This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Labor Day 2012: The Future Of Work

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Submitted by Charles Hugh Smith from Of Two Minds

Labor Day 2012: The Future of Work

Technology and the Web are destroying far more jobs than they create. We will need to develop a "Third Way" based on community rather than the Market or the State to adapt to this reality.

What better day to ponder the future of work than Labor Day? Long-time correspondent Robert Z. recently shared an essay on just this topic entitled Understanding the 'New' Economy.

The underlying political and financial assumption of the Status Quo is that technology will ultimately create more jobs than it destroys. Bob's insightful essay disputes that assumption:

Over the past 15 years, the global economy has experienced structural changes to a degree not seen in nearly 150 years. Put simply, the Industrial Revolution of the 1800s has given way to a post-industrial economy. In this post-industrial economy, technology has now evolved to the point where it destroys more jobs than it creates.

 

Still, most people are Luddites to some extent. Human nature is to resist dramatic change, either actively or passively, until we have no other choice. If you don’t believe that, just listen to our presidential candidates.

 

Both Mitt Romney and Barack Obama will give us happy talk about maintaining entitlement benefits (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid) that cannot possibly be sustained. They will talk about energy self-sufficiency. They will talk about creating jobs. They will tell us that we can somehow ‘grow’ our way out of our economic distress. But neither candidate will admit that technology now destroys more jobs than it creates, because to do so would be to commit political suicide. The fact is that none of the happy talk will ever come true. Instead, the Federal Government, with the tacit approval of both major political parties, continues to run trillion-dollar-plus deficits year after year in a futile attempt to spend our way out of our economic problems and to sustain an economic model that cannot be sustained.

 

Those who believe that bringing manufacturing back to the US will also bring back jobs are trying to fight a war that has already been fought and lost. Why? The answer is technology. It’s actually a fairly simple process now to bring production of many items back to the US, simply because of automation and robotics. A factory filled with robots can operate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, so long as the raw material inputs keep flowing into the factory. Robots don’t take breaks, don’t make mistakes, don’t call in sick, don’t take vacations, don’t require expensive health insurance, and don’t receive paychecks. A fully automated robotic manufacturing facility might require only 100 workers, while a traditional assembly line facility might utilize 3,000 workers. That’s a huge difference in the number of jobs. The simple fact is that most of the lost manufacturing jobs are never coming back.

 

What about all the marketing, administrative, accounting, and IT jobs that we think can’t be outsourced or automated? Well, retail enterprises now tailor any number of special offers directly to individual customers by mining data from reward programs. That doesn’t take an expensive ad budget or a huge marketing department, since it’s all automated. Have you ever noticed that most of the advertising you see while you surf the Web is tailored to things you might be interested in buying? That’s all automated – huge numbers of marketing professionals are just not needed.

 

In the accounting world, ‘lean accounting’ attempts to streamline accounting processes and eliminate accounting inefficiencies. A byproduct of ‘lean accounting’ is often greater use of technology and a significant reduction in the number of accountants and accounting clerks. In the IT (Information Technology) sector, computer algorithms for high-frequency stock trading (HFT) have become so complex that specialized software now writes new HFT programs and algorithms. That reduces job opportunities for programmers. The net result of all these examples is not job creation. It’s job destruction.

 

How about government jobs and government-related jobs? Well, think about the US defense budget. It’s a huge example. We surely do not need as many tanks and fighter jets as we used to, now that we have remote-controlled drones to do many of the jobs required. And with the availability of these drones, we might not need as many aircraft carriers, ships, or military personnel either.

 

What about the Post Office? Do we really need daily mail service in an electronic world?

 

The point is that as we let go of old methodologies, whether in the private sector or in government, huge numbers of jobs simply disappear. As a society, we need to admit that ‘free-market’ capitalism is not going to bring back these lost jobs. Thanks to technology, society is capable of meeting basic human needs (food, clothing, shelter, transportation) with far fewer workers percentage-wise than were needed in the past. But as a society, we also need to admit that socialistic solutions won’t work either, simply because human nature is to take care of ourselves and our families first. Once we have provided for ourselves and our families, very few of us are both willing and able to provide for every stranger that might knock on our door seeking assistance.

 

As a nation, we must at some point address any number of major economic issues, including the massive overhang of debt (public and private) that cannot possibly be repaid and demands for future entitlement payments that cannot possibly be met. As a society, we ought to admit that we cannot borrow our way to prosperity. Unless interest rates are zero forever and creditors are willing to forego scheduled repayments forever, borrowing our way to prosperity is a mathematical impossibility.

 

One point is certain. Even if we find the political will to deal with the mathematics of our economic problems, we will never find long-term solutions to our economic issues until we recognize the profound economic changes wrought by technological advances. This is especially true with respect to our traditional view of a job and a paycheck. While it is true that new opportunities will always exist, these opportunities may not be as plentiful as the jobs of the past once were. And these opportunities will generally require more advanced skills than many of the jobs of the past. Technology has fundamentally changed the nature of paying work, and it is also one of the major economic issues of our time.

 

About the author:

Bob Z., of Vancouver, Washington, is a Corporate Finance executive who retired in 2007 from an upper management position with a Fortune 500 corporation.

Thank you, Bob, for your forthright appraisal of technology and jobs. The decline in labor's share of the GDP (gross domestic product) is sobering:

Here are some other points to consider:

1. The build-out of a new technology creates a large but temporary number of jobs. This has been the case for some time: the construction of the railroads created a jobs boom that soon disappeared in a financial bust as rail was over-built and profits were non-existent for many of the extraneous or duplicate lines.

Telephony and telecom followed similar arcs, and did the build-out of the Internet infrastructure.

2. Technology maturation leads to diminishing return on labor as incremental advances in productivity are capital-intensive. Semiconductor manufacturing is a good example; fabrication facilities (fabs) cost upwards of $2 billion each even as the number of workers need to operate the fab declines. Profit margins on many high-technology products are razor-thin, flat-screen displays being a prime example, and diminishing margins further pressure labor costs.

3. Software is leading the next-generation industrial revolution, automating many tasks that were considered "safe" from automation. As Bob pointed out, this includes securities trading and accounting. (I would add tax preparation for the majority of tax situations.) Can the law, academia and government remain immune? Unlikely.

4. Although few dare contemplate this, the low-hanging fruit of technology may have already been plucked. Take healthcare as an example: antibiotics and vaccines virtually eliminated many diseases at a very low cost per dose (though some diseases are coming back due to unvaccinated host populations and bacterial adaptation).

Antibiotics are "one size fits all" technologies: they act basically the same on every target bacteria and in every host. Compare that universality to the spectrum of individual responses to cancer treatments and other medications: one size does not fit all, and many of the most profitable drugs of the past few decades treated symptoms, not the underlying illness.

It is increasingly clear that there is no "magic pill" that kills all cancers, or even specific cancers in all patients. Lifestyle diseases such as diabetes appear impervious to "magic bullet" cures, as the causal factors of the disease are complex. The same can be said of diseases of aging and environmental factors.

In other words, the notion that tens of billions of dollars in high-tech research will yield "one size fits all" low-cost treatments of complex diseases has been shown to be problematic, and very possibly a fantasy.

5. The Internet is destroying vast income streams that once supported tens of thousands of jobs in industries from finance to music. Craigslist has gutted the once-immense income stream from newspapers, and web-based marketing has shredded print-media advert page counts. Global competition and pressure to maintain profits and margins relentlessly drive enterprises to slash payrolls.

