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

Are jobs obsolete?

cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 331 posts

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#91

Post by cwp »

jcromartie wrote: post #86
cwp wrote: post #77

There is a nugget of useful discussion in there, in that corporations aren't as necessary as they used to be. Better communication technology lowers coordination costs and we don't need big organization and bureaucracy to get big things done anymore. But the whole "technology is destroying jobs" meme is just horseshit. What's destroying jobs in the US is lack of demand. Other counties (no, not all of them, but many)…

You're right: Technology doesn't kill jobs. It kills demand. Who wants to send paper mail, or a landline phone, or to take out traditional classified ads? The alternatives are too appealing and the demand for the old versions is never coming back.

Ugh. No. The financial crisis killed demand.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#92

Post by CWuestefeld »

jbooth wrote: post #59
jswinghammer wrote: post #17

I'm not sure the Post Office's problems are related to technology. Their union negotiated a "no layoff" provision in their contract just this year. Why would you agree to that as an employer? Then there is the problem of defined benefit pensions where you end up keeping people basically on staff long after they stop working for you. The Post Office needs to go bankrupt and clear these contracts out and move forward w…

Every union "no layoff" provision I've ever seen was a case of the union choosing to forego contracted CoL raises and some various health benefits in exchange for keeping jobs. Typically it will be cost-neutral compared to layoffs and keeping benefits. The employer wouldn't sign up to it if it was a pure money loser. They're not crazy :) Also, Obama already suspended Saturday delivery. So not too sure what he has to…

Obama already suspended Saturday delivery.

There was apparently a rogue delivery person four days ago, joyriding in the mail truck and asking me to sign for a delivery.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#93

Post by commanda »

This article skips discussing one reason why jobs are in a sense ends to themselves: the feeling of being useful. Retired people often complain that they don't know what to do with themselves after leaving the workforce, so they go do things like volunteering. A friend of mine recently took 2 months off between jobs and nearing the end of that time, she started becoming very depressed and realized it was because she wasn't contributing to society or to herself. I think most people work not only to pay the bills or to acquire luxury items, but to have a sense of self-worth.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#94

Post by Hyena »

Sadly, the premise going forward is that everyone should get a basic income. I don't think the monkeys will agree until it's far too late.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#95

Post by mrbgty »

jneal wrote: post #15

As time goes on, and technological abilities improve, more and more jobs will fall to "robots" or computerized replacements for real jobs. There will always be need for creative jobs, engineers, etc, but the non-skilled labor jobs will be less and less. I don't see how anyone could disagree that there is already a problem here, and in the future, there will be an even bigger problem. The only people able to get jobs…

more people working doesn't necessarily mean less jobs available. more people working can mean more jobs / value creation opportunities which results in more jobs overall

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#96

Post by jcromartie »

billybob wrote: post #56
jneal wrote: post #15

As time goes on, and technological abilities improve, more and more jobs will fall to "robots" or computerized replacements for real jobs. There will always be need for creative jobs, engineers, etc, but the non-skilled labor jobs will be less and less. I don't see how anyone could disagree that there is already a problem here, and in the future, there will be an even bigger problem. The only people able to get jobs…

'Aside from that, in the "old days" women stayed at home and took care of the family. "Nowadays" women are going to work, and I think that is absolutely great!' Another way of looking at this is, "in the old days, a household could be supported by one parent's work and the other could raise children. Now, both have to work to pay the bills, and children get less time with parents and more time in institutions."

> Now, both have to work to pay the bills, and children get less time with parents and more time in institutions.

I guess I'm not the only one upset by this trend.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#97

Post by [deleted] »

dreamdu5t wrote: post #57
silverbax88 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote, which is incredibly apt, does not blame crime on property law, but rather, short-sightedness and greed.

"power structure of self-absorbed property owners" implies that people who don't own property aren't self-absorbed, or that the power structure of property owners is responsible for greed, unemployment, and undereducation. Otherwise, why mention a power structure of property owners?

[deleted]

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#98

Post by ams6110 »

mayutana wrote: post #87
silverbax88 wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't mean to sound condescending (although I'm sure I will), but your theory about the future has already happened, and collapsed, in other countries: USSR and China being two prominent recent examples.

USSR was different where everyone was eligible or provided with the same whereas the poster talks about providing some basic livelihood to all and allowing those who can earn more to continue to earn more and live better.

Except for the ones who were killed off.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#99

Post by CWuestefeld »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #74
dreamdu5t wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what Jello implies is wrong. People have the inherent ability to do bad things and treat eachother differently, regardless of whatever property system you have in place. Unemployment and undereducation will not be eliminated by the removal of private property. You don't have to be a property owner to be a self-absorbed dick that doesn't care about other people. If people want to make sure everybody has a livi…

You're reading that way too literally. The point is that the property owners, those with wealth, are too greedy to allow their wealth to be taxed for social services such as better schools and an improved prison system. It is this greed that comes back to bite them when those kids rob and kill them.

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. This should be so transparently obvious to all by now, that I assume anyone claiming otherwise has motives he's trying to hide.

Re: Are jobs obsolete?

#100

Post by pemulis »

colanderman wrote: post #67
ippisl wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without some regulation , why would the work week become shorter ? for many people , working a 40 hour work week barely covers their expenses. why would they want to work less ?

I've always thought that a 30 hr work week should be regulated, forcing employees to demand higher wages in order to survive, forcing employers to raise wages, and forcing CEOs to be paid less , thus reducing the income gap.

If that sort of thing was effective, income inequality would have dropped over the past 60 years as government regulations raised the minimum wage and shortened the work week. Instead, it dramatically increased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Income_Distr...

Post reply on HN