What if jobs are not the solution but the problem? • Hacker News Board

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

#221

Post by edblarney » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:10 AM UTC

hermitdev wrote: post #121

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 unemploy…

Secular decline in labour participation rate decline is mostly demographics. People are getting older, and not having as many kids as they used to.

This started in 2000 coincident with the downturn.

The big drop in 2008 was mostly the crash.

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

#222

Post by robryan » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:12 AM UTC

module0000 wrote: post #57

jokoon wrote: post #5

There is a difference between a job you like, and a job you do because you believe "work sets you free" or because you believe work is a some sort of value or a necessary pain everybody has to take part in. 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 thi…

> If I decide I can live poor and be happy with welfare, I will Are you banking on the tax payers never reaching that mindset as well? Because it kind of breaks down if that happens.

Depending on where you are in the world living solely off benefits isn't very appealing to most. Much more likely that most will be forced into it rather than choosing it.

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

#223

Post by D-Coder » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:16 AM UTC

jondubois wrote: post #135

I agree with the characterization of investment bankers and hedge fund managers as 'gangsters'. I'm tired of hearing these people rationalize their work as being 'to allocate capital efficiently' - Their real job description is 'to dilute real value and centralize capital'. These people don't create jobs; they transfer jobs from small businesses to big corporations. Those big corporations gain market share not by off…

Ignoring your real argument, but a bun is supposed to be mostly air.

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

#224

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:18 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #88

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…

Most (all?) bad economic policies come from denial of economics 101. For example, fixed currency exchange rates. And, of course, wage and price controls.

[deleted]

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

#225

Post by astrange » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:26 AM UTC

IanDrake wrote: post #64

Forget the word "job" and instead use the word "value" to understand just how silly this idea is. What he's saying is that no one needs to do anything of value anymore. You know, like the guy who built the house you live in, chopped down the trees it was built with, managed the project to build it, inspected the building to make sure it was put together correctly, etc... Hundreds of people had jobs to make the shelte…

I think to many people on HN, houses might have no value. It's practically impossible to build any in California, since the existing residents do all they can to ban any new ones.

Maybe use office buildings or food delivery startups for your examples.

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

#226

Post by cmurf » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:26 AM UTC

Well, if we're going to simplistically blame just one thing and blame the premise of jobs, why not blame the premise that everyone has a right to propagate, or do so as many times as they want? Obviously it's less provocative to say fuck work than fuck children; or jobs are the problem than too many humans are the problem. But if there aren't enough jobs to go around, part of that is because there are so many people.

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

#227

Post by sqldba » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:29 AM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #226

Well, if we're going to simplistically blame just one thing and blame the premise of jobs, why not blame the premise that everyone has a right to propagate, or do so as many times as they want? Obviously it's less provocative to say fuck work than fuck children; or jobs are the problem than too many humans are the problem. But if there aren't enough jobs to go around, part of that is because there are so many people.

Agreed.

Why stop there though? How come some people hoard and/or inherit millions or billions?

Has one Bill Gates really done the work of 40,000 people worth a million each?

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

#228

Post by sqldba » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:31 AM UTC

JulianMorrison wrote: post #180

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…

I resent the idea that my surplus labour is anyone's but mine to spend. Certainly you could create infinite amounts of "paid" makework but in the end it amounts to keeping a system going for its own sake, and wasting people's potential by allocating them "dig a hole and fill it in" jobs when they could be being creative.

You just described Australia's work for the dole program.

There's no spots for talented people to work on shit like the failed $30 million IBM census disaster.

But smoking pot and filling in holes with low lives? You betcha! You better earn your welfare and enjoy it or you'll be reported!

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

#229

Post by rdtsc » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:34 AM UTC

nico_h wrote: post #153

rdtsc wrote: post #82

> Most jobs aren’t created by private, corporate investment, so raising taxes on corporate income won’t affect employment. But won't raising taxes on corporate income drive corporation to other jurisdiction? So employment in that company then won't just slowly trail off, but will look like a cliff, dropping to 0. So isn't that idea ignoring the fact that companies don't have to stick into one place and so we arbitrar…

This are the idea I have been struggling with: 1) how do you get people to accept the existence of basic income without perceiving the beneficiaries as moochers. 2) what do people on basic do? Right now your example of people visiting the elderly is in some place paid work but can also be performed by volunteer. However volunteers should be vetted. My guess is that when everybody is on basic, you can earn "social cre…

> But even "social credit" cannot prevent the paid workers to look down on the moochers on basic.

That I believe is going to be a very divisive subject. Wasn't the 80's the years of the "welfare queen boogeyman" (or I guess "boogeywoman..."). It started around Reagan's times where they tried to paint welfare recipients as opportunists, lazy, downright criminal and how they were responsible for all possible waste and other evils.

That will stratify the society into those who work and those who don't. I believe people will always have this competitive streak and will want things to be "fair". If they see someone not working and getting by and they are the ones working, they might antagonize them.

> or should that be like "Achievements" in video games? And how do you avoid turning that into the Black Mirror episode "15 millions Merits".

Ah interesting. Heh, it would be like karma here on HN or Reddit. Can't do much with it, but get access to more places perhaps. Can't buy food with it, but can influence the public discourse with it (can upvote, downvote more...).

Yeah I like this idea (but I'd also have to watch Black Mirror).

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

#230

Post by vacri » Sat, Nov 26, 2016, 2:35 AM UTC

cesarbs wrote: post #212

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 labor…

Are you serious? Knowledge workers have it easy. It's hard to get here, but once we're here it's a great gig. We're paid well, we're in demand, and there's a robust freelancing sector to our industries, be it software, legal, medical, engineering, or whatever.

That link describes a call center worker as a knowledge worker. That's absolute nonsense. You could, in theory, argue that a call center worker is about managing some sort of knowledge, but in truth they deal with less knowledge than a subsistence farmer, who has to know a hell of a lot about agronomy.

Classifying call center drones (of which I was once one) as 'knowledge workers', and then using them to discuss how hard knowledge workers have it, is beyond disingenuous.