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

Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#81

Post by eli_gottlieb »

PeterisP wrote: post #41
Houshalter wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hopefully this becomes more and more automated over time and eventually people won't have to do it at all.

Of course, "people won't have to do it all" also implies "the future doesn't need us". Currently those poor workers are cheaper than the machines that could do the same job. Once the machines become cheaper than a sustenance-wage for a human, there will be literally no jobs for those people, ever. And than means that either by that time we drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not…

>And than means that either by that time we drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not needed for living; or expect literal class warfare.

So? We've been due for class warfare for decades now. The sooner the better. I'm tired of seeing the entire planet's worth of societies optimized for hoarding capital. Enough!

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#82

Post by eli_gottlieb »

nicpottier wrote: post #69
panacea wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I apologise for the name-calling. (Particularly the egregious terms I used... and it's no excuse that in my circle of friends we use them in conversation, but subtleties are lost in translation, even amongst English speakers) My broader point is this (if you care beyond taking offence at the language I have used), people desperate for a job to feed themselves and their dependents, should not have to subjugate themsel…

I wasn't asking you to respect my feelings, I was simply asking you to engage in a discussion. I get where you are coming from, I really do, I just don't think this is the Big Evil Megacorp (TM) you are looking for. Yes, being a full time picker wouldn't be my first choice as a job, but that goes for a lot of jobs out there, many of which I did for a time. Not all jobs are fulfilling, not all jobs are fun, really onl…

Nobody expects work to be fun. People expect it to have reasonably short hours (ie: eight hours per day, for instance), to pay well enough to support themselves, and not to actively insult and humiliate the worker. If you can't meet that minimum standard, take your "job" and shove it.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#83

Post by goldenkey »

VLM wrote: post #68
goldenkey wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. The fact of the matter is, low wage jobs usually require less skill , and therefore less education. It is part of our responsibility as those who are better off, to help fight for the rights of not just ourselves, but _all_ laborers

"and therefore less education." Not exactly true. There's "requires" as in what it takes to do the job, and there's "requires" as in HR has figured out that people who were compliant at being team players with the educational-industrial complex will be more compliant as employees, and supply and demand results in some bachelor degree holders looking for anything at all just so they can eat, such as receptionist or la…

I'd have to agree. The spec of a job can certainly lock one into certain unfavorable circumstances, even when it is an educated position. The odds are much about supply and demand which somewhat correlates with qualifications needed for the job -- like you said though, not always, just a trend of the actors in the system.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#84

Post by PeterisP »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #81
PeterisP wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, "people won't have to do it all" also implies "the future doesn't need us". Currently those poor workers are cheaper than the machines that could do the same job. Once the machines become cheaper than a sustenance-wage for a human, there will be literally no jobs for those people, ever. And than means that either by that time we drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not…

>And than means that either by that time we drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not needed for living; or expect literal class warfare. So? We've been due for class warfare for decades now. The sooner the better. I'm tired of seeing the entire planet's worth of societies optimized for hoarding capital. Enough!

I'm not sure if anyone should be happy about the prospects of literal class warfare, i.e., a large portion of society being so disenfranchised that they need to resort to mass violence in order to survive. There are 3 possible outcomes to that:

(a) the warfare is limited and we're back to the same decision point (how do we change society?) but lots people have suffered for no good reason;

(b) the fighting ends with 'permanently jobless' getting physically eliminated in large numbers - increasingly sophisticated military/police forces + growing drone warfare may make it a possible outcome;

(c) the fighting ends with them winning, and implementing, as I said, "drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not needed for living;".

Why don't we just agree on (c) and implement it without need for bloodshed?

There will be in my lifetime billions of people without a possibility for any economically viable "job", i.e., the rest of society doesn't need anything at all from them, not their labor, not their services, not their flesh. They still need resources to live. So either they'll (a) not get those resources and not live; (b) we'll simply give them those resources; or (c) they'll try to take those resources - but in the end it results in (a) or (b) anyways.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#85

Post by fit2rule »

tluyben2 wrote: post #8
coldtea wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are humans still doing this work? They are cheaper. And it keeps them occupied.

Cheaper I understand, however, it doesn't seem very healthy work. I worked with people doing it full time at that time (and apparently not much has changed); most of those had damaged hips from walking the same way behind the carts they pushed for 10-15 years. And I can see why this would mentally affect you, although I must say that most of them actually liked it. I was setting up a software business and was telling…

>Cheaper I understand, however, it doesn't seem very healthy work.

My family works its own garden. We have a modest plot, which we push into production very comfortably, for about 8 months a year. This plot, which was once a 'pleasure-garden' around our house, replaces a family of 4's vegetable-nutrient needs at the grocery for about 6 months a year. Its a lot of work, mostly for my wife, but if I "didn't have to work elsewhere", the two of us could definitely have a much bigger yield.

The point I'm trying to make is that in fact, gardening for ones own vegetables simply has to get fashionable again. Even if you are a city-dweller, yes: garden culture has to push towards sustainable, edibles, as quickly as possible.

Which means, I predict the work is going to get easier, not harder. The false-economy of buying an Apple for 10c, which was trucked from a few thousand km's away, is really the end of it; our Pear tree gets us supplied good and plenty, and it costs nothing but a bit of rope to keep it propped up in the winds .. oh, sure, I did have to build a flame-thrower to keep the wasps away, but: that was fun!

