Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

The2ndWheel

(7,947 posts)
31. I can't argue about the social benefits of work, I agree
Tue Jun 7, 2016, 09:12 PM
Jun 2016

Labor shortage raises pay, but not if people aren't needed to do the job. If you go from 40 to 32 hours per week, but the same amount gets done, who is going to pay people more for less time? If you go from 40 to 32 hours, and the increasing automation works the way the it's supposed to work, who is going to get these raised wages? How many people are going to get the raised wages?

Need is really the part that raises pay. If the automation works the way it's supposed to, there won't be a labor shortage. There will be a need shortage. The need for people to be around for 40 hours, 32 hours, 10 hours, or whatever.

It's definitely going to be disruptive. There's no telling exactly how it'll play out. The meaning of work as we know it will change. It's almost inevitable, since that meaning has always changed in some way or another, since however far back as you want to go. You look at society as a whole, and we've already been building an increasingly isolated world for people in some ways. As they say, you can have 1000 friends on Facebook, but it's not really real.

It's a question of, if automation takes away the most basic of jobs, then takes away some more advanced jobs, and on and on down the list, what do people do? How many people can be doctors, or athletes, or whatever high paying profession? People in those positions make so much money because they're rare. If the majority of people don't have the talent, or drive, or chance to do those things, and machines of some kind are doing more and more jobs, where do people go?

If we're going to have the resource concentration mechanism that we call civilization(so there's nowhere outside of it to go), and we're going to advance technology in an unrelenting way(which puts that much more pressure on people), at some point we have to pay people for simply existing. Otherwise there are going to be a lot of pissed off and/or dead people.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

But those Republicans want to make everyone work... scscholar Jun 2016 #1
Give it time LuckyTheDog Jun 2016 #2
It did in sweden Ohioblue22 Jun 2016 #3
it did what? nt Javaman Jun 2016 #20
Went away Ohioblue22 Jun 2016 #21
can you point me to a link? Javaman Jun 2016 #23
Switzerland's (not sweden) voters reject basic income plan. They felt it would be too expensive Ohioblue22 Jun 2016 #24
I have read a lot about the coming jobless economy because jwirr Jun 2016 #4
Nobody planned for this Hydra Jun 2016 #5
And that is just exactly what I am talking about - being jwirr Jun 2016 #6
We're at a crossroads Hydra Jun 2016 #7
70% of food grown goes to waste lostnfound Jun 2016 #8
The solution is jobs, not basic income. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2016 #9
I'm guessing a reduced workweek at more pay to make up the difference? The2ndWheel Jun 2016 #10
Of course it will. Labor shortage is the only thing that raises pay. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2016 #14
I can't argue about the social benefits of work, I agree The2ndWheel Jun 2016 #31
I think it's short-sighted to believe there is merely one solution LanternWaste Jun 2016 #11
I've worked long enough with the disabled to believe that work is the solution to social isolation. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2016 #15
Very stupid idea.nt clarice Jun 2016 #12
HA HA HA, you actually think Capitalism's going to solve the problems it creates. HughBeaumont Jun 2016 #13
Did you just laugh at me? That's not the communist way.... clarice Jun 2016 #17
Yyyyyyyeah, I don't speak wingnutese. HughBeaumont Jun 2016 #18
ohhhhh someone woke up on the wrong side of the bed today. Name calling? nt clarice Jun 2016 #22
. . . said the false-dilemma tosser calling people Communists . . . HughBeaumont Jun 2016 #29
I didn't mean that YOU were a communist....lol clarice Jun 2016 #30
What ?? Only the most trustworthy blog articles come with php errors Bonx Jun 2016 #25
Right????? nt clarice Jun 2016 #26
The main obstacle is human nature whatthehey Jun 2016 #16
A universal basic income would not lead to idleness LuckyTheDog Jun 2016 #32
Of course it would for some, assuming you define "idleness" whatthehey Jun 2016 #34
100% employment has expired as a need or goal because of technology. PufPuf23 Jun 2016 #19
Because work is becoming obsolete, I agree. Agnosticsherbet Jun 2016 #27
Gwynne Dyer is still wearing the same leather jacket he had 25 year ago Angel Martin Jun 2016 #28
My car is older than his jacket. hunter Jun 2016 #33
There is no safety net out there for adults without minor children Marrah_G Jun 2016 #35
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Gwynne Dyer: Universal ba...»Reply #31