6. As I have discussed here many times over the years, the rising costs of taxes, benefits and regulations have squeezed small businesses. In response, many small companies rely on automation and software to perform tasks that until recently required a human worker.

Those small businesses that cannot prosper via technology are going under, and the risks posed by ever-higher costs have raised entry barriers to starting a small business. These trends are visible in this chart:

The array of web-based tools available to entrepreneurs now is astonishing. Why take on the risks of hiring people when you can do the work yourself with low-cost web tools and software? For many small enterprises, that is the only way to survive.

Advanced societies face a dilemma that cannot be solved by more debt or more technology: how to distribute not just the output of the economy, but the work and responsibility so that everyone has an opportunity to contribute and earn their keep.

Those who have plowed through my books know that I see community as the only viable way forward. Many aspects of human life cannot be turned into a "market opportunity," nor can they be taken over by the insolvent central-planning Central State. Paying people to stay home and rot is not a solution, but neither is paying people more than they produce in competitive markets. There is a "Third Way," but we've lost the skills and infrastructure required. Of the three elements of civil society, the Market and the State have crowded out Community. We either re-discover the labor-value of community or we devolve further into a potentially "death spiral" social and financial instability.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:30 | 2758013 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

It won't be long now before the robots are building more robots, which build more robots...and some Bill Gates-like nerds take control of Skynet and we're all terminated.

Then again, maybe some Anonymous hackers get control of enough drones and turn them against the elitist rat bastards.

Hacker Club

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 18:59 | 2758879 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Robots are already building robots.

The solution that has  apparently  been agreed upon by TPTB is a mass culling.  If there isn't some reason they want or need you, you die.  It's as simple as that.  The process of elimination of the "useless eaters" is now underway.  I don't know why it's so difficult for most people to see, expect they just can't admit it because they're the ones that are being culled.

Ted Turner and friends' 100,000,000 is looking to be the objective more and more every day.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 23:11 | 2759315 Real Estate Geek
Real Estate Geek's picture

If you want a mass culling, just get people to smoke more.  The increased medical costs are more than offset by the SS savings, especially since lung cancer is such an aggressive type of tumor.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 18:17 | 2762133 respect the cock
respect the cock's picture

The obesity epidemic will be much more fatal in the long run.

Especially now that being fat is becoming accepted in society.

The ultimate Trojan Horse.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:33 | 2758023 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

The problem is with decreasing employment due to automation is that folks won't have money to spend on whatever the automated factories are supposed to make.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:33 | 2758197 Debugas
Debugas's picture

robots owners will spend money to buy from other robots owners. the rest of population is just out of equation

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:29 | 2758337 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

It is not an issue. 'Americans' have a solution for that: that is called concentration of wealth.

What is happening? 'Americans' have put the world on the road to depletion of resources.

It means at first levelling production then later, decrease in production.

Why would you want to expand the basis of consumers when the inputs to support a bigger production of goods are going declining?

Concentration of wealth will mend up for that: it means less goods traded around (conformly to decrease of resources and inputs) but paid at higher prices by 'Americans' who can afford (concentration of wealth)

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:53 | 2758624 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Really? How many GM Volts are the 1% actually going to buy? God damn you are a broken record.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:33 | 2758024 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

The Luddite view is still WRONG.  Increased levels of technology do not "cause" job loss--job loss is a result of POLICY.

Businesses can either use labor-saving technology to free up workers to perform other roles for the company, OR they can cut the workers to reap greater profits.  As they cut workers and increase profits, they REDUCE the size of their own market, because fewer people can afford their products and services.

It's amazing to me that we're still seeing this argument repeated so often, even by people who are apparently able to understand the way an economy works. 

The Luddite argument was *never* true--automation doesn't "destroy jobs" in any way.  It just makes it easier for the rent-seekers to hide their eyes from the results of their own decisions.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:54 | 2758083 centerline
centerline's picture

+1.  Easier to find something to blame other than raw human behavior.  No to mention it works so well on so many so easily and for so long.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:03 | 2758106 Gully Foyle
Gully Foyle's picture

blunderdog

"Increased levels of technology do not "cause" job loss--job loss is a result of POLICY."

People like Herman Kahn and R. Buckminster Fuller were discussing this way back in the seventies.

Even Gingritch's buddies who authored Future Shock saw how technology was going to impact employment.

Fuck this is knowledge made public at leats forty years ago yet it seems no one paid attention.

Then again no one paid attention when the small farmer was losing his farm, when factories were being closed and parted out by speculators, and when Perot warned about the great sucking sound.

The employment issue has a similar trajectory to the drug issue, when it happened to minorities no one gave a shit. As soon as it started hitting white folk people were ouitraged.

I think all those white collar whiners deserve to lose their jobs. They failed to act when the tide started turning. They didn't care because it wasn't their problem.

Not it is. Now it is their childrens problem. And their grandchildrens.

They fucked themselves and have ZERO hope of crawling back from the abyss.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:27 | 2758312 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

Abso-fucking-lutely.

If you have not read it, you MUST read it:

Grunch of Giants | The Buckminster Fuller Institute - http://bit.ly/PXoA0k

 

And there are other policies in place...right now...to discourage people from doing more with less.
The system is designed to lock you in....steal your cash AND labor.
Literally, everything you own MUST belong to "them".

Sick system. Hell, even Jesus told you about it:

They showed Jesus a gold coin and said to him, "The Roman emperor's people demand taxes from us."
He said to them, "Give the emperor what belongs to the emperor, give God what belongs to God, and give me what is mine."

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:50 | 2758754 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Nice link.

He's right, but one minor quibble: clinging to the (outdated and disproven) mysticism of "mind" is not useful. 

"Mind" is just a term invented to describe a PROCESS which is very poorly defined and very rarely considered.  There's no "there" there.

Also worth considering: some of the loudest posters around here, if they ever bothered to try to read Fuller's work, would just call him a commie and be done with it.  Find a rope and a lamppost, that sort of thing.  We all do what we can.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:09 | 2758125 i_call_you_my_base
i_call_you_my_base's picture

"Businesses can either use labor-saving technology to free up workers to perform other roles for the company, OR they can cut the workers to reap greater profits.  As they cut workers and increase profits, they REDUCE the size of their own market, because fewer people can afford their products and services."

You are assuming that a business bases decisions on a longer horizon, and somewhat in unison, and believe that in their consideration set is reducing their market along with reducing employees. No company thinks this way. And by the time they've done it to themselves, it's too late. All of business doesn't make the mistake and then decide that they must hire the workers back to increase their potential market.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:16 | 2758150 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

I wasn't "assuming" anything.  I KNOW how business decisions are made in the USA. 

I'm pointing out that the decisions are made by humans--blaming the creation of technology for unemployment is analogous to blaming guns for murders.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:35 | 2758203 i_call_you_my_base
i_call_you_my_base's picture

Is it "blame" or a "cause" being described here? Do you disagree with the assertions or tone?

My only point is that you claim some sort of limiting factor on the impact of technology, but I believe the connection between reducing staff and simultaneously reducing market potential is so far removed from the decision-maker as to render the impact you cite completely impotent. And I might argue that it will always be too far removed given the nature of competition among many business participants and the fact that short-term thinking can actually defeat the long-term thinking pariticpants.

It certainly is a decision, as all things are, but I am curious as to what construct you would create in order for this limiting factor to actually work? And by that I mean real financial incentives rather than a mushy idea of business having a social responsibility?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:06 | 2758284 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

   I believe the connection between reducing staff and simultaneously reducing market potential is so far removed from the decision-maker as to render the impact you cite completely impotent.

