Are jobs obsolete? • Hacker News Board

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#281

Post by Spyro7 » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 2:22 AM UTC

yummyfajitas wrote: post #278

Spyro7 wrote: post #209

Why is this being upvoted? This article begins with a questionable premise and then descends straight into misinformation. The problems in the USPS did not begin with email. They began with a highly questionable requirement that the USPS fund a plan to fully cover the estimated future health care costs of all current employees. They are the only government institution required to do this, and it has crippled their ab…

They are the only government institution required to do this, and it has crippled their ability to remain profitable The post office may be the only government institution required to do this, but every private institution is required to do it. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR00004:@@@L&#3... ; Since the post office is supposed to be more or less independent of the government (i.e., profitable all by i…

The problem the USPS is having is not about prefunding pensions and pension plans. Their problem is that they are required to fund future employee health care benefits. No other company in America - public or private - is required to do this.

This is a side note, but... By the way, I am actually a frequent reader of your blog, and I really miss your posts on economics. Link for the curious:

http://crazybear.posterous.com/

Good stuff!

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#282

Post by dj_axl » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 2:26 AM UTC

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #178

ryandvm wrote: post #29

It's a fact that computers/automation are going to continue to obsolete human jobs. Nothing short of a technological apocalypse is going to reverse that. And I agree that we shouldn't really lament the reality that a trucker who used to spend 50 hours a week vacuously staring at the highway no longer has to do that. But that's a triumph. One more human mind freed up for greater accomplishments. That said, I'm dubious…

Why pay 3/4 of the population to work 40 hours a week when we could pay all of them to work 30 (then 20, then 10)? Because many types of work do not lend themselves to be broken up into pieces. Communication/coordination overhead can be quite large as any programmer will be able to attest to. Also, educating twice as many people costs at least twice as much. But of course that's a very narrow view on the costs and be…

> Why pay 3/4 of the population to work 40 hours a week when we could pay all of them to work 30 (then 20, then 10)?

Because corporations want to pay 60% of the population to work 50 hours a week on salary. This is why everyone should be hourly. That's the first step. Then, yeah sure, hourly with overtime pay for anyone working more than 30 hours a week.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#283

Post by gensym » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 2:42 AM UTC

johngalt wrote: post #111

tjstankus wrote: post #12

The opposite, libertarian answer (and the way we seem to be going right now) would be to let those who can't capitalize on the bounty simply suffer. Cut social services along with their jobs, and hope they fade into the distance. Reminds me of this quote from Jello Biafra: Some day, even the experts will figure out, that crime is not caused by rap music...or even my music, but by a power structure of self-absorbed pr…

We spend more per student than we ever have in history. Why wasn't the country in chaos when there weren't public schools at all? Teaching the kids that they are owed something merely because they have less than someone else? Seems to justify theft to me.

WTF, kids are owed something. Kids are owed safety, education, food, shelter, and hope for the future. Kids, by definition of the term, cannot be held responsible for their current situation. If this isn't obvious - if it isn't an axiom from which all discussions of how we should structure our society derive, then we're all in pretty bad shape.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#284

Post by yummyfajitas » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 2:53 AM UTC

Spyro7 wrote: post #281

yummyfajitas wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are the only government institution required to do this, and it has crippled their ability to remain profitable The post office may be the only government institution required to do this, but every private institution is required to do it. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HR00004:@@@L&#3... ; Since the post office is supposed to be more or less independent of the government (i.e., profitable all by i…

The problem the USPS is having is not about prefunding pensions and pension plans. Their problem is that they are required to fund future employee health care benefits. No other company in America - public or private - is required to do this. This is a side note, but... By the way, I am actually a frequent reader of your blog, and I really miss your posts on economics. Link for the curious: http://crazybear.posterous…

After googling this, you appear to be correct. However, the problem is not that the USPS is required to do this - the problem is that everyone else is not.

There is absolutely no reason to treat pension and non-pension obligations differently, and the fact that we treat the USPS differently than everyone else is not an argument to let the USPS off the hook. Instead, we should force both the public and private sector to properly fun their post employment obligations.

