five times wealthier than Bob (as opposed to twice). Now repl…

Wealth has nothing to do with gold coins or green pieces of paper.

Wealth is about the total amount and quality of goods and services you consume.

Your house is of much higher quality than the houses of the 1950s. Just because the mansions are even bigger and better, This doesn't take away the quality of life improvement of you owning a better house or car or your ability to be cured of diseases that were incurable in 1950.

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

#252

Post by grzm »

bertiewhykovich wrote: post #249
freshhawk wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what of the risk to your mental health if you end up realizing that how much money you make isn't measuring how much value you provide to society? Or that, there are inherent contradictions in capitalism and therefore people have lied to you. The system is more complex and less rational than you thought. That would mean that we aren't in Fukuyama's post-ideological, end-of-history era! Sounds terrifying, maybe it…

It's good and not at all insane that I make $100,000/year for dicking around on a computer every day. Those poors just aren't creating value.

Snide comments like this do nothing to promote constructive discussion. Please post civilly or just don't.

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

#253

Post by JamesBarney »

pdonis wrote: post #242

The article lost me in the second paragraph, with "there is not enough work to go around". Seriously? There are so many things that need to be done. We need better energy sources. We need better health care. We need better infrastructure. I could go on and on. There is a huge amount of work to be done. More than enough for everybody.

Then the big question is if work is a aplenty, and workers scarce. Why is it so hard for such a large portion of the population to find good work? Why doesn't all of that work turn into jobs?

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

#254

Post by stale2002 »

knieveltech wrote: post #210
tachyonbeam wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this sentiment. There is a lot of work that needs doing. There are also a lot of parents out there with young children who could use a nanny. There's a need for more therapists, or just people to talk to. There's a lot of work that needs doing. There's an abundance of people to do the work, and I feel like we have plenty of natural resources. It seems to me that we could build housing for everyone, we ha…

There is no need for additional construction to meet housing demand. In the continental US there are something like 6 empty units for every homeless person in the country. In turn this means there is no pent up demand for building materials, so putting people to work in forestry, quarry, cement, steel, etc is also a non-starter. Global food surplus indicates there is no pressing need to put additional people to work…

There are empty houses, but not in places where people want to live.

There is absolutely a housing shortage in popular metropolitan areas (take your pick) . If there wasn't, then prices wouldn't be so high.

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

#255

Post by pdonis »

pygy_ wrote: post #179
nhaehnle wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rate of CO2 emission per GDP is already decreasing thanks to technological advances. There's no fundamental reason why the same couldn't happen to the ratio of energy use per GDP. So finite supply of resources is not a problem per se, and certainly won't be within our lifetimes, which is what we need to deal with.

You can't be more than 100% energy efficient, so, while there may be some headroom in that direction, there's a hard limit as well. Edit: Also, while there seems to be a positive correlation between GDP per capita and energy efficiency, the most efficient nations in the world have a very low GDP per capita... I wonder why it is the case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_intensity#Economic_ener...

> You can't be more than 100% energy efficient

Yes, you can, practically speaking. The amount of energy needed to produce a given amount of value to humans is not fixed; it can be decreased, and in principle can be made as small as we like given sufficient advances in technology. That means the amount of value to humans that can be produced with a fixed amount of energy can increase, in principle as much as we like. That's what the parent to your post was saying.

Obviously it will be a while before we have technology advanced to the point where, say, the amount of value currently being produced per year on Earth can be produced with one tenth or one hundredth or less of the energy it currently takes. But we also have a while before we hit any hard limits of the sort you are referring to.

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

#256

Post by thesagan »

thesagan wrote: post #130
BurningFrog wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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....

Can't edit my original comment – sorry about the 'I love you', that's a bit over the top. I might've had a drink earlier. ;)

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

#259

Post by [deleted] »

thesagan wrote: post #102
Pyxl101 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give one (preferably two) specific examples of respected economists who are questioning 101 level econ principles? I've studied economics at the college level. I follow economics news and am not aware of economists questioning 101 level principles. Many of these are relatively simple and intuitively obvious ones (once you wrap your head around them), much like 101 level maths. Consequently I am inclined to di…

Please accept my apologies: I'm taking a Mary Poppins approach by "not explaining anything." We're all capable of looking for examples that'll confirm our own suspicions; an attempt at confirming or disconfirming what I've blurted out above can be an exercise for the diligent reader. I want to push back on the idea that economics is a way to divinate the truth of how to generate and share happiness. It's a piece of t…

[deleted]

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

#260

Post by dpweb »

chadcmulligan wrote: post #136

Maybe a better approach is how can we spend the surplus labour? There are lots of things I see need doing looking around my neighbourhood - public parks need cleaning up, old houses could be torn down and make some nice new ones, old roads could be fixed. Probably stacks of other things. Maybe some creative accounting will enable us to do these things? I know national parks near me have great paths that were built in…

There's a great example of this now. Uber drivers.

There are a lot of people out there with a lot of free time who are willing to work for very little.

Maybe the Govt should make an app that people can use their phone to sign up and do jobs like cleaning up parks etc.. and the Govt can pay them.

Post reply on HN