The effect isn't impotent, there's just a very long lag between the early steps in the process and the eventual outcome.  I agree with you in the sense that short-sighted decision making will likely always continue to dominate the industrial process, but only because we've reached a point where the *emergent* FINANCIAL flows completely overshadow the "real economic" flows.  (A good example of what happens is GM in the '80s when it tried to become a bank that ran an auto-manufacturing subsidiary.)

I don't believe the problem can "fixed" through legislation or abstract rule-sets of any kind.  Corporations are a synthetic life-form which exist to min/max their ability to consume money given whatever rule-sets are enforced.

This is the way the competitive business market has ALWAYS worked.  Control of resources gradually shifts over time to smaller and smaller groups of people.  At some critical point, either global depression occurs (as now) and the controllers of resources begin to consider adapting new policies, OR violent overthrow of existing property-rights occurs and the groups no longer able to participate in the global economy "steal" what is required for them to re-enter the system.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:39 | 2758579 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Is it stealing if it was stolen from you in the first place (re: the world's wealth)?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:34 | 2758728 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Good question.  "Steal" is a loaded term.  Regardless, I chose it just because it was the right term within that context.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:23 | 2758176 centerline
centerline's picture

More companies used to think this way.  The forecast upon which critical decisions are made has been reduced further and further.

But, of course, you are hitting the nail on the head.  The whole concept of a healthy economy is based on investment - the very concept of such is destroyed when forecasting becomes useless.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:55 | 2758259 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

Blunderdog, someone finally got it right. At one time almost everyone was in agriculture and related fields. It is less than 2% of the U.S. population, now. The same holds true for manufacturing. I think it used to take about 50 people to make a car in the 40's and now it takes less than 20. That frees up people to make iPod's and Pads which did not exist then.

All these type analyses look backwards, not forward. We do not know what there will be to do in services or make in the future. Freedom and ingenuity will develop things we have not thought of. Even things we have thought of may surprise us. Would you think there would be a wildly successful chain of custom order coffee shops like Starbuck's twenty or thirty years ago? I would not. Coffee was often free with breakfast. Now it is an industry with tens of thousands of baristas who need shops, machinery, training and make lots of us happy and more productive.

I would say the more proper thing to worry about is when governments everywhere are in charge of everything and are concerned about providing for the survival of the buggy whip industry. That is what governments tend to do.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:54 | 2758445 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

    I would say the more proper thing to worry about is when governments everywhere are in charge of everything and are concerned about providing for the survival of the buggy whip industry. That is what governments tend to do.

You're correct historically, but it's not JUST governments that do this.  *Every* large institution attempts to prevent change when that change threatens their existing plantation structure. 

A good example: RIAA/MPAA have been colluding with government to fix prices for decades now.  In some sense, it's inappropriate to blame everything about that IP war on government, because those corporations that got the DMCA passed *are* citizens who demand political representation.  Government is just refereeing between competing interests, and will generally side with whichever faction can dominate the financial conflict.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:08 | 2759383 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

Agreed. It is why as a libertarian I now side with less government power to pick and favor those type interests.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:35 | 2758367 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Businesses can either use labor-saving technology to free up workers to perform other roles for the company,

_________________________

What other roles? Businesses have purposes and once the purposes are served, what other roles are there to be filled?

Infinite growth, here we go, the 'american' meme...

Businesses wont create roles, job or provide work for the sake of profiting roles, job or work.

With the depletion of resources coming up as brought up by 'Americans', the production is limited and to decline.

Who shall want to expand the customer basis when one lacks the inputs to produce and meet the demand?

US citizenism at work.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:39 | 2758387 akak
akak's picture

Shut the fuck up.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:46 | 2758417 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Maybe you could shut me up by attacking my points instead of hitting off target through a lavish use of ad hominems?

Oh, yes, you cant do that, cause you are an 'American' and 'Americans' can not face the reality of 'Americanism'. They have to run away into propaganda and fantasy.

So, obviously, I will keep going...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:15 | 2758453 akak
akak's picture

Go to Hell, you lying bastard.

Your incessant trolling has no "points", other than that you are a blind bigot entirely consumed by your hatred for all Americans, on whom you are willing to blame all the ills of the world, as well as project all the failings of your own natural resource blobbing-up society, as well as the innumerable and egregious crimes and human rights violations of your own Chinese Communist masters, whom you are congenitally unable to criticize in any way whatsoever --- unlike the Americans whom you hate with such an all-consuming passion, who highlight and criticize the crimes of their OWN government, and the failings of their OWN society, on an almost continual basis here in this forum.

The only question remaining here is whether you are in their direct employ, or merely spewing your obsessive lies and hatred on your own dime.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:37 | 2758574 goldenrod
goldenrod's picture

Good job, akak.  You finally found the chink in his armor :-)

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:44 | 2758592 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Are you allowed to use 'chink in his armor' when talking about a (I'm guessing here) Chinese poster's comments? 

J/K  I am just remembering the Jeremy Lin/ESPN debacle

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:46 | 2758598 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

Made me laugh.

The 'American' armchair warrior...

So lets see: 'Americans' are entitled to criticize and highlight the crimes of their own governments but others dont...

But what are you doing when you keep blaming China? Oh wait, as an 'American' you have that right.

Others have only one option: criticizing and blaming their own governments.

'Americans': every government...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:59 | 2758637 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

AnAnonymous, displaying the mind of a monocot:

Others have only one option: criticizing and blaming their own governments.

How convenient of you to leave out the other embarrassing options at your disposal: blobbing up, roadside crapping, opium smoking. Very Chinese citizenish, monolizing the speeching means like a paid official talking mouth for the party.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:10 | 2758663 akak
akak's picture

 

AnAnonymous, displaying the mind of a monocot:

Well, as we all know, coconuts, even algebraic coconuts, are of course monocots, so ....

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:02 | 2758646 Citxmech
Citxmech's picture

Criticize away - just offer some options or alternatives.  Your 'criticism' amounts to a big:  "Your momma's so ugly. . ." joke without the funny puch-line.

Again, I'll ask:  what do you propose?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:02 | 2758470 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

Well, one thing we basically gave up in the USA is customer service.  There's still plenty of demand for it, and it does serve a real function, but it became considered too expensive for many businesses.

As a result, a lot of customers of those businesses never get the product or service they purchased just because they lack the understanding or sophistication to get it delivered.

From a strictly cost/revenue perspective, this is GREAT for business--they can collect the customer's money and never actually deliver the product.  But that's a short-term benefit, because as more and more customers become dissatisfied with the service components of their product, they turn away from the company.

So that'd be an example of what COULD be done with widget-welding employees who are replaced by a robot.  They could do customer service, which robots still really can't perform effectively.  From my experience, the Indians or Philipinos are perfectly SKILLED to perform that kind of work, but the communications problems are not easily overcome.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:33 | 2758026 yochananmichael
yochananmichael's picture

Even if the factory employs only robots, the factory will at least pay local taxes.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:34 | 2758028 ChickenTikka
ChickenTikka's picture

MosFilm, nice throwback ZH.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:38 | 2758038 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

some diseases are coming back due to unvaccinated host populations

What bullshit is this. When you calculate the cost of a condition like autism which has exploded in the past few sand which has been linked to thimerosal in vaccines...however the vaccine makers may try to discredit that finding....I'd rather take my chances with measles, mumps, chicken pox...we all lived through it and got a natural immunity...oh there it is is...no profit on natural immunity...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:11 | 2758134 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

I do not think that vaccines are your culprit.  There has been plenty of good, empirical research to indicate this.  What I would look at is a sexually transmitted disease: a virus that infects the fetus in the womb and impairs development.  There is historical evidence to support this.  Autism did not boom during the initial generation (cohort) of immunizations.  Autism only began to boom after the sexual revolution.   There is a price to pay for all this sexual liberation, and since we are not allowed to say anything about that sexual revolution and feminism, except how wonderful it all is, we will never know.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 18:07 | 2758788 Lester
Lester's picture

How many trillions spent on cancer treatment and research?

