Right now probably 40% are against Putin and can't do much about it.
They are not so desperate yet to risk their lives. Don't forget about the perks Putin gives to some part of population (military, police, useless bureaucracy) to buy their loyalty. |
|
|
|
10% is a significant number of people, enough to make their own party or destablize a country's economy.
In Russia in 1917 only ~2% of population were enough to overthrown the monarchy. |
|
|
|
And then they can put you in jail until you pay.
To apply key disclosure laws they have to prove that you really have private keys. Some encryption tools (e.g. TrueCrypt) can create hidden partitions which existence is impossible to prove. |
|
|
|
|
Russians traditionally like virtual currencies (WebMoney and Yandex Money exist for 10-15), Bitcoin is not an exception! Most likely it happens because banking and credit cards were not available for most population until recently.
|
|
|
|
And this "supercomputer", how will it account for people's wants and desires? People aren't parts in a machine, intended to be used to further some arbitrary ends, they are sovereign beings capable of making decisions and fulfilling their own wants. No centralized system can account for me deciding I want a ham sandwich instead of turkey sandwich.
When you buy this sandwich, the planning system will count increase in this good's consumption and can balance its supply to meet demand. OK, so.....welfare then? Or maybe a better term would be slave/forced labor. When people are denied the basic right of determining how they will work and for what gains, they call that slavery.
There are no welfare for idling, as well as forced labor - the state owns means of production so pays to its workers as corporations do now (but in more fairer way so the owner won't get 99% of the profit). P.S. It is clear for almost everyone that technological unemployment is a final stalemate for the free market! Of course this system have some advantages over central planning, but will be dead no matter how much do you like it (not certainly anywhere in the world - most likely regions like Silicon Valley will prosper under capitalism but be populated only with "technological elite")! Think realistically, not emotionally! |
|
|
|
There is a third way.
Open source economy based on principle of production on demand.
We just need a cheap 3D printers available for general population not only in labs such as NASA. And right now printers can print in almost anything , there is no technology that we lack.
Don't be so naive - production of replicator-level 3D printers will be monopolized by large corporations like anything else. Energy also won't be free, look how EU banned cheap Chinese photovoltaic panels to reduce competition for preferred corporations. The production has increased because they can set one up and then go to another machine and get it going also. But we still need an operator and it is extremely unlikely a machine could ever autotag the wires. They are extremely thin wires and I don't see how humans can even do it. I would go insane doing that job. lol So I guess it depends on what kind of automation you are talking about.
Increasing productivity with automation doesn't directly means an elimination of the workers on this concrete plant, however competing companies may be wiped out from the market entirely and have to fire 100% their employees. Good example is high-productive Germany and lagging Southern & Eastern Europe. Germany has low unemployment and high level of automation simultaneously, but Greece/Spain/Latvia/Bulgaria etc have closed many industries and suffer now from 30-50% real unemployment! Relative to the whole country's economy it is the same as firing some part of the employees on each factory proportionally. Now it is fully automated everything in the plant. The Owner still keeps workers around because he probably knows that for the economy they are necessary, no one ever gets layed off at that plant... but everyone just stands around for hours doing nothing just watching the machines do their thing, people are just there for back-up now.
Are you telling about Russia? If so, don't hope it will last permanently - preserving inefficiency is possible due to oil and gas revenues, as well as Vladimir Putin's fear to lose its power if unemployment start rising. Will be interesting to look what will happen when oil price will fall below $100!  |
|
|
|
|
Deposits have been enabled!
|
|
|
|
Unfortunately a planned economy can't work. If you plan the entire thing and the smallest detail doesn't line up with "the plan" then how does the rest of the plan adjust? This was tried a lot in the USSR (5-year plans) but always failed.
I never offered to repeat USSR economy model, it already proven to fail. But with current level of technology it is possible to enable state-wide computer-aided planning system (like ERP, but in much larger scale) which will readjust plan in realtime - so no more shortages, no waste of resources, reduced possibility to embezzle. In Chile there was an attempt to build this system ( Project Cybersyn) but Pinochet's coup didn't let to try. Additionally, I'm not sure how you plan an economy without everyone being on welfare (i.e. provided for by the government). Wouldn't their wages, or alternatively their means of subsistence, need to be part of the plan?
Of course planning agency will set wage structures (with participation of the worker unions). I would like to see some examples of the African countries you indicated had a high standard of living while the USSR was in existence. I suspect the state they are in now is either a direct result of involvement with the USSR (and the fallout from its collapse) or events since then have caused the issues and true "laissez-faire policies" were never really tried.
There were many countries in Africa who cooperated with USSR, e.g. Ethiopia, Angola, Somalia (the last is totally collapsed now). In some sense it is difficult to prove something using official statistics because pro-market reforms were made by IMF and World Bank fanatics and they teached local officials how to hide real problems and show better economy (which is not true in fact). BTW, Somalia now is much more "laissez-faire" than United States, I am not joking (no stable govt = no regulations at all)! People are competitive by nature. Central planning brings most alpha-types to the center. There they consolidate power and draw disproportionate benefits for themselves and their support groups. Ideas threatening the status quo are outlawed. Security and stability are emphasized. Large security apparatus is built to protect the state.
