When capitalism reaches its optimal point, who will buy its products?

[RVtitem]

• Tweet

The point of capitalism is minimization of cost and maximisation of profit. Human labour which while a vital cost to a capitalist system also feeds back into the system by giving workers salaries/purchasing power...

Now if companies are downsizing and adopting new technology to lower labour cost, where will they get customers to buy their goods/services?

[Empedocles]

The point of capitalism is minimization of cost and maximisation of profit. Human labour which while a vital cost to a capitalist system also feeds back into the system by giving workers salaries/purchasing power...

Now if companies are downsizing and adopting new technology to lower labour cost, where will they get customers to buy their goods/services?

Discussions are already being held pondering that exact question, with the tentative answer being Universal Basic Income:

Elon Musk Thinks Automation Will Lead to a Universal Basic Income - NOVEMBER 6, 2016

Obama on how new technology will affect the job market a couple of weeks ago:

[veritas]

Elon Musk is politically/socially retarded. These tech folks think they know the human condition when they should stick to what they're good at... dreaming.

Universal income has been done before & it's called Communism.

It doesn't work.

Reason is because people are also creative at being greedy.

Some people will take advantage of the system and fabricate multiple version of themselves perhaps for more income. Or, bully others for this and that protection form this and that faction-- like what govts do today collecting tax.

The bad thing about communism is and we see this in Chinese culture, it hinders creativity. People no longer see the point of being creative or innovative but rather just copy and be autonomous. People are motivated by fame and fortune, ego etc. universal wages take that away. You get a situation like the Hunger Games or the Scorch Trials with some faction breaking free to make their own choices.

The likes of Elon Musk would never support such idiocy like universal wages knowing he would no longer be able to live off the stock market. These rich people are bums.

People are born free and the world should be a free place.

If one wants an exact science to happiness then the universal annual income according to science which makes people happy is $250 grand , neither less or more has shown optimal happiness.

In that sense if middle class people were given 5 million each, that would be enough to earn $250 grand each year off the stock market doing nothing.

THE SOLUTION is to redistribute wealth. So put a cap on earnings at 250 grand a year and the rest one can donate their stocks to other families.

[veritas]

What's real now is the fact that F*CKING C*NT Bannon is head strategist in Trump's new admin. I've been at war with that f-cking c* group since last year and was very much pleased when they were kicked out of social media exposed one by one.

The FU*KERS came back through the back door... literally through the back door . .

Makes me so angry I'm this close to trotting around the globe intensely lobbying for an all out cyberwar against the USA based on some super policy plans I've drawn up roughly. Get Capitol Hill's powergrids shut down for the thousands of women they've abused online.

[RV Pundit]

Interesting debate. The global economy will greatly benefit from automation and robots...leading to more wealthy govs...with "less" jobs as machines take over. I am sure when the first society mechanized agriculture...there were all these fears..about one tractor taking over many thousand farm labourers jobs but in the end we know the fear was not justified. We simply transitioned from being farmers to more specialized jobs. The same profound fears confronted the world during industrial revolution. And now we are just heading into ICT revolution. Many jobs will certainly disappear...but new more exciting and more rewarding jobs will arise. The same way we moved from being farmers to being factory workers and finally to being white collars...we will move on to better cleaner more satisfying jobs that computers can never do unless they completely replace humans.Nobody knows how the future will look like..but we know for certain that we will be richer..our gov will be richer..meaning better services & welfar..poverty may become history. And that new jobs and opportunities will come up. We've moved from back-breaking jobs to cleaner white collar jobs. I think future jobs will be really cool...you could be able to work for an hr or less..and get paid more than you'd be paid now for a months job.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

The point of capitalism is minimization of cost and maximisation of profit. Human labour which while a vital cost to a capitalist system also feeds back into the system by giving workers salaries/purchasing power...

Now if companies are downsizing and adopting new technology to lower labour cost, where will they get customers to buy their goods/services?

Whatever is in demand will change and that is where the market will be. 

[Empedocles]

Elon Musk is politically/socially retarded. These tech folks think they know the human condition when they should stick to what they're good at... dreaming.

Universal income has been done before & it's called Communism.

It doesn't work.

Reason is because people are also creative at being greedy.

Some people will take advantage of the system and fabricate multiple version of themselves perhaps for more income. Or, bully others for this and that protection form this and that faction-- like what govts do today collecting tax.

The bad thing about communism is and we see this in Chinese culture, it hinders creativity. People no longer see the point of being creative or innovative but rather just copy and be autonomous. People are motivated by fame and fortune, ego etc. universal wages take that away. You get a situation like the Hunger Games or the Scorch Trials with some faction breaking free to make their own choices.

The likes of Elon Musk would never support such idiocy like universal wages knowing he would no longer be able to live off the stock market. These rich people are bums.

People are born free and the world should be a free place.

