[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

What If There Just Aren’t Enough Jobs to Go Around?


The Roosevelt authors say a key factor is the concentration of
resources in the hands of managers and owners of large
corporations—think of CEOs who are compensated largely in shares of
the firms they oversee. This ownership encourages them to skimp on
labor costs to further enrich themselves, in their analysis. That
shrinking demand for labor then helps depress job-market dynamism. It
also contributes to broader secular stagnation, since wealthier people
tend to save more of their incomes.

1) Eventually, and probably pretty soon (within 100years), that there
obviously won't be jobs for everyone. Automation, progress(efficiency
gains) and increasing population makes it inevitable.
2) That a general "goal" of society is do away with jobs. In any
traditional sense. To me we've been approaching that ever since
agriculture provided ability to support specialists (those who don't
spend time gathering/producing the food/resources they need). Such as
scientists, artists and soldiers. The jobs keep moving "up" the ladder
(away from production). Previous low-rung jobs get reduced in number
by efficiency or replaced via automation. The end of this trend is
that all basic needs are met by 0 to a tiny fraction of a percent of
human labor and rest are all free to pursue specialist activities such
as science, art, and killing each other.