Technological unemployment is (almost) here

[BadBitcoin (James Sutton)]

Libertarians and people more in favor of direct democracy share this goal.

IMHO everybody on the blockchain technological frontier has a moral responsibility to decentralize power.

De-centralized power is nice when we aren't under threat.

Climate Change won't be solved by de-centralization of power, and if our alien neighbours decide its time to inhabit earth and get rid of the indigenous population I have a strong feeling that mom and pop who have their own 3D printers so they can make guns and robots in their house won't be able to stand up against existential threats.

For now, de-centralization is nice because it makes each individual worth more. But in the event that we need to work as one and we are all de-centralized, we're going to be obliterated. Take look at the city states of Europe before the Romans conquered them, and then imagine what would have happened if the Roman Legion suddenly invaded a historical European Union.

[1714708696]

1714708696

[1714708696]

1714708696

[1714708696]

1714708696

[1714708696]

1714708696

[1714708696]

1714708696

[1714708696]

1714708696

[anu]

Libertarians and people more in favor of direct democracy share this goal.

IMHO everybody on the blockchain technological frontier has a moral responsibility to decentralize power.

De-centralized power is nice when we aren't under threat.

Climate Change won't be solved by de-centralization of power, and if our alien neighbours decide its time to inhabit earth and get rid of the indigenous population I have a strong feeling that mom and pop who have their own 3D printers so they can make guns and robots in their house won't be able to stand up against existential threats.

Such as? The most immediate existential threat comes from state power, i.e. 1000s of nukes. I can't see why climate change should be a threat at all, even if it happens. Even if it were, I can't see what govt can do about it - except for the already discussed population culling.

For now, de-centralization is nice because it makes each individual worth more. But in the event that we need to work as one and we are all de-centralized, we're going to be obliterated. Take look at the city states of Europe before the Romans conquered them, and then imagine what would have happened if the Roman Legion suddenly invaded a historical European Union.

The Roman Empire is a good example of how any time the government say "We", the rest of the sentence is a lie. The average Latin farmer had no benefit from all the conquest. They only died in it. All the loot went into the pockets of Marcus Licinius Crassus and his friends.

Had the Roman Farmer understood this, they would have left their neighbors alone and everyone would have been better off (xcept Crassus, of course). For them, the best course of action would have been to simply walk away from the power centers and so it is for us today.

[phelix]

Libertarians and people more in favor of direct democracy share this goal.

IMHO everybody on the blockchain technological frontier has a moral responsibility to decentralize power.

De-centralized power is nice when we aren't under threat.

Climate Change won't be solved by de-centralization of power, and if our alien neighbours decide its time to inhabit earth and get rid of the indigenous population I have a strong feeling that mom and pop who have their own 3D printers so they can make guns and robots in their house won't be able to stand up against existential threats.

For now, de-centralization is nice because it makes each individual worth more. But in the event that we need to work as one and we are all de-centralized, we're going to be obliterated. Take look at the city states of Europe before the Romans conquered them, and then imagine what would have happened if the Roman Legion suddenly invaded a historical European Union.

Decentralized does not mean disconnected. Politicians usually are elected for less than five years. Because of this their time horizon is five years or less, they don't think further ahead. This is the main reason for public debt btw.
Reasonable people and especially parents have a much longer time horizon, they care more about the future. With a longer time horizon of say twenty, fifty years fighting/dealing with climate change and meteor threats becomes much more important so a decentralized but coordinated system might come to much more consequent decisions and actions instead of only talking.

OT: The alien threat is a bad example. We would be 100% at the mercy of any intelligence that makes it's way to us. They could destroy us with the blink of an eye before we even realized because their technology would be so far superior. Think of a modern army against Roman empire. The only thing we could hope for was that they/it would also have high moral standards. Maybe it's not so smart to send radio waves into all directions...

[Bid4Bit]

Yes I imagine in that world the vast majority of kids will stop playing, art will have no utility,entertainment, fantasy and going out into the wilderness will be capital crimes. I imagine the functional members of your imagination would live forever as they could harvest organs from the non functional in exchange for exploring knowledge or even food. Yes and as technology improved even there children will become redundant and used for organ generation.