If one wants an exact science to happiness then the universal annual income according to science which makes people happy is $250 grand , neither less or more has shown optimal happiness.

In that sense if middle class people were given 5 million each, that would be enough to earn $250 grand each year off the stock market doing nothing.

THE SOLUTION is to redistribute wealth. So put a cap on earnings at 250 grand a year and the rest one can donate their stocks to other families.

Interesting debate. The global economy will greatly benefit from automation and robots...leading to more wealthy govs...with "less" jobs as machines take over. I am sure when the first society mechanized agriculture...there were all these fears..about one tractor taking over many thousand farm labourers jobs but in the end we know the fear was not justified. We simply transitioned from being farmers to more specialized jobs. The same profound fears confronted the world during industrial revolution. And now we are just heading into ICT revolution. Many jobs will certainly disappear...but new more exciting and more rewarding jobs will arise. The same way we moved from being farmers to being factory workers and finally to being white collars...we will move on to better cleaner more satisfying jobs that computers can never do unless they completely replace humans.Nobody knows how the future will look like..but we know for certain that we will be richer..our gov will be richer..meaning better services & welfar..poverty may become history. And that new jobs and opportunities will come up. We've moved from back-breaking jobs to cleaner white collar jobs. I think future jobs will be really cool...you could be able to work for an hr or less..and get paid more than you'd be paid now for a months job.

A bit long but this guy addresses some of the things we should be thinking about if and when automation does get that far:

[veritas]

"Post-scarcity" in economic terms comes under commodity excess, abundance of raw materials etc. Maslow pyramid could apply to individuals not communities and civilisations. Service sector aren't commodities. Commodity excess is tethered to conditions & contexts- not a stand alone. For instance, under an import condition, price checks, inflation, trade agreements etc.

[RV Pundit]

Yeah that post-scarcity sound plausible. I know for sure we will be able to eliminate absolute poverty in less than half a century. That mean nearly everyone will be able to meet their basic needs...we may even at that point make it human right for every person to get balanced diet, nice warm bed and clothes. In the last generation; China alone has lifted nearly half billion of it's people of out poverty and many countries are doing the same.

[Empedocles]

Yeah that post-scarcity sound plausible. I know for sure we will be able to eliminate absolute poverty in less than half a century. That mean nearly everyone will be able to meet their basic needs...we may even at that point make it human right for every person to get balanced diet, nice warm bed and clothes. In the last generation; China alone has lifted nearly half billion of it's people of out poverty and many countries are doing the same.

Agreed if AI does progress as the optimists are hoping expecting.

But only with our policies?

Fat chance.

[veritas]

no such thing as post-scarcity. There is such a thing as redistributing wealth policies but it isn't yet that established. Black market thrives on excess goods though. I don't think poverty can be eradicated unless there's equitable access, mental health counsellors etc. poverty is complex and not just an economics problem.

[veritas]

Yeah that post-scarcity sound plausible. I know for sure we will be able to eliminate absolute poverty in less than half a century. That mean nearly everyone will be able to meet their basic needs...we may even at that point make it human right for every person to get balanced diet, nice warm bed and clothes. In the last generation; China alone has lifted nearly half billion of it's people of out poverty and many countries are doing the same.

Agreed if AI does progress as the optimists are hoping expecting.

But only with our policies?

Fat chance.

A lot of AI exist in quackery and fake news at present so the govt can harvest personal data. I know what's out there in practice given my close proximity to the power grid & industrial electrical goods. The tech they're talking about would take at least another 50 years to be useful for consumers, add another 10-20 for industrial sectors who don't even want biometric scans because it's inaccurate. The science has long way to go, engineering might be there but for prediction, analytics, accuracy, algorithms etc. is a slow process.

[veritas]

Unfortunately the best minds in science are now bankers. There's really nothing in science right now except fake science, sensationalized graphics, data manipulations, chance findings, lots of speculations masked as "theories" just a lot of useless trash right now. The scientific movement is going through a brain drain. If wealth is redistributed then perhaps better minds that should be contributing to science can develop predictive AI models instead of stock market trends.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Yeah that post-scarcity sound plausible. I know for sure we will be able to eliminate absolute poverty in less than half a century. That mean nearly everyone will be able to meet their basic needs...we may even at that point make it human right for every person to get balanced diet, nice warm bed and clothes. In the last generation; China alone has lifted nearly half billion of it's people of out poverty and many countries are doing the same.

From that video, it seems to me that post-scarcity is a very temporary event and has happened a few times before.  The scarcity is quickly restored by population growth, increasing or new demands.

[RV Pundit]

I don't think I understand what you mean. The post-scarcity has obviously never happened before and might never happen for higher needs. If we focus on maslow base - physiological needs - food,housing and clothing - globally that has never happened - of course in many developed countries- this long happened. US for example long eliminated absolute poverty. The other higher human needs are going to be hard to fulfil...but I think as world become more efficient and productive..we will certainly reach a period where everyone has enough food to fill their stomach, nice warm clothes and a bed. That should be in before the end of this century. World economy right now is about 70 or more trillion USD and growing, we are meeting MDGS & SGDS, and soon enough there will be enough for everyone basic need.