The first vaccinations were not literal cocktails of ingredients. Serums or simple dead-cell cultures might be effective, but "medical progress" brought to you by Big Pharma has played you for lab-rats & mice since the 1950s.

Fluoriated water and other "treatments" are slow killers. Shit food, foods devoid of nutrition and ingredient killers like aspertame which is omnipresent in all sorts of foods besides the diet foods and drinks is a leading cause of MS. Know anyone who has MS, Lupus, and all the new range of diseases manifested widely through the American Population since the 1980s?

Doctors will fucking kill you; it's their training and methodology. First they will drain you of all resources and hope for living. Homeopathy and Naturopathy, Herbalism and other so-called "alternative" medical systems are much less likely to severely impact your system. Fact is, all Alopathic medicine is based on systemic poisoning to suppress symptoms rather than stimulation of the body to allow a cure.

Humans beings in present worldwide number are no longer needed or manageable. TPTB, the sociopaths who've managed to rob their way to the top, have decided Earth should only comprise about 400,000,000 humans at most to service and advance their goals and needs.

Everything being done now is deliberate and aimed to kill or sterilize you and your offspring. You are what you eat and live as you are conceptually able. Most everything in American Society is geared to generate depression and despair.

Nothing is by accident...

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:14 | 2759390 FreedomGuy
FreedomGuy's picture

Let's suppose all you say is true. Flouride and doctors will kill you...slowly or quickly. Big Pharma helps them both kill you like lab rats. Maybe little pharma also helps. If this is all true what should we expect to see in terms of life expectancies over the last century? Let me help you. If memory serves, the life expectancy of someone in 1900 was about 42. It is currently 80 and we are larger (fatter) and more sedentary than ever. If all these fake medical helpers are killing us how is it we are living longer and I would add more vibrantly than ever?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:22 | 2758172 smiler03
smiler03's picture

 "we all lived through it"

 

Apart from those that didn't. 

"Measles remains a leading cause of death among young children across the globe, health experts say. Despite a safe and effective vaccine being available for the past 40 years, more than half a million people died of the disease worldwide in 2003."

http://www.irinnews.org/Report/53506/NIGERIA-Measles-kills-more-than-500-children-so-far-in-2005

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:14 | 2758509 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

That particular "link" is about as tenuous and the Saddam Hussein/al Qaeda link, FYI.

Maybe a small-pox resurgence will help cull the herd of the folks who don't like science.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:24 | 2758693 smiler03
smiler03's picture

Did you actually read the whole of the link?

That link is from a service of the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and the World Health Organisation. I'm sorry that you have no trust of of the UN. Who else would you expect to correlate World Wide data on medical issues? The Huffington Post?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:36 | 2758733 blunderdog
blunderdog's picture

No, I didn't read YOUR link. 

Did you realize who I was replying to?  Take another look.  Check those margins.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:36 | 2759414 MeBizarro
MeBizarro's picture

It was discredited and the authors of the study in question admitted they fabricated their data.  We aren't sure what the increased incidence in autism is due to or have traced it to a single factor.

A signficant factor is likely that fact that kids who are diagnosed with some level of autism in the last say 5-10 years were historically classifed as 'retarded' or 'slow.' 

You would rather take your chances with a disease like smallpox or others?  Ugh.  Sadly, there has been a real resurgence among Americans who think just like this. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:39 | 2758047 Wood
Wood's picture

Let's just feed 1/2 of the poor to the other half and be done with them.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:46 | 2758073 1fortheroad
1fortheroad's picture

Spoken like a true Rotschild.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:59 | 2758089 centerline
centerline's picture

Beware of green-colored processed food.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:45 | 2758226 crkennedymd
crkennedymd's picture

+100. Damn near pissed myself laughing.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:41 | 2758053 tony bonn
tony bonn's picture

"...very few of us are both willing and able to provide for every stranger that might knock on our door seeking assistance..."

and this is the damnation of the times of the gentiles....it is a barbaric civilization adamant on conquest, control, and exploitation....

regarding the infaillibility of robots - hogwash - they need maintenance, software upgrades, electricity, and a host of other inputs to operate....no doubt they are cheaper and more capable than humans in some respects but they are by no means a free lunch...costs are shifted from labor to capital and that's a shame....

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:41 | 2758055 Duke of Con Dao
Duke of Con Dao's picture

Tower of Babel? You didn't build that Japheth!

Some other Bilblical Jew made that happen!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pNszEgqj9RY

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:08 | 2758490 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Some other Bilblical Jew made that happen!

There were no Jews when the Tower of Babel was built dudeski.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:42 | 2758060 jbvtme
jbvtme's picture

bingo

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:42 | 2758062 TheSilverJournal
TheSilverJournal's picture

Technological gains decrease labor's share of production, and that's a good thing. The point is to work less and have more. I repeat, THE POINT IS TO WORK LESS. 

This article is disgraceful and belongs on a pro central planning site.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:39 | 2758211 Debugas
Debugas's picture

to work less and have more. the only question is who will have it

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:26 | 2758327 TheSilverJournal
TheSilverJournal's picture

And who's should decide that? You? Mr. Central Planner. Why don't we just let Barack and Bernanke divvy up the booty?

Or better yet, let the market decide. Take your central planning and go away.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:51 | 2758612 Herd Redirectio...
Herd Redirection Committee's picture

If there is no justice there is no market, IMO.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 21:41 | 2759188 TheSilverJournal
TheSilverJournal's picture

If by justice you mean leaving people along, then I agree. The current injustices of regulations, taxes, and corporate and social welfare are destroying the markets. All that's needed are rules to protect private property rights.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:42 | 2758063 impermanence
impermanence's picture

The probelm isn't technology, but instead, the distribution of labor-value created.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:06 | 2758066 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

There is a definite Luddite air to this article, and it seems to ignore that which cannot be seen. Is technology really to blame? If the political and legal system was adequate to control things (it's not that hard to imagine captains of industry and finance held in check by an otherwise benevolent dictator with an oft-used guillotine), then the real wealth (savings) might still exist and grow in a manner than enables people to find plentiful work in all sorts of new industries that literally take us to the stars. Does anyone really think that in all the billions of planets in our universe alone that (probably) support life, there aren't a few great civilizations that are thriving with technology millions or even billions of years more advanced than ours? It might even be possible that we discover some new force or phenomena that allows instantaneous communication, not just light speed. Then we'd suddenly be able to tune in to the vast databases and wisdom of those civilizations.

Not saying we'd use it to humankind's advantage. Just saying that it's close-minded and nihilistic to blame our problems on technology when it's not that tool that is the source of what ails us. It's the tools who control the technology that are the enemy. Technology has liberated people from all sorts of hells and could continue to do so in the right hands. The blame we all deserve for the state of this sorry world should be placed where it belongs.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:42 | 2758217 Debugas
Debugas's picture

the problem is that people with capital (robots owners) do not wish to spend their money to reach stars so all the potencial engineers have no those jobs opportunities

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:50 | 2758077 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

Good old boys working all day doing mind numbing labor and then coming home to a wife, 2.5 kids and a beer... yeah... those days are gone. It's time to get over it.