Damn, I would like to see that vivid imagination of yours used into envisioning smarter societal solutions that positive and rather utopistic ones.
People who don't have envisioning skills follow the generally accepted vision. And it is envisioning ability that we are ripped out from in our schools.

We are taught to linear, systemic, mechanistic thinking. A slave mind is taught directly, effectively without visible violence.

That is TODAY.

We already live in a dystopia horrifyingly near to those things you wrote about...
It's time to turn the mental gaze fully into the new possibilities, in the pro-life department before these things get too non-human.
Organic things are to be harmonized with and learned from. It's smarter than dissecting and dissemination.

With more freedom from the oppressive lingual lexical systemic fuckup of a technical language run amok unchecked, unmonitored, misunderstood, faulty... With more freedom from it... We release our research potential and communications from oppressive systemic taxing and monetary distortion to the scientific fields via predatory social entity corporatization... As the wealth is pumped from the crowds, everything becomes a corporation. Public wealth gets sucked out in the vortex and we are left with unfair state contracting and corrupt favoring those business owners who agree to their political schemes openly.

So, fellows of coins, the re-inventors of the old healthy trade cultures that produced great common wealth zones where money circulated between people...
Let's see together what we can do with this re-lit torch of newly found spirit for fair trade and restoration to the great progress humanity made before "The Empire Stroke Back" and we found ourselves with these tokenic coinages made out of sheer ether! Dios Mio! Herregutt! Oh so many possibilities! Such Vision.

[Bid4Bit]

OT: The alien threat is a bad example. We would be 100% at the mercy of any intelligence that makes it's way to us. They could destroy us with the blink of an eye before we even realized because their technology would be so far superior. Think of a modern army against Roman empire. The only thing we could hope for was that they/it would also have high moral standards. Maybe it's not so smart to send radio waves into all directions...

Haha, it's perhaps entertaining to link thoughts of war against the aliens to aliens, but as you stated there between the lines, there's likelihood/hope they would actually be smarter than just a warmongering space barbarian... Which the common image actually seems to be most of the time at this moment.

The alien is a psychological archetypal character that can be used as an object to narrate beliefs of the emperor to the common folk trough means of mass production and it's greatest field of societal programming apart from the education field; the entertainment industry. A giant engine of PR aka. propaganda for the almost monarchistic state. Power, again... yet again... grown behind closed doors, away from the public, off from the streets.

Being afraid of the alien and projecting it as a military threat is a powerful way to link the thought that the unknown solutions, technologies, thoughts, creativity... is only in the realm of the war machine. Be afraid, be very afraid.

But if the concept of aliens is taken seriously and not used as a ridiculous puppet, as a genuine reflective tool to think about human possibilities...
Don't you think that ANY highly sophisticated society of alien intelligence would actually be very peaceful and wise instead of fearful and tribal.

If you take a neurologic viewpoint, this would be a wrong evolutive direction to follow the observations...
Intelligence is about understanding. Real intelligence is not harmful. Real science is always about good ethics.

It comes from rational approach to apply rationally confirmed knowledge into a process of understanding.
It would be safe to assume that any self-aware planetary race would have to solve the questions and challenges of the questions about spreading wealth and population management as a whole. It is the biggest challenge of humanity right now and basically everything that we ever discuss in the fields of the sciences, politics, social studies and economics. That's what all the fuss is about, that's why there is something we call "News". We look at the developments of this lunatic social experiment because we are just too damn lazy to catch and cultivate our own food.

Well, that's the first intelligent being process all about... Reaching adulthood, balance of body and mind and self sustenance without tantrums and violence.
That's what the aliens needed to figure out FIRST, before they could develop tech further, otherwise been lost into space due some stupid disputes. That's precisely why the big nations do space programs together.... The scientists are trying to keep up having world peace challenging the best of these nations work together on a bigger quest. To keep the frustrated men off each others throats as this political madhouse tries to settle itself.

