Global politics to deal with worldwide decrease in “Joe jobs” due to population and annd automation increases.

[ModernDiogenes]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home. Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated. Business will go where the money points it. Automation will take place.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing. Only those necessary to manage and maintain the machines will be necessary and soon most of them will be gine as there will be machines to maintain and repair the machines. Leaving only human managers to program and decision making, and much of that can be automated as well (but for safety reason we ought not as that greatly facilitates “machine evolution” - computers that “think’ and can program and make decisions for themselves). [another topic]

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

That’s only 25 years or less away folks.

A whole new economics system is going to be required so people can be “self-reliant”. There won’t be enough jobs available to do it the way we do it now. When it took 1000 people to operate a big plant that made things you will probably need 1000 machines and only 10 people to run it all.

In a world with guesstimated 100:1 job loss as we automate how do you put everyone to work on a planet with 10 billion people on it?

It’s not a make believe question. It’s very real and it is coming, and sooner than you think.

How do we cope with and solve for it?

 

[Mr Person]

If we were sane, we could try things like using higher corporate tax rates and significantly higher taxes on the upper crust to fund UBI.

Of course the Republican answer will be: "let them eat mud, and if it's not too much trouble, to find a hole to go die in".

 

[bomberfox]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home. Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated. Business will go where the money points it. Automation will take place.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing. Only those necessary to manage and maintain the machines will be necessary and soon most of them will be gine as there will be machines to maintain and repair the machines. Leaving only human managers to program and decision making, and much of that can be automated as well (but for safety reason we ought not as that greatly facilitates “machine evolution” - computers that “think’ and can program and make decisions for themselves). [another topic]

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

That’s only 25 years or less away folks.

A whole new economics system is going to be required so people can be “self-reliant”. There won’t be enough jobs available to do it the way we do it now. When it took 1000 people to operate a big plant that made things you will probably need 1000 machines and only 10 people to run it all.

In a world with guesstimated 100:1 job loss as we automate how do you put everyone to work on a planet with 10 billion people on it?

It’s not a make believe question. It’s very real and it is coming, and sooner than you think.

How do we cope with and solve for it?

Ideally we could foster wider ownership of the means of subsistence.

 

[Isidore]

If most people cannot afford to buy what is being produced, a bunch of those robots will probably go idle as well.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Hence, the White Replacement Theory so many believe in.

 

[BirdinHand]

Been saying that we will need a UBI for a few years now.

We should already be working towards addressing this reality and planning for it. As well as upgrading our educational infrastructure AND our infrastructure to deal with having more than 20% of our population elderly.

But

Instead, our current leadership here in the US is trying to rewind the clock and take us back to the 1900’s and wants to see people at industrial sewing machines or screwing tiny screws into iPhones, is slashing healthcare funding, is attacking educational institutions and is taking food stamps away from families.

So

 

[Integrityrespec]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home. Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated. Business will go where the money points it. Automation will take place.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing. Only those necessary to manage and maintain the machines will be necessary and soon most of them will be gine as there will be machines to maintain and repair the machines. Leaving only human managers to program and decision making, and much of that can be automated as well (but for safety reason we ought not as that greatly facilitates “machine evolution” - computers that “think’ and can program and make decisions for themselves). [another topic]

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

That’s only 25 years or less away folks.

A whole new economics system is going to be required so people can be “self-reliant”. There won’t be enough jobs available to do it the way we do it now. When it took 1000 people to operate a big plant that made things you will probably need 1000 machines and only 10 people to run it all.

In a world with guesstimated 100:1 job loss as we automate how do you put everyone to work on a planet with 10 billion people on it?

It’s not a make believe question. It’s very real and it is coming, and sooner than you think.

How do we cope with and solve for it?

How about a major campaign to slow down new births, particularly in third world nations who already can't feed their own people, and cannot provide jobs.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Increased social and financial insecurity will make MAGA maga even harder.

 

[Rexedgar]

How about a major campaign to slow down new births, particularly in third world nations who already can't feed their own people, and cannot provide jobs.

USAID did much of that……

USAID’s reproductive health funding has saved millions of lives. Now it’s gone.

For decades, USAID’s family planning program was the main source for contraception and HIV treatment in some countries. Experts say without it, women and LGBTQ+ people will die.

19thnews.org

 

[Lovebug]

How about a major campaign to slow down new births, particularly in third world nations who already can't feed their own people, and cannot provide jobs.

Let's talk abortion.

 

[joluoto]

We are quite doomed.

 

[Gordy327]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home. Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated. Business will go where the money points it. Automation will take place.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing. Only those necessary to manage and maintain the machines will be necessary and soon most of them will be gine as there will be machines to maintain and repair the machines. Leaving only human managers to program and decision making, and much of that can be automated as well (but for safety reason we ought not as that greatly facilitates “machine evolution” - computers that “think’ and can program and make decisions for themselves). [another topic]

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

That’s only 25 years or less away folks.

