We could outlaw bulldozers, that would help, then shovels, make them use spoons. Imagine the jobs we could create.
We could outlaw bulldozers, that would help, then shovels, make them use spoons. Imagine the jobs we could create.Stop being so melodramatic. The issue wasn't one of economics, it is one of poor public policy - namely, how do you help those that are displaced? A more robust safety net would could have helped people displaced by automation.
Did you cry for government subsidies when the horse carriage makers and saddle makers were being driven out of business by Ford and the horseless carriage?
It absolutely is a bug if there is no mechanism in place to repurpose the workers displaced by automation.
First they put machines on the assembly line and I remained quiet.
Then they put self checkout in the grocery stores and I didn't say a word.
Then they started 3D printing buildings and I didn't care.
Algorythms and big data have already taken the fun out of music.
Entertainment has become formulaic, predictable and unimaginative.
Eventually machine learning will eliminate the need for analysts and consultants and many other previously insulated white collar jobs.
Some utopia
That is precisely the point and often the center of debate around globalization. What is an appropriate safety net for thousands of displaced blue collar workers.Stop being so melodramatic. The issue wasn't one of economics, it is one of poor public policy - namely, how do you help those that are displaced? A more robust safety net could have helped people displaced by automation.
Did you cry for government subsidies when the horse carriage makers and saddle makers were being driven out of business by Ford and the horseless carriage?
It is not unique to red states. Many blue urban areas similarly suffer a disparity in educational quality, hence the emergence of charter schools.Recall it was mentioned those smart asians planned their economy well enough to transition to more advantageous layers built on top as the lower ones became too competitive. To bad the red state types never believed in the education & orchestration necessary for this, and regrettably their disease is infecting the rest of country if we don't do something about it. I fully support amputation given treatment is an obvious dead end.
It is not unique to red states. Many blue urban areas similarly suffer a disparity in educational quality, hence the emergence of charter schools.
The problem with displaced workers will always be about systemic efficiency.
Farming land by hand is more efficient than any machine method can ever be. Its just cheaper by machine, but not more energy efficient.
Having a system where people sit around doing nothing while machines do everything actually isn't efficient. The humans are leeches at that point. Then we wait until we run low on EROEI and especially cheap rubber/petroleum/plastic products.
That can go on for maybe 30 years. Not even half an average lifetime. This shit is dumb.
The problem with displaced workers will always be about systemic efficiency.
Farming land by hand is more efficient than any machine method can ever be. Its just cheaper by machine, but not more energy efficient.
Having a system where people sit around doing nothing while machines do everything actually isn't efficient. The humans are leeches at that point. Then we wait until we run low on EROEI and especially cheap rubber/petroleum/plastic products.
That can go on for maybe 30 years. Not even half an average lifetime. This shit is dumb.
There must be some underlying shame that causes otherwise sensible people to keep on making these predictions about how the current situation is unsustainable and we're all doomed. It wasn't true when Malthus predicted it, it wasn't true during the 1970s when people were predicting mass starvation, it's not true now with the "global warming will displace billions," it isn't true when you say it, and it won't be true the next time same other person predicts it either.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/24/seven-big-failed-environmentalist-predictions/
You must be using a nonstandard definition of efficiency here because farming by machine is vastly, vastly more efficient than by hand.
Again, what definition of 'efficient' are you using?
In terms of net inputs vs production he's likely correct. You use less energy when harvesting by hand (i.e. no petroleum for the tractors, etc) and yield per meter is greater because you have a more granular control over each piece of produce so less gets crushed by an inaccurate combine for example. The problem isn't strictly one of efficiency alone however but rather of scale. For comparison compare farming to construction, if you're making a sand castle building one by hand is more efficient than using a machine for various reasons. But once you're talking about building a larger structure like a skyscraper than doing it by hand is crazy talk even though on a micro scale it's more "efficient" you don't want to wait hundreds of years for the more "efficient" hand construction that using automation could complete in a single year. It makes no difference if you'd be more efficient at farming by hand if all you can farm and harvest is a half-acre plot. To use made-up numbers, 90% efficiency at non-automated farming on a half-acre gets trumped pretty convincingly by even 60% efficiency using automation that allows one to farm 1,000 acres.
https://veganorganic.net/2012/06/what-is-efficient-agriculture/
In terms of net inputs vs production he's likely correct. You use less energy when harvesting by hand (i.e. no petroleum for the tractors, etc) and yield per meter is greater because you have a more granular control over each piece of produce so less gets crushed by an inaccurate combine for example. The problem isn't strictly one of efficiency alone however but rather of scale. For comparison compare farming to construction, if you're making a sand castle building one by hand is more efficient than using a machine for various reasons. But once you're talking about building a larger structure like a skyscraper than doing it by hand is crazy talk even though on a micro scale it's more "efficient" you don't want to wait hundreds of years for the more "efficient" hand construction that using automation could complete in a single year. It makes no difference if you'd be more efficient at farming by hand if all you can farm and harvest is a half-acre plot. To use made-up numbers, 90% efficiency at non-automated farming on a half-acre gets trumped pretty convincingly by even 60% efficiency using automation that allows one to farm 1,000 acres.
https://veganorganic.net/2012/06/what-is-efficient-agriculture/
We would still have the problem of property rights. There would be competition for land and how to distribute a sustainable plot among heirs? Communal farms and population control would seem to be a necessity.I guess if you're only looking at energy efficiency and not economic efficiency that makes sense. Of course if energy efficiency was what mattered we should all go back to subsistence farming.
Did it not occur to you that those predictions are nothing more than the projection of what we desire and can't admit we feel? If there is an unconscious feeling that something important in life is missing, the joy of being alive, say, then wouldn't the world be made up of Zombies walking backward into self willed extinction? Perhaps what you have is a religious faith intended to keep such a realization at bay.There must be some underlying shame that causes otherwise sensible people to keep on making these predictions about how the current situation is unsustainable and we're all doomed. It wasn't true when Malthus predicted it, it wasn't true during the 1970s when people were predicting mass starvation, it's not true now with the "global warming will displace billions," it isn't true when you say it, and it won't be true the next time same other person predicts it either.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/04/24/seven-big-failed-environmentalist-predictions/