From that video, it seems to me that post-scarcity is a very temporary event and has happened a few times before.  The scarcity is quickly restored by population growth, increasing or new demands.

[Empedocles]

Yeah that post-scarcity sound plausible. I know for sure we will be able to eliminate absolute poverty in less than half a century. That mean nearly everyone will be able to meet their basic needs...we may even at that point make it human right for every person to get balanced diet, nice warm bed and clothes. In the last generation; China alone has lifted nearly half billion of it's people of out poverty and many countries are doing the same.

Agreed if AI does progress as the optimists are hoping expecting.

But only with our policies?

Fat chance.

A lot of AI exist in quackery and fake news at present so the govt can harvest personal data. I know what's out there in practice given my close proximity to the power grid & industrial electrical goods. The tech they're talking about would take at least another 50 years to be useful for consumers, add another 10-20 for industrial sectors who don't even want biometric scans because it's inaccurate. The science has long way to go, engineering might be there but for prediction, analytics, accuracy, algorithms etc. is a slow process.

Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong.

But I can't and won't call it either way with 100% conviction.

The heroism of yesterday is the commonplace of today - Chicago Tribune editorial cartoon, Nov. 21, 1916

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I don't think I understand what you mean. The post-scarcity has obviously never happened before and might never happen for higher needs. If we focus on maslow base - physiological needs - food,housing and clothing - globally that has never happened - of course in many developed countries- this long happened. US for example long eliminated absolute poverty. The other higher human needs are going to be hard to fulfil...but I think as world become more efficient and productive..we will certainly reach a period where everyone has enough food to fill their stomach, nice warm clothes and a bed. That should be in before the end of this century. World economy right now is about 70 or more trillion USD and growing, we are meeting MDGS & SGDS, and soon enough there will be enough for everyone basic need.

From that video, it seems to me that post-scarcity is a very temporary event and has happened a few times before.  The scarcity is quickly restored by population growth, increasing or new demands.

If you watch the video.  The first post-scarcity event happens with the discovery of fire or thereabouts.  Which leads to huge population boom.  The next one happens after settlement and agriculture...another boom and then scarcity.  So land becomes a demand and then becomes scarce.

In a more general sense, scarcity is a man-made thing and is entirely predicated on the current demand.  Today's scarcity is totally different from hunter and gatherer scarcity ad infinitum.

[veritas]

Empy, where's your twin MK ? There's no such thing as post-scarcity- it exists in SciFi perhaps. Resources are finite & even if resources were self-sustainable via recycling cadavers & excrements into food, there are also uniquely human traits that would prohibit a "post-scarce" ecosystem. The science, economics, academia, philosophy doesn't support it.

A couple examples of academic theories:

1. The universe isn't designed to progress under equilibrium.  Effectively life dies without imbalance and chaos.

2. Ethics prohibit a lot of sustainable scientific efficiency.

3. It takes more expertise and machines to convert raw material into a commodity. Machines need fuel & fuel is a finite resource & why the world is at war for it at present.

4. All living things have a decay rate, even the sun. The more we recycle something, the less it can be of quality to the point it would be detrimental. Same goes with gmo foods to clones. Clones have half life less than original, gmo foods are harmful if it's been modified too much.

5. We don't eat monkeys because they're genetically similar to us. Recycling biomatter for consumption to recycling fossil fuel eventually does more harm than good.

I could go on.

The only SciFi notion I think is viable and most likely the future of humanity is to send a cohort off to migrate to a planet & start a new civilisation there. At most civilisation on earth has maybe a couple hundred years left before the ozone layer is completely ripped apart, rising sea levels & earth uninhabitable.

[veritas]

The problem with SciFi tech pundits is that they ignore existing theories & practices, the world at present and come up with ideas & mindsets in a vacuum, assuming the world remains the same. Eg. If more machines pop up that just helps everyone. These pundits have a "startup" mentality which completely overlooks the power grid, energy & trade routes, geopolitical dynamics, cultural & social contexts. A lack of civics education, social understandings, the atrocities & struggles in the world today, history.

This guy assumes a utopia without even considering the consequences of such a utopia that for centuries have debunked the notion of a utopia. It's just idiotic. It exists in SciFi because it's fiction like a siren luring sailors to death at the promise of infinite sex knowing the harlot has a bottom of a whale with absolutely no access.

[veritas]

Food waste is one area where redistribution is needed. Technology is more easily redistributed and recycled like in Shenzhen though.

Really good documentary on Netflix: Global Waste: The Scandal of Food Waste by Olivier Lemaire

Presented by Tristram Stuart, also did TED talk.

https://www.ted.com/talks/tristram_stuart_the_global_food_waste_scandal