Eventually central planers find ways to chose & groom their successors, which usually turn to be next in kin. Gradually a narrative develops praising the elite for its unique skills & wisdom. An aristocracy is born.
I mean democratic version of planned economy in which government must be responsive to population's needs (e.g. clause in the constitution that referendums must be held about important resource allocation decisions). Why is there no 'false dilemma' poll option? I think what the 2nd or 3rd poster said is right - all automation does is make manufacturing cheaper, which only means the product gets cheaper for those who get their jobs displaced.
Murwa correctly answered on your question. There are really no viable 3+ option, in fact only single variant is possible because implementing unconditional income will instantly fail as capital will flight from this country. |
|
|
|
But, can you really automate neurosurgery/heart surgery in the next year?
Studying neurosurgery takes >10 years and hundreds thousands USD, therefore even theoretical possibility to automate this profession during now-enrolling students' lifespan (next 40-50 years) can have significant effect! |
|
|
|
Another interesting chart to think about (look at the right side)!  |
|
|
|
|
We need really new breakthroughs like nuclear fusion, not the shitty gas that destroys environment in the large scales!
|
|
|
|
If it weren't for these air travel would have improved and gotten cheaper over the past 30 years, instead it is stagnant.
Say honestly, would you fly with ultra-cheap deregulated free-market Kamikaze Airlines ?! |
|
|
|
Hmm, don't know where you got your statistics from, but these say otherwise. It's a chart of total global labor force, employment, and unemployment from 1948 to present
At first, population size in the U.S. have grown significantly also, so your chart is not representative (you must look at the percentage, not absolute numbers). Secondly, have you noticed labor force participation leveled off last years even in absolute numbers (population continued to grow nevertheless)? Programmers:obsolete
Programmer will be the last profession automated! |
|
|
|
Liberals focus a lot on "employment", but they miss the point: The goal is in fact to work as little as possible, yet reap the highest rewards -- the standard of living:work ratio. And that today in the USA is the highest it has ever been anywhere in the history of the world. Government subsidies -- minimum wage, welfare, food stamps, etc. -- they give fish rather than teach to fish -- and thus distort incentives and the market, and ultimately lead to a lower SOL:work ratio.
I think most people in this thread see only one (and the most horrible) form of socialism - welfare state, which now unfortunately dominates in most EU countries and being increasingly pushed in the US. Its formula is very simple: rob (tax) wealthy - give to idlers! Of course in the long run it cannot lead to any prosperity! Another form of socialism is planned economy, which is only one sustainable model for some nations that for the unknown reason cannot successfully live in the market conditions. It may be some genetic traits, mentality etc but always when you try to establish laissez-faire policies here, these countries return to the pre-modern level. Before USSR collapse some African countries had a planned economy and rather high quality life, but now they are fully impoverished. Without oil and gas revenues Russia also would be at the level of Sierra Leone now. Also note that technology advance and automation will continuously reduce number of people belonging to the "creative elite" class in free market, winner-takes-it-all will become more and more widespread. |
|
|
|
|
I can foresee a scenario where the world will be split into 3 large blocks:
1. Elitist - the smallest one (in part of population) but the most technologically advanced. Libertarian and free market ideas dominate, "losers" forced to go away into another 2 blocks. Silicon Valley probably will center of it.
2. Socialist - state manages the economy and provides full employment. Medium level of technology, tries to copy products that elitist block create. Probably Russia, South America, China will be forced to switch to this model.
3. Anti-modernist - society based on religion and traditions, almost no automation, manual labor. Africa and many Asian countries likely will be here.
|
|
|
|
When pondering this chart, don't forget the concept of a "stay at home mom" was very common on the left side of the chart, and is rather uncommon on the right side.
Real wage have fallen since 60-70's and it is almost impossible to live on single family member's salary now! |
|
|
|
when you say machines are going to take over the jobs, yes maybe the ones today but that's because we're becoming more productive and as humans advance new industries start to form. Those who anticipate where the new demand will be are the ones who start it off, the Bill Gates and Steve Jobs of the world, extraordinary humans unlike you and I, so just because you can't think of where the jobs are gonna come from in the future doesn't mean there aren't gonna be any because if you did know where the jobs were gonna come from you'd probably become very rich.
There are no doubts new industries will appear and new jobs created, but the problem is the number of jobs created is less than destroyed. This trend become very clear now!  |
|
|
|
Just spread the shares to the people who invest well, the best investors in what Humanity needs will be rewarded by increased production, higher prices and lower costs, investment would be the only way for the autonomous corporation to grow.
To spread the shares between people, the government must to confiscate means of production from the current owners. Its obvious that >80% of ordinary people will just sell/gamble/lose these shares within 5..10..20 years and the rich who owned capitals before nationalization will own them again and poor-today will be poor again! In case of nationalization, the only one viable model which will work is a form of socialism with planned economy. Otherwise nationalization will have even worse effect than doing nothing - poor will be poor again AND nobody will invest in this country fearing confiscation! |
|
|
|
|
Free vouchers have been sent to the users asked above!
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
