Scientists Warn the UN of Capitalism's Imminent Demise

[Dave Hounddriver]

10 minutes ago, JeSsDaDdY said:

while most people don't like the fact that jobs at Starbucks or Walmart don't pay much, they also don't want to pay much for their stuff.

We may see some backlash here.

Upper middle class and rich people will get tired of doing their own grocery shopping, bagging their own groceries, loading them in the car all by themselves.  They will get tired of self-service cafeterias etc.  They are willing and able to pay for service and high-end stores and restaurants will still need human staff to cater to them.  Those people will be well paid as the customers will demand the best service.

There will not be enough jobs for everyone though.  I see the high paying jobs of the future being designed for the repairmen who can fix things.  Computers, plumbing, air conditioning, robots, if you can fix it when it breaks then you have job security.

[Jack Peterson]

 Strikes me that the Scientists that come up with these Articles need to watch out for themselves, They too may be an endangered species, If the Computer based robot etc can do a job, I reckon there's will/may at risk at some time  so I guess retraining into the Jobs our Dave mentions could be in order EH?

For me, to old and settled to worry too much  as I said earlier we have heard it all before and  the end of the World will be at the discretion of a Robotic managed computer. (think 1984, 1999 and other dates )

[StayAtHomeDad]

1 hour ago, Dave Hounddriver said:

Computers, plumbing, air conditioning, robots, if you can fix it when it breaks then you have job security.

Good point. I agree. There always has been and always will be work for people who can just fix "stuff". I let my daughter look at all the stuff that breaks or stops working and then ask her to give her opinion on why said item broke or stopped working. She's getting pretty good at it and even has figured out how to repair a few of the pieces. She assembled her own PC at 9 and knows her way around a gaggle of devices, cables and connectors. Now, teaching her to perform basic car/motorcycle maintenance (she knows how to change a tire; it's just too big for her right now.)

I am trying to teach her that she should rely on her own intuition and skills to fix problems - and stuff. Tomboyish? Maybe, but I think it will help her in the long run. Now, if I could only get her to learn how to ride a bike. I never seen a kid have so much trouble balancing those two wheels. We try every couple of months, but no joy so far. Oh well. Can't have everything I suppose.

Edited August 29, 2018 by JeSsDaDdY

[Jack Peterson]

 I sit and wonder if they (The scientists) are trying to turn us all into Trekkies ( )

Might help me understand why so many University Course are Computer based, we are most definitely Breeding a lot of IT Geeks,

[ sorry mr IT Geek but] I live and enjoy this Real world and leave the Futuristic stuff to others 

[Tukaram (Tim)]

Changing to more sustainable energy won't hurt capitalism, it just make new business opportunities.  Just as automation does not wipe out the job market - it just makes different jobs.

[Jack Peterson]

4 hours ago, GeoffH said:

And increasing costs of recovering resources (which is not the same thing as running out, we're NOT running out) is causing reduced profit which reduces innovation as well.

 or put another way;

 

“The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome will become bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance." - Cicero, 55 BC

So, evidently we've learned bugger all over the past 2,073 years.

[GeoffH]

2 minutes ago, Jack Peterson said:

 or put another way;

 

“The Budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed, lest Rome will become bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance." - Cicero, 55 BC

So, evidently we've learned bugger all over the past 2,073 years.

 

I never said that I believed the budget needed to be balanced, or that the treasury needs to be refilled or that public debt should be reduced.

 

Most of the problem is actually private and company debt which governments only have limited control over.

[Jack Peterson]

7 minutes ago, Jack Peterson said:

So, evidently we've learned bugger all over the past 2,073 years.

 I think this says it all 

4 minutes ago, GeoffH said:

I never said that I believed the budget needed to be balanced, or that the treasury needs to be refilled or that public debt should be reduced.

NO one has suggested you did, but it all follows through that none of this is new, people are just mongering in things that will not change in our life time and the Quote was to illustrate that the worlds ( in this case Italy) [ well Romeat least] concerns has been around for a very long time with regards to this topic Now, as it seems a little  niggle has crept in I will leave it with you all to put things right,

[Guy F.]

For a long time pundits have said automation will lead to increased unemployment. Somehow that hasn't happened. I expect the near future to be much like the recent past.

Completely free markets are not the salvation of humanity. Greed is NOT always good. Regulation is necessary to save us from the insanely greedy.

Edited August 29, 2018 by Guy F.

[Dave Hounddriver]

26 minutes ago, Guy F. said:

Completely free markets are not the salvation of humanity. Greed is NOT always good.  Regulation is necessary to save us from the insanely greedy.

There is a fine line between greed and ambition.  It has been my experience that greedy people and/or companies eventually fail while ambitious people and/or companies become so successful that they often need to be regulated to give other people a chance.  The most successful people/companies are that way because they are smarter and hungrier and more willing to do what it takes to win.  This leads me to a question.

 In a perfect world, who would you prefer to see running it?  A greedy loser, a successful and ambitious businessman, a politician who is skilled at convincing people they are happy, or a scholar who has never been either but teaches how they got that way?