A whole new economics system is going to be required so people can be “self-reliant”. There won’t be enough jobs available to do it the way we do it now. When it took 1000 people to operate a big plant that made things you will probably need 1000 machines and only 10 people to run it all.

In a world with guesstimated 100:1 job loss as we automate how do you put everyone to work on a planet with 10 billion people on it?

It’s not a make believe question. It’s very real and it is coming, and sooner than you think.

How do we cope with and solve for it?

I have always said overpopulation is a problem. Its only going to get worse and quality of life will decline because of it.

 

[Gordy327]

Let's talk abortion.

Yes. Abortion is 1 solution. Unfortunately, too many become too uneasy or emotional about it.

 

[Allan]

I have always said overpopulation is a problem. Its only going to get worse and quality of life will decline because of it.

Yet despite the growing population poverty rates have declined. And the decline is significant - from 80% in 1800 to less than 10% today.

 

[Gordy327]

Yet despite the growing population poverty rates have declined. And the decline is significant - from 80% in 1800 to less than 10% today.

How long can that be sustained with an ever growing population and dwindling resources? Never-ending that crime, pollution, density and such have gone up.

 

[Allan]

Never-ending that crime, pollution, density and such have gone up.

Crime is also down.

 

[Gordy327]

Crime is also down.

Depends on the crime. Either way, the original question still stands.

 

[tharock220]

We've been replacing old technology with new for centuries. I'm surprised anyone has a job anymore.

What ever will happen to all the farriers, horse ranchers, carriage company employees with this weird new thing called an automobile.?

 

[Visbek]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home.

Just FYI, there's currently over 8 billion. Global population is expected to peak at a little over 10 billion.

Estimates of global unemployment have actually dropped since 2000.

I realize you're not about to go on a Malthusian bender, but: As a reminder, panic over an increasing global population is at least 225 years old. Ironically, population decline is also seen as a serious issue in some nations, such as Japan. Anyway, do go on....

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated.

You do know that people said the exact same thing about industrialization, yes? Funny how all those fears did not materialize.

While in the short term there will certainly be some pain, and we should not minimize that, predictions of doom over things like "new production technologies" and "automation" never seem to materialize. Hmm.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing.

In the US, the percentage of the workforce employed in manufacturing started dropping back in the 1950s. It went from (iirc) around 30% to 10% by 2000 or so, and has stayed there.

During that same time, labor force participation grew from 1950 to around 2000, and has slowly dropped a bit since then, and largely stabilized in 2014, with a brief dip for the pandemic. Given how many Boomers are nearing retirement age, that's actually pretty good.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans today don't even want to work in factories, which is one reason why there's a ton of job openings in that sector. Most manufacturing jobs available today are crappy, low-paying, repetitive, dead-end jobs. The good manufacturing jobs require extensive training or apprenticeships (and unions...), often specialized for a particular industry, and who's going to pay for that? Companies have to be pretty hard up for workers before they pony up for that kind of training.

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

And again, we've heard these predictions about new technologies for well over a century, and it doesn't happen. Why is that?

We should also add that you're ignoring the potential benefits of AI. IMO it is vastly overhyped right now, but it is likely that AI will increase productivity, and reduce the costs of production. This could mean less expensive goods and services.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

Again... Manufacturing as a source of employment in the US has eroded for decades, yet somehow the US isn't at 90% unemployment. Hmmm.

The "solution" is not easy, mostly because labor can't change overnight. It takes time, effort and money to retrain people for new jobs; and if those jobs aren't available where people live, then it's very difficult to relocate those workers.

Remote work does offer some possibilities here, since companies are now less likely to need to hire people based on their geographic area. However, many of the companies that benefit the most from this are not thrilled by remote work, mostly because upper management a) wants to justify the ongoing costs of offices and b) is stuck in an outdated mindset. And of course, a lot of jobs can't be done remotely.

The main reason to "panic" over this is not that Total Destruction is inevitable. It's that many people in the most affluent nations don't want to do what needs to be done. In the same way that Japan doesn't want to fix its declining population problem in the most obvious and effective way (encourage immigration), Americans are unlikely to provide better safety nets, encourage unions, and invest in training. So it goes.

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Just FYI, there's currently over 8 billion. Global population is expected to peak at a little over 10 billion.

Estimates of global unemployment have actually dropped since 2000.

I realize you're not about to go on a Malthusian bender, but: As a reminder, panic over an increasing global population is at least 225 years old. Ironically, population decline is also seen as a serious issue in some nations, such as Japan. Anyway, do go on....


You do know that people said the exact same thing about industrialization, yes? Funny how all those fears did not materialize.