It's time to grow up and realize the world isn't that easy. It hasn't been 99% of the time over the last 10,000 years of recorded history. The Boomers lucked out. They should remember that before they start bitching about what they "deserve" from the younger generations.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:49 | 2758412 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

" The Boomers lucked out."

We sure as hell did. It is almost mind-boggling how much we lucked out, and I remind myself of that a dozen times a day. I often remind fellow boomers who are a little too self-entitled of the same, but they damn sure don't like to hear it.

A child in the carefree, anything goes 60's. A teenager in the 70s, mostly in SoCal and Texas. "Dazed and Confused", the movie, is like looking thru a time portal back at my life then. We didn't even realize how great we had it, but had plenty of fun nevertheless. The easy money of the 80's and 90's.

Then the 2000's, and I'd grown kind of sated...then 9/11...travels to certain parts of the world that still haunt me...and that began a new trek and I woke up to a lot of things. The blissful joy of a life lived wearing rose-colored glasses suddenly evaporated. I still feel lucky to have all those memories to sustain me as I live in these very interesting times and wonder if these long days of knowing I'm now just as fucked as everyone else the world over have mostly always been is the price I must pay for all that joyful luck I once knew.

I have to admit. Ignorance was blissful, and I'm glad I was such an ignorant fuck in that previous life. Yet I'm glad I won't die with rose colored glassed still attached to my skull. The real world is exacting a price from me now, but I'll never whine about it. The boomers who do make me so sick, there's a part of me that wants to see the whole thing collapse on top of them. It's coming.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:35 | 2758559 Muppet Pimp
Muppet Pimp's picture

Speaking of changing times, children are mostly reared by the state these days as most households need both parents working to make ends meet.  This has had a poor effect on the character of the children, as the state does a poor job of raising kids.  They come out with a bias thinking the state will cure all of society's ills and are far less independent than previous generations, not to mention many are incapapble of critical thinking.  It is almost as though we would be better off if we could return to an environment where one parent raises the children and takes care of the homefront while the other parent works.  That alone might reduce the oversupply of labor we currently find that has resulted in meager gains in wages since the 70's, and instead create the needed upward pressure on wages.  Truth be told the womens lib movement and all women wanting to work that has created many of these issues.  Certainly the effects of the state raising the children is showing and the results are not good.  Having the state substitute for real family and community is not working out so well.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:59 | 2758635 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

Some good points there, but mom going to work had a lot less to do with women's lib than it did economic necessity. Nixon took us off what was left of the gold standard in 1972 and that had immediate inflationary effects. At the same time as the U.S. support of Israel in the '73 Arab/Israel conflict which led to the gas shortage and price spike, along with burgeoning taxes at all levels, much of it to pay for the Great Society bullshit of the years leading up. That's when my mother had to go to work. It was kind of a sudden thing for many people. Mom can't go back to work now, due mostly to economic necessity. The women's lib thing is overemphasized. Most women understood and still understand they serve there children best at home and even most diehard women's libbers of fame have admitted the same in recent years. I know plenty of moms and I'm pretty sure all of those who work would love to stay home if they could.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:28 | 2758717 smiler03
smiler03's picture

 "Truth be told the womens lib movement and all women wanting to work that has created many of these issues"

 

Oh, it's the fault of all women! That makes a change from blaming a President.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 18:10 | 2758787 Muppet Pimp
Muppet Pimp's picture

Hook line and sinker

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 01:37 | 2759442 Cathartes Aura
Cathartes Aura's picture

so tiresome to read yet again that "all the women wanting to work" is to blame for the poor excuses for families amrka labours under.

never a thought that working class women who raised children always worked (it's in the label, eh?), and managed to raise families. . . never mentioned is the women who raised their children despite "deadbeat dads" or equivalents. . .

but the stunning ignorance that assumes all females are family fodder, that all females even desire to raise children, or be socially and economically dependent on a man, that they have no real purpose but to be housewives and sexual servants to the breadwinners - that one always gets a head shake from me.

you want to raise children, on you go sir.  don't blame the sorry state of amrkn "culture" on women who earn wages, take some time and a longer look at the issues.

and the "meager gains in wages since the 70's" might have something to do with the outsourcing of labour to nationstates that allow "special economic zones" that use enforced labour with little to no wages paid - Nike,iCrap, etc. - finger pointing. . .

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:50 | 2758080 Curt W
Curt W's picture

Utopian type books in the 50's and 60's saw the future where computers and robots did all the work and humans were free to do whatever they desired.

They somehow thought the wealth would be spread to all.

How terribly wrong they were.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:55 | 2758252 LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

People spreading utopian fantasies have been wrong through out the ages they all leave out purposely or otherwise the most basic equation human nature

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:53 | 2758082 Piranhanoia
Piranhanoia's picture

Shouldn't this be prefaced by need for sophistication in the manufacturing?  What do we need during a collapse of our erstwhile civilization?  Robots may have a very limited use.

Bob's future demands endless progress.  The world may be more comfortable in a steady state.  Bob should read Player Piano or Dune.  Get familiar with some of the great works of the utopian future past.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 13:57 | 2758093 Dorelei
Dorelei's picture

Isn't it the dream  of most humans ? When freed from work they can spend all  their time with friends and familly while the robots work for them...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:06 | 2758111 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

Yes that's how it's supposed to work out.  The problem is, there is a monopoly on who owns said robots.  As of today, it's the employers (corporations) who own the robots and by doing so humans are left out of a job.  Instead, people should be allowed to PURCHASE their own robots and LEASE those robots to corporations, thus earning money from the sweat of THEIR robots.  Everyone with a robot should be responsible for the health (maintenance) of their silicon buddy, just as they would if it were them on the job.  Robots that are not well mantained and have significant downtime can be "fired" as would any carbon based unit.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:21 | 2758168 akak
akak's picture

When I finally buy my first personal robot, I just hope to Hell that I don't end up buying one of the AnAnonymous series --- that model is a total lemon.  Their logic circuits, in particular, are hopelessly defective, and they always seem to be squirting out servo-fluid every time they pass over a roadside.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:25 | 2758180 Hayabusa
Hayabusa's picture

We do have robots, they are called cars and yes, most of us take care of them in order to keep them slaving away for each of us.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:52 | 2758243 Debugas
Debugas's picture

one can buy corporate stocks and hope for dividends

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:28 | 2758188 Hayabusa
Hayabusa's picture

Of course it's a dream of most humans, however it's a reality for others now.  Laborers are robots and so are robots to the businesses/corporations that employ them anyway... exploitation and laziness go hand in hand... humans suck sometimes.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 19:43 | 2758955 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Guess again.

Laborers have been slaves to government for 10,000 or so years.

The humans that suck are the ones that worship government and nature keeps reloading mankind with a large majority of them.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:01 | 2758100 Debugas
Debugas's picture

just an example - new cement producing factory employs how many workers ? TWO ENGINEERS watching after robots failures and making service calls to bring in replacements

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:19 | 2758157 petolo
petolo's picture

If the system is going to crash we will only need robots to pick up the pieces, clean the  shattered  glass and bandage up the wounded.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:04 | 2758110 hivekiller
hivekiller's picture

This is one more reason why the pyramids were built. Too many people with time on their hands.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:05 | 2758112 Uncle Remus
Uncle Remus's picture

Wait - today is a holiday?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:06 | 2758117 marketblip
marketblip's picture

It might be a holiday in the US, but it certainly isn't a holiday in the Eurozone - September is crunch month for Merkel and the EZ

http://www.marketblip.com/

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:07 | 2758119 Navigator
Navigator's picture

Two words:  Peak Oil

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:42 | 2758214 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Two more words: Bull Shit

Peak Oil is a trick played on sheeple. Not that oil may be getting more difficult to acquire but moreso that it was never needed in the first place.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:56 | 2758255 Navigator
Navigator's picture

Reality is what doesn't change when you ignore all those pesky facts, q99.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:08 | 2758293 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

Right...because we all know that the supply of oil on Earth is infinite, and that even when it gets harder to find and drill, it gets cheaper.