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#86

Post by eli_gottlieb »

PeterisP wrote: post #84
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And than means that either by that time we drastically change our distribution of resources - where 'having a job' is not needed for living; or expect literal class warfare. So? We've been due for class warfare for decades now. The sooner the better. I'm tired of seeing the entire planet's worth of societies optimized for hoarding capital. Enough!

I'm not sure if anyone should be happy about the prospects of literal class warfare, i.e., a large portion of society being so disenfranchised that they need to resort to mass violence in order to survive. There are 3 possible outcomes to that: (a) the warfare is limited and we're back to the same decision point (how do we change society?) but lots people have suffered for no good reason; (b) the fighting ends with '…

>Why don't we just agree on (c) and implement it without need for bloodshed?

Because large portions of the not-completely-disenfranchised consider (c) immoral.

Trust me, I agree on (c). I want my post-scarcity society, goddamnit. The diminishing happiness returns point on income is $70k/year USD per household or local standard-of-living equivalent, and I'm sure with further study we could find out exactly the cost of living variables behind that number. For reference, the current GDP/capita of the USA is $48k/year per person, easily enough to get over the diminishing returns point with approximately 1.5 "GDP/capita portions" per household (ie: leaving several more portions for investment, government, and other nonpersonal uses).

Or as I sometimes joke to people, the Economic Singularity, the point where our economy tips over into being definitively able to satisfy each and every citizen's fundamental needs, has long-since happened. There is no remaining moral excuse for poverty or toil.

However, the powerful elite of society now require poverty and toil for the rest of us simply because their moral code is: "He who does not work shall not eat." That is why there will be class warfare: because we have implemented a system which views mass starvation as a moral local maximum.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#87

Post by eli_gottlieb »

Nursie wrote: post #20
waps wrote: post #2

From the article A handset told him what to collect and put on his trolley. It allotted him a set number of seconds to find each product and counted down. If he made a mistake the scanner beeped." "We are machines, we are robots, we plug our scanner in, we're holding it, but we might as well be plugging it into ourselves", he said. Really reminded me of this : http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm Welcome to the future…

Haven't read that one for a few years, but it always seems more and more spot-on. The 'Australia Project' part is fanciful sci-fi, but the point is clear - the work that all humans have put in for generations is being co-opted by the few in the ownership classes. Ordinary people find themselves treated more and more as replaceable machines then are finally optimised out of the process and disenfranchised entirely. OT…

>OTOH when you look at much of the non-western world, thinking about problems with concentrated ownership in a post-scarcity society seems a million miles away from the people who still need a clean water supply and a reliable source of food.

It's really not. The pre-capitalist world had a much more egalitarian international wealth distribution, with India, for example, making up a double-digit percentage of the world GDP. These non-Western poor countries wouldn't be nearly so poor if not for the same capitalistic process that is steadily leaving the Western working classes out in the cold (and now even the Chinese working classes, as they get to be more expensive than robots or Africans).

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#88

Post by Nursie »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #87
Nursie wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't read that one for a few years, but it always seems more and more spot-on. The 'Australia Project' part is fanciful sci-fi, but the point is clear - the work that all humans have put in for generations is being co-opted by the few in the ownership classes. Ordinary people find themselves treated more and more as replaceable machines then are finally optimised out of the process and disenfranchised entirely. OT…

>OTOH when you look at much of the non-western world, thinking about problems with concentrated ownership in a post-scarcity society seems a million miles away from the people who still need a clean water supply and a reliable source of food. It's really not. The pre-capitalist world had a much more egalitarian international wealth distribution, with India, for example, making up a double-digit percentage of the worl…

Fair enough, I guess it just strikes me as odd to talk about post-scarcity anything when we have poverty on such scales. I guess it can all be an outgrowth of the same phenomena.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#89

Post by eli_gottlieb »

Nursie wrote: post #88
eli_gottlieb wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>OTOH when you look at much of the non-western world, thinking about problems with concentrated ownership in a post-scarcity society seems a million miles away from the people who still need a clean water supply and a reliable source of food. It's really not. The pre-capitalist world had a much more egalitarian international wealth distribution, with India, for example, making up a double-digit percentage of the worl…

Fair enough, I guess it just strikes me as odd to talk about post-scarcity anything when we have poverty on such scales. I guess it can all be an outgrowth of the same phenomena.

Well let's be clear: there are lots of Indian villages who would have plenty of drinking water if some Western firm wasn't bribing the government into letting them steal all of it. There are Mexican farmers who would have a good deal more food if NAFTA hadn't ruined them. There are Argentine workers who would have much better wages and easier access to, well, everything, if the IMF had not tried to liquify their entire nation into debt-service payments.

Global capitalism is a global problem.

Re: Amazon workers face 'increased risk of mental illness'

#90

Post by Nursie »

eli_gottlieb wrote: post #89
Nursie wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fair enough, I guess it just strikes me as odd to talk about post-scarcity anything when we have poverty on such scales. I guess it can all be an outgrowth of the same phenomena.

Well let's be clear: there are lots of Indian villages who would have plenty of drinking water if some Western firm wasn't bribing the government into letting them steal all of it. There are Mexican farmers who would have a good deal more food if NAFTA hadn't ruined them. There are Argentine workers who would have much better wages and easier access to, well, everything, if the IMF had not tried to liquify their enti…

I'm not sure I'd blame 'capitalism' outright like that, but the actions of some of the so-called* free-market evangelist nations and organisations have been despicable and made a lot of places a lot worse off, yes. But I don't think you can blame the totality of world poverty on that, not honestly.

*(I say "so-called" because it's usually "free market for you, trade barriers for us")

Post reply on HN