As for the blog, I'm building a startup, and haven't had time to post. I'm planning a post on color measurement soon, however.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#285

Post by yummyfajitas » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 2:57 AM UTC

z0r wrote: post #185

ryandvm wrote: post #29

It's a fact that computers/automation are going to continue to obsolete human jobs. Nothing short of a technological apocalypse is going to reverse that. And I agree that we shouldn't really lament the reality that a trucker who used to spend 50 hours a week vacuously staring at the highway no longer has to do that. But that's a triumph. One more human mind freed up for greater accomplishments. That said, I'm dubious…

The surplus labor army is useful for driving down the wages of the employed, to increase the profits of the employers. Why pay 3/4 of the population to work 40 hours a week when you can pay 3/4 of the population to work 40 hours for what they used to be paid for 39 hours, holding the threat of the competing jobless 1/4 against them? This is grossly simplified, of course, but why would any company try to optimize for…

The problem with your theory is that wages have not decreased even as unemployment has skyrocketed.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/ECIWAG

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#286

Post by nicklovescode » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 3:00 AM UTC

They are great Chairmen

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#287

Post by bluedanieru » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 3:00 AM UTC

ctdonath wrote: post #237

shoham wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the title was just to grab your attention. I don't agree with everything in the article, especially the idealization of the Middle (or 'Dark') Ages, but the idea that what kind of work people will do 30-50 years from now, I think will be as great of a shift as from the farm to the factory, or the factory to the office (though probably not as big of a shift as the agricultural revolution!) I think that th…

Rushkoff writes: "What we lack is not employment, but a way of fairly distributing the bounty we have generated through our technologies, and a way of creating meaning in a world that has already produced far too much stuff." To wit, the discovered it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. With the lofty assumption the idle will, lacking want, pursue productive meaningful occupation, he fails to observe…

>he fails to observe London-like riots are the more likely outcome

You're suggesting that the London riots, where income distribution and control of wealth and political process is nearly as skewed as in the US, with all the attendant social ills, where civil rights are an even bigger joke than in America, is the result of social democracy run amok? Do you know what social democracy is?

I don't disagree that many people will not pursue productive work if they're free from want. In fact I suspect most won't. But I fail to see why that makes a difference.

I think the core problem is whether technology will make most people obsolete and, if that happens, what we should do with all the people. What do you do with people who really will not and can not ever contribute back to society what they take from it? We had less of a problem with letting them starve back when there really was work for everyone to do, but that might not be the case for much longer, if indeed it is now.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#288

Post by pradocchia » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 3:14 AM UTC

Spyro7 wrote: post #209

Why is this being upvoted? This article begins with a questionable premise and then descends straight into misinformation. The problems in the USPS did not begin with email. They began with a highly questionable requirement that the USPS fund a plan to fully cover the estimated future health care costs of all current employees. They are the only government institution required to do this, and it has crippled their ab…

Did you read past the introduction? It's being upvoted because it's provocative, it's by Rushkoff, and there is a certain unease about the future that this piece speaks to in a hopeful tone.

It's not a protest against technological change at all. It's someone trying to alert others to possibilities that technological change might have for the human condition, if some lateral movement could be accomplished.

Technological progress, creative destruction and the business cycle are all fine and well, but the transition states (Great Depression, WWI & II, Third World Debt Crisis--take you pick) are not particularly kind to all concerned. There's no rational reason to expect the future to be any kinder, breezy appeals to conventional wisdom notwithstanding.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#289

Post by mdda » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 3:14 AM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #118

CWuestefeld wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

those with wealth, are too greedy to allow their wealth to be taxed for social services such as better schools My property tax bills beg to disagree with you. For the 16 years I've owned my house, I've watched the portion of my taxes that go to our schools go up far faster than the rate of inflation. If there's a problem with education, it is absolutely NOT that there is insufficient money being invested into it. Thi…

I believe I have discussed education issues on here with you in the past. Suffice it to say, I believe you are sorely mistaken. 1. Proportions of taxes can shrink or grow at any rate independent of inflation. This doesn't say that the absolute value given to education per student (and that's the measure that matters) has or has not exceeded inflation. 2. Statistics saying that e.g. yy % of students do not benefit fro…

While I'm sympathetic to the plight of teachers (my mother was a physics teacher, FWIW), I still can't shake the fact that education spending per student is higher in the US than in most of the rest of the world : http://mercatus.org/publication/k-12-spending-student-oecd

Something doesn't add up.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#290

Post by piguy314 » Thu, Sep 08, 2011, 3:28 AM UTC

jbooth wrote: post #119

ojbyrne wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kijiji, AirBnB, Cars.com, etc. etc. See http://thegongshow.tumblr.com/post/345941486/the-spawn-of-cr... I think you didn't grasp the phrase "second order effects."

There should really be a Godwin-like rule when it comes to accusing someone of not knowing how to read. How many people does AirBnB employ, again? I've never even heard of Kijiji. Add up all those companies and you're around the level of a single 100k city newspaper. Maybe 2-3 of them. Did you know that newspapers actually employ a lot of people who's whole job is to get stuff printed out on paper and delivered to ev…

You are glossing over the other point that reducing the transaction cost increases market participation and velocity in those goods which are advertised in classifieds. Craigslist is easier and cheaper than traditional classified so there are individuals at the margin who will advertiser in craigslist but would not have advertised in the newspaper due to difficulty or cost. Those marginal advertisers buy and sell goods/services which increase economic activity.