/sarc

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 19:52 | 2758971 Anusocracy
Anusocracy's picture

Absolutely. And we are still burning peat and everyone will still be driving Honda Civics a hundred years from now.

Everything is locked in, nothing changes in a fool's mind.

 

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:43 | 2759419 MeBizarro
MeBizarro's picture

On a thread full of stupid and misguided comments, this one wins hands down.  So we would be able to support any where near the economic level of activity we have or the current levels of comfort we enjoy (not to mention the current population) without oil?  Ugh. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:08 | 2758122 nscholten
nscholten's picture

End the Fed.  Print our own money from the treasury with no usury.  Money would not be created from DEBT.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:11 | 2758131 dwdollar
dwdollar's picture

This is what happens in a failed, centrally planned economy. Buckle up.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:18 | 2758135 Hayabusa
Hayabusa's picture

Anyone who is a realist simply looks around and recognizes that the bottom line is all that matters to business who wish to remain competetive

and in stay in business.  If labor is much cheaper in another country, manufacturing will go there, if automation can do it cheaper than laborers,

automation will increase - profit, not people matter, period.  The author of the preceding article just tells it the way it is... the way it is is to make damn sure you cannot be replaced

by cheaper labor (human or rototic) before your pathecic empty life ends.  Of course the article rings of truth and what

it states about neither candidate admitting it the truth of automation replacing laborers and the associated political suicide... true, all true.  IROBOT is becoming less fiction along with

Skynet... in the end there can be only one HighLander... one man (the top dog) and his robotic empire and when he is gone only the matrix will exist and Neo will not ever get out... he'll live and die a battery to his rototic overlords (now that I think about it, it's pretty much the same for most of us right now).

I'd ask where is God when you need him, but that question is facetious in this or any other context... like Santa Claus he's not going to bring you presents or rescue you when TSHTF because he resides in your imagination.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:00 | 2758268 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

"I'd ask where is God when you need him"

Didn't you read your old testament?  Most of it reads like about like this... "the people began living immorally, greed and liscentiousness plagued the land... God punished them to show them they must live better lives."  God will be heard from yet of that you can be sure.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:05 | 2758283 akak
akak's picture

"And they did eat the bread of wickedness, and drank the wine of violence."

 

Damn, I gotta find me the grocery store that carries that.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:30 | 2758341 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

When you're there, be sure to pick up some Anacin of lapsed judgement and Pepto-Bismol of regret.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:36 | 2758372 akak
akak's picture

I've never been able to figure out if the Wine of Violence goes better with meat or fish.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:33 | 2758359 centerline
centerline's picture

I think that is just a fancy way of talking about a cheap meal and lots of tequila.  That combination and me have come pretty close to needing bail money too many times.  Good thing I suppose that the brain cells responsible for remembering the details were apparently collateral damage.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:13 | 2758140 q99x2
q99x2's picture

We should all take some time this day to contemplate the many ways to remove the banking sector from our lives and country. How to run the banksters out of the Goldman Sachs building and convert it into a free range chicken house. These actions will lead to more jobs for the unfortunate (certainly won't get me to work) and lower the bribery and blackmailing of our elected officials.

I am so thankful that I do not have a job on this labor day and hope all will join me soon.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:21 | 2758317 NewWorldOrange
NewWorldOrange's picture

Misery loves company eh? I'd love to see money demonopolized and the banksters tarred and feathered too, but I can't say I'll be happy to see everyone lose their jobs. And to those without one and having a hard time finding one, I say, make your own job, even if you have to sell cheap moving help and handyman jobs on Craigslist while living in a storage unit (been there, done that.)

And slowly build credit, get a shitload of credit cards, take the cash advances, open a forex account, wait for a major turn in say, the Euro from a risk-on to risk-off sentiment (like in early May 2012), and short the fuck out of it (been there, done that, posted all here in realtime.)

Can't never could.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:36 | 2758735 smiler03
smiler03's picture

A roulette wheel would be easier.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:53 | 2758446 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

"I am so thankful that I do not have a job on this labor day and hope all will join me soon."

 

The Great Slack Session - YouTube - http://youtu.be/3sAryusv48o

A truly inspiring video.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:14 | 2758143 Snakeeyes
Snakeeyes's picture

Work? Look at the record under Obama. Almost 13 million unwmployed, long time on unemployment and massive growth in food stamps.

http://confoundedinterest.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/obamas-record-on-the-economy-and-housing-are-we-better-off-than-4-years-ago/

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:15 | 2758146 BlackholeDivestment
BlackholeDivestment's picture

The future of work is ...suicide, if you don't die first.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:21 | 2758166 buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

The purpose of labor has always been to make someone else fat. From the time of the pyramids up until the present day corporate big shots laborers have worked the fields and factories only to have someone else eat that for which they did not toil. The advent of the machine age has allowed more to eat from the labors of fewer and fewer people. The ratio of workers needed to the general population keeps declining and so labor is squeezed due to competition. Eventually people will stop working altogether and start eating each other.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:30 | 2758191 centerline
centerline's picture

Good thing I have been stocking up on spices and BBQ sauce.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:07 | 2758484 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

Verse 53

If I have even little sense,
I will walk upon the great path of Tao
and only fear straying from it.
This Great Way is straight and smooth
yet people often prefer the side roads.

The courtyard is well kept
but the fields are full of weeds,
and the granaries stand empty.
Still, there are those of us
who wear elegant clothes, carry sharp swords,
pamper ourselves with food and drink
and have more possessions than we can use.
These are the actions of robbers.

This is certainly far from the Tao.

 

Verse 75

Why are the people starving?
Because their leaders eat up too much of the tax-grain;
that is why the people are starving.
Why are the people difficult to govern?
Because their leaders interfere;
that is why the people are difficult to govern.
Why do the people treat death lightly.
Because their leaders are so grossly absorbed in the pursuit of living;
that is why the people treat death lightly.

Indeed, it is wiser to ignore life altogether
than to place too high a value on it.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:21 | 2758170 Hayabusa
Hayabusa's picture

You know if we'd all quit bitchen and commit suicide none of this would matter anymore... just hit the Esc button.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:31 | 2758192 TrustWho
TrustWho's picture

The government is working on a bacterial carried disease that will wipe out everyone over 65 years old. They will have a 100% estate tax. This will pay-off the debt and allow for the re-structuring of society to fit their vision of utopia.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:55 | 2758256 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

Nature is doing just fine at cooking this up by itself.  Unlike a fascist state, nature does not require a corporate / government structure to profit from and regulate its ever activity.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:36 | 2758571 TrustWho
TrustWho's picture

Nature is good and mother nature always wins given time until the Sun destroys all in its death throes; however, a good lab with genetic engineering tools can create some nasty DNA from the existing DNA of this great earth. Do not sell short man's ability to destroy herself.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:32 | 2758194 centerline
centerline's picture

I think it was Hypertiger that said something about "please reporting to nearest pit of burning diesel and throw yourself in."

