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

The Future of Not Working

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 279 posts

Re: The Future of Not Working

#191

Post by sametmax »

kayoone wrote: post #190
sametmax wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need mandatory sterilizatiion. Men are scared enough of unwanted pregnancy. Just offer free VASALGEL procedure on and off for anybody and the problem will solve itself. Now we just need the procedure to become legal in the us, but i'm very eager to use it myself and have high hopes for it.

Birth rate in western countries is hardly the problem.

I disagree. I think our quality of life would improve if we could half our population, once passed the painful periode where society adjusts.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#192

Post by dorfsmay »

zouhair wrote: post #166
Razengan wrote: post #135

With almost 8 BILLION people on this planet soon, not everyone can meaningfully contribute to something that can't be done more efficiently by automation (which is also cheaper for everyone and easier on the environment) or done away with entirely. See [1], [2], [3] for examples from our not-so-distant past. You just cannot expect everyone to "earn" money while expecting technological progress to continue unabated. D…

> Don't want so many people? Mandate reversible sterilization at birth. Jesus fucking Christ, let's just round up all that don't have jobs and kill them all it'll go faster.

Money has worked really well to share limited resources in a fairly peaceful way.

Making decisions about how to share limited resources in a post-work world is one of the most difficult problem we are going to face, and yet it isn't discussed. Instead, we'd rather claim that Basic Income pixie dust is going to solve all problems.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#193

Post by coldpie »

rorykoehler wrote: post #167
greyman wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not everyone can meaningfully contribute to something that can't be done more efficiently by automation I don't know if this statement is true, but a lot more jobs could be created in the area of teaching, caring for elderly and ill people, etc.

I wonder if compulsory national service in these areas for individuals who don't contribute over x% or $yy.. in personal income tax a year would work?

The last person I want teaching or caring for my old body is someone being forced to do so. Rather, we should increase the incentive for people to train in those areas by increasing their wages.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#194

Post by zouhair »

dorfsmay wrote: post #192
zouhair wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Don't want so many people? Mandate reversible sterilization at birth. Jesus fucking Christ, let's just round up all that don't have jobs and kill them all it'll go faster.

Money has worked really well to share limited resources in a fairly peaceful way. Making decisions about how to share limited resources in a post-work world is one of the most difficult problem we are going to face, and yet it isn't discussed. Instead, we'd rather claim that Basic Income pixie dust is going to solve all problems.

You know why people in rich countries don't have a lot of kids? It's because when you give people everything they to have a decent life they start to think about other things than just having tons of kids, kids are the retirement fund for poor people, give them enough to have a decent retirement fund and suddenly they will stop having ton of kids.

Overpopulation is not the problem in itself, the problem is that people do not have enough to survive, all when we as humans are producing more wealth per capita than any other time in history.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#195

Post by Noumenon72 »

bennettfeely wrote: post #156
Razengan wrote: post #135

With almost 8 BILLION people on this planet soon, not everyone can meaningfully contribute to something that can't be done more efficiently by automation (which is also cheaper for everyone and easier on the environment) or done away with entirely. See [1], [2], [3] for examples from our not-so-distant past. You just cannot expect everyone to "earn" money while expecting technological progress to continue unabated. D…

> Mandate reversible sterilization at birth. This sounds like an absolutely atrocious idea ripe for corruption. It would be only a matter of time before those programs target the poor, those who whose political views, religious views, or ethnic origins are unwanted or inconvenient.

In theory we could use food stamps to force people to do things on pain of starvation, but in practice we just do a little bit of drug testing sometimes. Meanwhile, the problems caused by unwanted babies are huge. If we could enact mass sterilization to reverse mass incarceration, the poor and ethnic would be better off even if they did face some discrimination in restoring reproductive access. Not to mention how much better everyone's sex life would be without worrying about kids.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#196

Post by dorfsmay »

zouhair wrote: post #194
dorfsmay wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money has worked really well to share limited resources in a fairly peaceful way. Making decisions about how to share limited resources in a post-work world is one of the most difficult problem we are going to face, and yet it isn't discussed. Instead, we'd rather claim that Basic Income pixie dust is going to solve all problems.

You know why people in rich countries don't have a lot of kids? It's because when you give people everything they to have a decent life they start to think about other things than just having tons of kids, kids are the retirement fund for poor people, give them enough to have a decent retirement fund and suddenly they will stop having ton of kids. Overpopulation is not the problem in itself, the problem is that peopl…

Or is it because bringing up kids responsively in industrial countries is really expensive?

Re: The Future of Not Working

#197

Post by AsyncAwait »

adrianN wrote: post #168
cannonpr wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do wonder about the "not everyone can contribute" perhaps they can't contribute in building cars, but with a cultural shift and education, well there are a lot of avenues of research and mathematics that only require thought and basic tools like chalk. I tend to view an unemployed human as an awful waste of computational resources. This ofcourse assumes we haven't figured out strong AÍ or we don't want to, cause th…

are you honestly suggesting that a large part of the population can be trained to become research mathematicians?

I took the point as in "everyone can still do something", be it mathematics, art, politics etc.

Re: The Future of Not Working

#198

Post by EliRivers »

sametmax wrote: post #191
kayoone wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Birth rate in western countries is hardly the problem.

I disagree. I think our quality of life would improve if we could half our population, once passed the painful periode where society adjusts.

Why? What's magical about halving the population in the typical Western industrialised country? That's not an order of magnitude change. I don't see any reason why this would have some kind of magical effect.

We'd still need pretty much the same kind of society. We'd need pretty much the same kind of infrastructure. Given that wealth in the typical industrialised, Western country isn't generated by natural resources, it wouldn't be the case that suddenly there's simply more stuff to go around. Why would halving the population of the place improve quality of life?

Re: The Future of Not Working

#199

Post by tim333 »

paulpauper wrote: post #22

It would seem like 'going to work' is becoming a thing of the past, at least for increasingly many people. Labor force participation at multi-decade lows. Gig jobs, welfare, disability, prolonged education, social security/retirement, and the 'underground economy' is replacing a significant chunk of the traditional job market.

Not in the UK. "The employment rate in the UK has hit another record high of 74.2%, and there are more people in work than ever before." https://www.gov.uk/government/news/employment-rate-hits-reco...

Re: The Future of Not Working

#200

Post by flocial »

thehardsphere wrote: post #174
bennettfeely wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Mandate reversible sterilization at birth. This sounds like an absolutely atrocious idea ripe for corruption. It would be only a matter of time before those programs target the poor, those who whose political views, religious views, or ethnic origins are unwanted or inconvenient.

People used to do this during the original "Progressive era" im American history. The people who ended up targeted were poor and black. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

If you look at current incarceration statistics I'd say it's still happening.
Post reply on HN