While in the short term there will certainly be some pain, and we should not minimize that, predictions of doom over things like "new production technologies" and "automation" never seem to materialize. Hmm.


In the US, the percentage of the workforce employed in manufacturing started dropping back in the 1950s. It went from (iirc) around 30% to 10% by 2000 or so, and has stayed there.

During that same time, labor force participation grew from 1950 to around 2000, and has slowly dropped a bit since then, and largely stabilized in 2014, with a brief dip for the pandemic. Given how many Boomers are nearing retirement age, that's actually pretty good.

Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of Americans today don't even want to work in factories, which is one reason why there's a ton of job openings in that sector. Most manufacturing jobs available today are crappy, low-paying, repetitive, dead-end jobs. The good manufacturing jobs require extensive training or apprenticeships (and unions...), often specialized for a particular industry, and who's going to pay for that? Companies have to be pretty hard up for workers before they pony up for that kind of training.


And again, we've heard these predictions about new technologies for well over a century, and it doesn't happen. Why is that?

We should also add that you're ignoring the potential benefits of AI. IMO it is vastly overhyped right now, but it is likely that AI will increase productivity, and reduce the costs of production. This could mean less expensive goods and services.


Again... Manufacturing as a source of employment in the US has eroded for decades, yet somehow the US isn't at 90% unemployment. Hmmm.

The "solution" is not easy, mostly because labor can't change overnight. It takes time, effort and money to retrain people for new jobs; and if those jobs aren't available where people live, then it's very difficult to relocate those workers.

Remote work does offer some possibilities here, since companies are now less likely to need to hire people based on their geographic area. However, many of the companies that benefit the most from this are not thrilled by remote work, mostly because upper management a) wants to justify the ongoing costs of offices and b) is stuck in an outdated mindset. And of course, a lot of jobs can't be done remotely.

The main reason to "panic" over this is not that Total Destruction is inevitable. It's that many people in the most affluent nations don't want to do what needs to be done. In the same way that Japan doesn't want to fix its declining population problem in the most obvious and effective way (encourage immigration), Americans are unlikely to provide better safety nets, encourage unions, and invest in training. So it goes.

All well and good and I’m challenging only one aspect of everything you’ve stated.

In none of above was there created something that walks, has the approaching manual dexterity, rudimentary ability to problem solve…

In the past machines were created that eliminated the work required by the human. The difference this time is what’s being replaced is the human being itself.

 

[ScrambledEggs]

The only way to solve this is more corporate tax cuts & remove tax cuts for the rich

 

[joluoto]

If most people cannot afford to buy what is being produced, a bunch of those robots will probably go idle as well.

Or they will stop producing things we need, because there is no profit in that, and just produce things for the classes that still has purchasing power, i.e. the rich.

 

[reinaert]

We are quite doomed.

The plague years, bio-isolated arcologies, and billionaires in LEO.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

By 2050 there could be as many as 10 BILLION people on this rock we call home. Even with first world birthrates declining that is the case.

Automation was always going to be a problem but add advancing ahead of schedule A,I. and robotics to that mix and automation increases to productivity are crossing thresholds were capitalization of switching from human to automated manufacturing is negated. Business will go where the money points it. Automation will take place.

This will lead to a dramatic lessening of human beings required to facilitate manufacturing. Only those necessary to manage and maintain the machines will be necessary and soon most of them will be gine as there will be machines to maintain and repair the machines. Leaving only human managers to program and decision making, and much of that can be automated as well (but for safety reason we ought not as that greatly facilitates “machine evolution” - computers that “think’ and can program and make decisions for themselves). [another topic]

What this means is that we will have a world where there just aren’t enough jobs at 40 hours a week to support an individual, let alone a family.

So what do we do when the 40 hour a week job doesn’t house and feed an individual any longer? That day is coming.

That’s only 25 years or less away folks.

A whole new economics system is going to be required so people can be “self-reliant”. There won’t be enough jobs available to do it the way we do it now. When it took 1000 people to operate a big plant that made things you will probably need 1000 machines and only 10 people to run it all.

In a world with guesstimated 100:1 job loss as we automate how do you put everyone to work on a planet with 10 billion people on it?

It’s not a make believe question. It’s very real and it is coming, and sooner than you think.

How do we cope with and solve for it?

Make work projects run by the government

So instead of giving welfare to able bodied people provide make work type jobs

Cleaning a park, sweeping sidewalks, scrubbing walls etc, all low skill but certainly good for the area and having people in those areas will make it feel safer for visitors.

Now is it the most efficient way of doing those tasks no, but if you loom at it holistically from the welfare and social benefits it probably comes out ahead.

Or the libertarians will say let them starve if they can't be productive

 

[ModernDiogenes]

Or the libertarians will say let them starve if they can't be productive

The “Scrooge” approach? Me thinks that will lead to pitchforks and torches.