The more this crap goes on, the more he looks like he is right (in a macro sense), which reaalllllllllyyyyy is scary.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 23:52 | 2759362 Bernankenstein
Bernankenstein's picture

Tried that twice, didn't work.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:27 | 2758184 TrustWho
TrustWho's picture

We either re-discover the labor-value of community or we devolve

We are meeting utopia and we can't handle it. For example, beautiful models in the fashion industry are being replaced by digitized images. Their skill set was their physical beauty, so what can they do? Sexually prostitution.

I do consulting work for small business and most local business models have been broken by computer/internat technology. For example, a distributor business for roofiing and insulation provided owner good living from 1975 - 1995. Owner supported many local activities, especially schools, aand even provided grants to students going to college. He was offered $4.5 million in 2002 and today the business is zero. Distributor businesses, backbone of small to mid-size towns, are dying businesses as an example.

However, on a community basis, there are some many needs for the poor and aged. Poor can't pay and aged poor can't pat outside of medicare and medicaid (retirement homes will die when medicaid is reduced).  My definition of poor covers 80% of American population, so lots of needs.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:44 | 2758218 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

(retirement homes will die when medicaid is reduced)

 

This will be the next casuality in the decline of American life.  These homes are beginning to face a serious cash squeeze and most Departments of Public Welfare, as well as Medicare HMOS, are putting the screws to them.  If you find a way to short long-term care... it is a money-making play.  Come to think of it... McKesson is the largest provider of durable medical equipment to nursing homes... and their CEO is the highest paid CEO in America... short McKesson?

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:34 | 2758199 AurorusBorealus
AurorusBorealus's picture

"Take healthcare as an example: antibiotics and vaccines virtually eliminated many diseases at a very low cost per dose (though some diseases are coming back due to unvaccinated host populations and bacterial adaptation)."

 

The effectiveness of every form of antibiotic is waning and waning rapidly.  ESBL are one group of several new types of bacteria that is virtually immune to every form of antibiotic, and this stuff is spreading rapidly in just the past few years... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beta-lactamase . Also, antibiotics are only useful against bacteria.  Viruses remain an illusive target for medicine, and since very few people actually work on curing disease (rather than the hundreds of billions spent playing around with chemical sequences to treat the symptoms of disease by pharmaceutical companies), a tremendous amount of work needs to be done in understanding how viruses work.  Keep in mind that, throughout history, as human populations became more urbanized and crowded together, the result was always (at least for 5,700 years) an outbreak of a new disease, usually viral, that would cull the population, with as high as a 90% mortality rate (such as what happened to the American Indians).  The book to read on the subject is William McNeal, Plagues and Peoples.  If you are interested in following some of the best research on viruses, especially the flu, see http://www.recombinomics.com/ .

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 18:08 | 2758789 TrustWho
TrustWho's picture

The reason research has such trouble with viruses is they mutate so rapidly--NOT because they do not understand them. Hell, they make a flu virus based on the evolution the prior year and then take their best guess so they can manufacture the volumes required for the vaccination timeline.

The manufacturing process still uses eggs to create the vaccine-virus. A rather archaic process in this bioengineering era. Actually, a higher volume quicker process would be competitively beneficial. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:35 | 2758201 q99x2
q99x2's picture

Very nice article for the Labor Day. Thanks for the posting.

My difficulties in past businesses have been PARTNERS. Had one that had a stroke and died. Married another one that drove me to drink and so on.

'Why take on the risks of hiring people when you can do the work yourself with low-cost web tools and software?'

I guess this is what I'm doing now and it seems good so far.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:44 | 2758202 RiskAverseAlertBlog
RiskAverseAlertBlog's picture

There exist far denser sources of energy whose employment would revolutionize the physical economy and negate every last contemporary misconception regarding today's assumed limits, as well as more greatly assure the viability of present liabilities whose incurring in prior generations assumed progress toward achieving greater mastery over nature would remain a constant within an enlightened social order. I have no doubt this assumption remains correct, this notwithstanding recent decades' descent into the abyss of an imperial scam whose ultimate intention is to subdue progress. Likewise, the degree to which even current technologies have yet be fully leveraged clearly escapes the imperial slave's imagination. This should come as no surprise as those like-minded with Thomas Malthus apparently cannot be disproven enough.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:52 | 2759426 MeBizarro
MeBizarro's picture

Maybe technology saves up from going off a cliff as our ability to bring on supplies of cheap and easily accessible sweat light crude fades.  I'd doubt it.  It doesn't mean that humans won't burn and devour every source of oil-related energy over the next 50-100 yrs though in an effort to remain your current lifestyle.  

As for a more dense source of energy than oil, it doesn't exist on Earth given our current understanding of physics. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:42 | 2758216 Shizzmoney
Shizzmoney's picture

Those graphs look like just one really flaccid limp cock of unemployment

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:44 | 2758223 Uber Vandal
Uber Vandal's picture

Imagine what another 1859 Carrington Event would to our technology.

That might do for labor what the Bubonic Plauge did for the survivors.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:46 | 2758230 lizzy36
lizzy36's picture

Talking to a friend of mine this week who is a CEO of a service company out here in Alberta. 

They are always short labour. 70% don't last one year. Yes this is physical labour, generally conducted in remote regions. Starting salary is $110k. Yes $110,000. For that one does work 14 day stretches. Also sometimes 14 hour days. One is provided free food and living accomdation. So you are a 22 year old, and by the time you are 30 you could have $500-$600K saved, working these types of "labour" jobs. Yet most don't last a year. The worst come from Ontario. They want to unionize, and don't understand why the fracs run through lunch. The best come from the prairie provinces and oddly from Ireland. 

There are all sorts of arguments about why capital is taxed more favorably than labour. In my opinion most have to do with the fact that capital writes those laws. But there is also an argument to be made that in our entitled society, some don't really want to work that hard, they feel they "deserve" XYZ, rather than have to work for it.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:28 | 2758547 KK Tipton
KK Tipton's picture

Sometimes 14 hour days?  How about ALL THE TIME.

How many hours will you work in a year for these people?
Divide into $110,000 = Prob $10 an hour by the time you are done. NOT WORTH IT.

$110,000  for those hours is minimum wage in our steadily inflated (by design) economy.
Do the math and prove me wrong. Ask him how many hours his people work.
Not approximate...the EXACT documented hours.

A human's TIME is all they have. How much are you going to pay them for it?
I'll bet that CEO is not going to "fairly" compensate the workers. Bottom line.

A pure danger job on top of it all...for no pay? No thanks.

Maybe he needs to invest in robots to do that fracking?
Oh, that would be expensive you say?
Cheap bastard won't do it. Guaranteed.

Can't wait till these companies start pointing guns at the workers.
Oh, they have been doing that lately.

 

PS - all this is crap anyway. We don't need what is in the ground. B. Fuller proved it back in 1970.
Corps. and govt. need to stop suppressing better ways of doing things.
Endless war is the outcome from that deal.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:50 | 2758239 GernB
GernB's picture

What makes a people prosperous is how much they produce with how few resources. Under the thesis of this article we should be awash with high quality cheap products that took a fraction of the labor to produce. There is an up-sideb to technology replacing labor . Basically you dont need as much labor to afford the same things. If technology makes products 10x cheaper to produce, i should need 10x less labor to afford the same things. If what this article says is true, what we need is properly functioning free markets and a drastically shorter work week.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:54 | 2758251 css1971
css1971's picture

This isn't hard.

People don't live to work. It's the other way round, no matter what you've been brainwashed by tptb into thinking.