Aliens, obviously would have had to been gone through all of that and way beyond.
And using alien to connect unknown elements into ridicule or fearful scenarios is mental image manipulation to hold psychological leverage against progressive thought.

So no, I don't think sending radio waves to space is all that dangerous  
The dangers only exist likely on the silver screen. Real aliens would be magnificent beings in greater likelihood if you take a broad look on nature and the universe.

[TCraver]

I can't see why climate change should be a threat at all, even if it happens.

Just an FYI or reminder:  Hydrogen Sulfide might be a threat:
http://robertscribbler.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/awakening-the-horrors-of-the-ancient-hothouse-hydrogen-sulfide-in-the-worlds-warming-oceans/

[anu]

I can't see why climate change should be a threat at all, even if it happens.

Just an FYI or reminder:  Hydrogen Sulfide might be a threat:
http://robertscribbler.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/awakening-the-horrors-of-the-ancient-hothouse-hydrogen-sulfide-in-the-worlds-warming-oceans/

And what can the all-powerful state/govt do about it, should this "threat" materialize? Ban H2S? Bomb it with hellfire missiles, their preferred way to spoil Muslim wedding parties? Lock H2S up in Guantanamo and use enhanced interrogation methods, aka Waterboarding? Maybe nuke H2S like Ms Timoshenko apparently want to do with the Ukrainian Russians? Or legislate H2S into H2O like the state of Indiana tried to legislate the value of PI to 3.2?

Frankly, the only climate change that is IMO both realistic and terrible is caused by the state, i.e. turning the world into a radioactive snowball.

Back to topic: Proponents of BIG should really look into the track record of the state to determine if this is the right agent to implement such plans. At the very least we need to change the organization of society away from big government to something like the Swiss model before BIG can be attempted, probably even less centralized. Unless you have a death wish, of course.

[anu]

.... a decentralized but coordinated system might come to much more consequent decisions and actions instead of only talking.

THIS!

Big government's power has only one goal: Perpetual growth of big government's power.

The assembly in a Swiss Canton is serving the goals of the people there. The US had a similar concept at the beginning: The County. Much of the 2nd amendment was directed at the county (A well regulated militia...) But these days, the county has been reduced to a mere administrative unit and it's power has been transferred to Washington. In the EU we do the same thing: The power of Brussels is directed at the goal of increasing the power of Brussels.

Frankly, the only reason BIG is not adopted by the power centers is that they do not (yet) understand how well it serves their purpose. So proponents should maybe change their strategy: In addition to explaining to the sheeple how they get goodies, they should explain to really powerful people like Cheney, Haass and Schäuble how BIG can be used to centralize power.

[phelix]

Frankly, the only reason BIG is not adopted by the power centers is that they do not (yet) understand how well it serves their purpose. So proponents should maybe change their strategy: In addition to explaining to the sheeple how they get goodies, they should explain to really powerful people like Cheney, Haass and Schäuble how BIG can be used to centralize power.

How would a well balanced BIG empower the government? It would simplify so much and make the government much leaner.

[anu]

Frankly, the only reason BIG is not adopted by the power centers is that they do not (yet) understand how well it serves their purpose. So proponents should maybe change their strategy: In addition to explaining to the sheeple how they get goodies, they should explain to really powerful people like Cheney, Haass and Schäuble how BIG can be used to centralize power.

How would a well balanced BIG empower the government? It would simplify so much and make the government much leaner.

It requires much higher taxes and/or central planning, as this thread' poll suggests. It will result in even more involvement of govt in every day life. It will result in more tax evasion and thus a war against tax evasion. I'd expect the prison population of BIG countries to exceed that of the US today if BIG is financed through taxes. If, for example Switzerland were to introduce BIG and finance that partly through VAT, the current habit of Swiss people to shop and fill the tank in neighboring countries can no longer be tolerated. Bern will need more, much more law enforcement.

[giantdragon]

It requires much higher taxes and/or central planning, as this thread' poll suggests. It will result in even more involvement of govt in every day life. It will result in more tax evasion and thus a war against tax evasion.