If work and money aren't available, they'll live another way.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 14:55 | 2758261 Rockfish
Rockfish's picture

Solution; SPACE. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:07 | 2758287 Zola
Zola's picture

GernB we have a winner! Without the CB sponsored inflation, the price of products and quality of live would have improved tremendously.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:15 | 2758289 dolph9
dolph9's picture

One of the insightful comments I saw on another board was that the Nazis veered too far toward "efficient destruction" in the sense that they wanted to kill off whoever they saw as undesirable, which was alot of people, so that the land could be colonized and managed by them.  And of course I would never advocate that, not to mention that in the end they bungled the job.

The world in which we live now veers too far toward "humanism."  We are all socialists now...everybody is responsible for everybody else.  All 300 million Americans and 7 billion humans MUST be provided with everything and live forever through collective action, or else we are all failures, and worse, evil.

So when we talk about job loss, and this or that, I say...bring it on.  There has to be some cathartic release at some point.  Not everybody can have a "job" that lasts 40 years and then they get a pension that pays for them to live and consume resources for another 40 after that.  The idea is absurb and always was absurd.

In the meantime, we'll just pay off the jobless with section 8 and food stamps, but even this will run out at some point.  So, either make yourself useful by scrubbing floors or repairing toilets, or go the way of the Dodo bird.  It's only natural.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:09 | 2758291 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

I was just thinking today how being serious about limiting government could be pretty good for US jobs.

One thing that would stop is policing the high seas.  All companies would have to hire private maritime security of varying quality and integrity, like the East Indian Company did.

With international commerce risky and expensive, some of the pressure on wage equalization would be relieved.  Domestic labor would be slightly more valuable because of the security premium on imports.

Just a thought...you never know where a little actual logic can take you!

Peace and Happy Labor Day, unless you're working....:*)

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:10 | 2758295 phat ho
phat ho's picture

it's all a phallacy; what the world needs now is mo' phat ho's   :-)

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:15 | 2758300 akak
akak's picture

Anyone who believes in phallacies must be a prick.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:18 | 2758309 phat ho
phat ho's picture

tee hee

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:00 | 2758632 BlackholeDivestment
BlackholeDivestment's picture

Akak, you just described everyone standing in agreement with the United States Government's offer.  http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-govt-open-for-business/2011/04/08/AF94Vw4C_video.html 

                                 http://bible.cc/revelation/6-5.htm                             

                                        I prefer the earthquake

                          that turned the Black Horse's (hate) speech

            ...into a gelding. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDwkNU6AFvY

                                   http://bible.cc/daniel/5-25.htm 

                          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-BE2Sf-ohI

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:11 | 2758296 Temporalist
Temporalist's picture

When I was in kindergarten I built a house of Lincoln Logs.  Someone came over and kicked it apart and said "You didn't build that!  Someone else built that for you!"

Ever since I have hated Lincoln.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:14 | 2758299 Jim in MN
Jim in MN's picture

Definitely not a holiday everywhere....gold about to break $1,700/oz.  Wake up central bankstaz!  Push the button!

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:31 | 2758346 pies_lancuchowy
pies_lancuchowy's picture

AWFUL article. Without even BASIC understanding what economy is all about. It is NOT about creating JOBS. It is about creating PRODUCTS and SERVICES . The goal of making shoes is not that the shoemaker can have a JOB, but that his client has a SHOE. LUDDISM has proven to be wrong. If you, Tyler, consider new technologies DETRIMENTAL to EMPLOYMENT, than please stop using this blog, rent a nice headquarter, hire some staff, and start PRINTING and DISTRIBUTING paper version! Because now you have STOLEN dozens od JOBS! Disgusting... get this guy out of ZH!!!

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:39 | 2758384 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

The 'american' way: perception commands reality.

If indeed technology harms job provision, going for a paper blog wont change the fact that technology harms job provision.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:42 | 2758409 akak
akak's picture

The Chinese Citizenism way: defecation commands real estate.

Particularly the roadsides.

 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:47 | 2758421 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

It provides jobs: cleaning the roadsides...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:51 | 2758433 akak
akak's picture

And online trolling, apparently.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:48 | 2758603 AnAnonymous
AnAnonymous's picture

You mean that some 'Americans' go lavishly on chinese shitting on the roadside?

Is it a job? My bet is they are not paid for it, they just do it for the lolz, the enjoyment, the fun...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 16:57 | 2758634 akak
akak's picture

No, I mean like some Chinese Citizenism citizen trolls, who endlessly spread their blind hatred for all Americans by repeating the same egregiously illogical, hypocritical and retarded memes in this forum.

Take a bow, after taking another dump.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 02:58 | 2759482 merizobeach
merizobeach's picture

Hey, fuckface, I'm curious: do you actually live in China?  Would you like to meet in Taipei sometime, and we can discuss your opinions about Taiwan, too?  (You'll have to apply for a visa since it's a foreign country.)

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 17:05 | 2758648 Clever Name
Clever Name's picture

Hey wait, did he just use self defecating humour?

 

Sorry, gotta give him a +1 for that line...

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 19:57 | 2758984 Poor Grogman
Poor Grogman's picture

That was funny

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:47 | 2758420 pies_lancuchowy
pies_lancuchowy's picture

If going for paper is not enough, he can distribute this paper by horses or bicycles , this will create a lot of jobs. Seriously: the thesis that technology makes a process TOO EFFICIENT , up to the point that is DESTROYS the economy, is ABSURD. THANKS to technological advancement, workers are eliminated from one process.. become shortly unemployed.. and go to another job, where they are more useful . And THIS is called PROGRESS.

Tue, 09/04/2012 - 00:58 | 2759431 MeBizarro
MeBizarro's picture

Creative destruction as advocated by Schumpter and others has two potential serious flaws - it largely assumed a world of infinite resources and that technology would never get to a point where it would reduce net employment.  2nd one is in some doubt yet but the 1st one isn't. 

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:39 | 2758385 KingTut
KingTut's picture

The obvious problem is that a huge part of the unemployable population becomes dependent on the government for support.  That means higher taxes on the few who are working and on their businesses.  Of course, the higher taxes would be redistributed to non-workers who would spend it on goods and services.  But note that the REVENUE of all the productive entities must come from the taxes on the INCOME of its workers and profits.  But that income is LESS than the revenue, by definition.  It doesn't compute.  

The government could borrow the money, but that would destroy the currency, creating a persitent inflation that only benefits owners of real assets, not the welfare class.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:51 | 2758413 BlackholeDivestment
BlackholeDivestment's picture

All kidding aside, the question of work in the future is defined by the past. Take a look at Sodom, Babylon and today's China, then take a look at your children. Oops, I mean child. Where do you think the New Secular Order boys are heading? ...and are you going to continue as you were, looking back to the future mapped out for those sweet little innocent kids that were not aborted in the womb, but cast out into this current system of debt because you love them so much?

The evidence is in our face and upon this generation, no way is the contempt of this generation going to provide anything beyond a transhuman reality based on a fascist New World order that will ''change'' human life into some kind of intelligence risen in it's own image, way beyon human. How we came to this point defines this.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8TRm4OWhvo 

The Truth is not a choice! Nobody chose to be born, much less, in order to labor in a garden fertilized with meaningless death. If this was not the case, love would be meaningless and moral hazard would be a market principle of zero interest based on the black hole and people would buy sell and trade it at the point of a gun and at the expense of humanity, calling it (g)od's work.

Mon, 09/03/2012 - 15:49 | 2758427 flacorps
flacorps's picture

The world of Vonnegut's "Player Piano" has arrived. And while it is not an unmixed curse, humanity has been too stupid to dull its sharp edges despite Vonnegut having sprayed them with day-glo orange paint more than sixty years ago.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!