Therefore a probably outcome is nationalization of the means of production by state, so corporations' owners won't be able to hide profits.

I'd expect the prison population of BIG countries to exceed that of the US today if BIG is financed through taxes. If, for example Switzerland were to introduce BIG and finance that partly through VAT, the current habit of Swiss people to shop and fill the tank in neighboring countries can no longer be tolerated. Bern will need more, much more law enforcement.

If basic income implemented, I think most countries will shift from imprisonment to property confiscation as a punishment.

[anu]

It requires much higher taxes and/or central planning, as this thread' poll suggests. It will result in even more involvement of govt in every day life. It will result in more tax evasion and thus a war against tax evasion.

Therefore a probably outcome is nationalization of the means of production by state, so corporations' owners won't be able to hide profits.

I'd expect the prison population of BIG countries to exceed that of the US today if BIG is financed through taxes. If, for example Switzerland were to introduce BIG and finance that partly through VAT, the current habit of Swiss people to shop and fill the tank in neighboring countries can no longer be tolerated. Bern will need more, much more law enforcement.

If basic income implemented, I think most countries will shift from imprisonment to property confiscation as a punishment.

That's the Socialist spirit: Use violent force to solve all problems. Force entrepreneurs to work and rob them at gun point. Much good did that way of doing economics do to the Argentinian and Venezuelan economy.

You see, it doesn't stay there: Put yourself in the shoes of an entrepreneur and ask yourself what you would do. You would probably move to some other country. So the next reaction of govt is clear: Build a wall around your country to prevent people from escaping BIG paradise - tried and tested Socialist practise.

Say: From what will you pay the Guaranteed Income (TM) when entrepreneurs use their creativity not to produce but to escape.

EDIT:
You mention "corporation owners". Those people will be just fine. Crony capitalists are good at entering a symbiosis with a socialist government. They don't care if their corporation is "owned by the people" because they know who the real owner is: The one who controls it. George Soros is a socialist. Ask yourself why.

[phelix]

Frankly, the only reason BIG is not adopted by the power centers is that they do not (yet) understand how well it serves their purpose. So proponents should maybe change their strategy: In addition to explaining to the sheeple how they get goodies, they should explain to really powerful people like Cheney, Haass and Schäuble how BIG can be used to centralize power.

How would a well balanced BIG empower the government? It would simplify so much and make the government much leaner.

It requires much higher taxes and/or central planning, as this thread' poll suggests. It will result in even more involvement of govt in every day life. It will result in more tax evasion and thus a war against tax evasion. I'd expect the prison population of BIG countries to exceed that of the US today if BIG is financed through taxes. If, for example Switzerland were to introduce BIG and finance that partly through VAT, the current habit of Swiss people to shop and fill the tank in neighboring countries can no longer be tolerated. Bern will need more, much more law enforcement.

Naah, it depends very much on how the BIG is implemented. For a start I would recommend a cost neutral implementation. It would save hundreds of thousands of government clerks paying out welfare. It would prevent people from being stigmatized and humiliated because they lost their job. Together with a flat tax with as few exceptions as possible it would not only be much more efficient but also be more fair than what most countries have today.

The question is how to balance it. Votes on the height of the BIG would have to be coupled to the height of the flat tax percentage (a nonlinear relationship) to prevent deficit spending. Please note that in Switzerland there was a vote on a very high BIG before and people voted against it. The majority is much smarter than most people think. No one in his right mind with a time horizon of more than five years would agree to long term general government indebtedness.

It's not that politicians are idiots. But the system makes them act like idiots in a lot of cases. Here people need to take control and force politicians to do the right thing for the long term.

[anu]

It's not that politicians are idiots.

This is the politician who is running the largest ministry (Social) in Germany at 145 Billion Euro. Look at that impressive resume:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Nahles
Frankly, I'd not even hire this person as a cashier in a grocery store.

Remember the Wiso survey of MPs in the German parliament when they were doing the ESM vote? Most MPs didn't have a clue that it was 211 Billion nominal and none of them knew that it is potentially unlimited. They also didn't know that they were about to vote for immunity of the fund managers. They essentially handed over the power over the German budget to the ESM without even knowing it. Dito in other EMU countries.

You may be right, they may not all be idiots. But they are also not the people who are truly running the show. Those people who are really running the show could not care less about a good implementation of some BIG scheme. It will either fit their agenda or it won't. If it does fit it will be implemented in such a way as to fit the agenda best.

[giantdragon]

That's the Socialist spirit: Use violent force to solve all problems. Force entrepreneurs to work and rob them at gun point. Much good did that way of doing economics do to the Argentinian and Venezuelan economy.

You see, it doesn't stay there: Put yourself in the shoes of an entrepreneur and ask yourself what you would do. You would probably move to some other country. So the next reaction of govt is clear: Build a wall around your country to prevent people from escaping BIG paradise - tried and tested Socialist practise.

Say: From what will you pay the Guaranteed Income (TM) when entrepreneurs use their creativity not to produce but to escape.

In planned economy there won't be any need to motivate entrepreneurship at all (this have some disadvantages of course, but at least unemployed won't starve). People who don't like this system will be free to leave the country, so what a problem?!

[anu]

That's the Socialist spirit: Use violent force to solve all problems. Force entrepreneurs to work and rob them at gun point. Much good did that way of doing economics do to the Argentinian and Venezuelan economy.

You see, it doesn't stay there: Put yourself in the shoes of an entrepreneur and ask yourself what you would do. You would probably move to some other country. So the next reaction of govt is clear: Build a wall around your country to prevent people from escaping BIG paradise - tried and tested Socialist practise.

Say: From what will you pay the Guaranteed Income (TM) when entrepreneurs use their creativity not to produce but to escape.

In planned economy there won't be any need to motivate entrepreneurship at all (this have some disadvantages of course, but at least unemployed won't starve). People who don't like this system will be free to leave the country, so what a problem?!

The problem is:

You can ignore reality, but you cannot ignore the consequences of ignoring reality.
(Ayn Rand)

The problem is, if you had free reign, you would turn your country into another North Korea.

[giantdragon]

@anu and supporters: you must understand that Ayn Rand and any other laissez faire ideology simply won't work in the era of technological unemployment! You may don't like socialism, but ALL solutions to the OP problem contains parts of it.

[anu]

@anu and supporters: you must understand that Ayn Rand and any other laissez faire ideology simply won't work in the era of technological unemployment! You may don't like socialism, but ALL solutions to the OP problem contains parts of it.

From the fact that you can't imagine different solutions does not follow that they don't exist.

[giantdragon]

From the fact that you can't imagine different solutions does not follow that they don't exist.

These solution were discussed many times in this thread! All of them are either some for of socialism or "starve the useless people". You have to admit that there are no third way!

[dogechode]

This is absurd.

Yes, burger flipping and screw tightening and poop-shoveling will soon no longer be available as jobs. But who's complaining? The fact is everyone thinks they are too good to do those jobs nowadays, and that includes the poor classes. The few people that are willing to do these jobs, expect absurd amounts of compensation for doing them (ie the fast food workers strikes.)

There are plenty of jobs and every time something gets automated, it tends to open up new avenues for careers. I think there is a certain line that people will not want to cross with automation due to society's ingrained fear of "thinking robots." So there should always be plenty of jobs for people that have a brain and are willing to use it - management, planning, research, medicine, etc etc...

The REAL problem is, and it's unpopular to say this but it's true, there is a strong correlation (at least here in the USA) between the groups of people who do these 'automate-able' jobs, and having a lot of children. They are quite literally out-breeding the scientists and white collar folks at an alarming rate. So you see, the group of people that work the jobs that are being taken away, is growing, while the group of people that work the jobs which are expanding, is stagnating or shrinking (this is currently being offset by immigration, H1B visas, etc.)

If you don't believe this, look at the decline in interest in mathematics, chemistry, engineering, etc. Many of those jobs are being filled by foreigners because most native home-grown Americans don't put in the study time and aren't interested in anything that has a hint of math in it.