{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
由Dustin Time 4Bed編輯：
3/5/2015 7:02:01 AM
4
Future of capitalism
Do you believe socialism is inevitable?
Essentially the idea is that due to the extraordinary unemployment that we will face in the next 100 years due to rapid automation, coupled with a surplus of resources due to technological innovation, the government will be forced to distribute supplies to the majority of the population.
There's a couple problems with it though. Firstly, people underestimate the importance of human labor. Sure, manufacturing and construction jobs don't necessarily have to humans, but there are plenty of other jobs which necessarily have to be human, like therapists or singers. Yes, they technically could be automated by some super smart AI, but people don't want that.
Secondly, why would the people in power want to distribute out resources? To do that would be at their own expense. The people in power are generally the same people with a large surplus of resources. I just find it unlikely. I guess you could argue that they'd have to in the interest of global security.
So we might be able to eliminate half the labor force, but that's not enough to completely abandon self-interest as a driver for innovation and convert to socialism. Maybe if you could get unemployment to 90% you could rely on human goodwill as a driver for innovation and convert to socialism without going economically bankrupt. But the fact that we'll have half the population unemployed and poor is a pretty scary thought. Hopefully the welfare system would be good enough to keep them from rebelling or rioting in the streets for jobs or some other irrational, violent thing.
These are just my thoughts and opinions on the future of capitalism. Do you think socialism is inevitable? Why or why not?
-
由DukeOfStuffing編輯： 4/2/2015 10:59:01 AMSingers, scientists, etc... Would all still exist alongside automation. You're also correct in that people in power won't want to relinquish that. Radical change is often met with conflict. Anyway, the jobs that are important to an automated society aren't self-interested jobs.
-
It seems to be the logical step to take. As much as I don't like it, automation is inevitable. We see it already even during a basic trip to the grocery store. Simply put, distributing resources based off of human labour will not work for long since the value of human labour is vastly plummeting due to automation and that capitalism is self-defeating in this regard since the business always wants to save money--which means reducing human labour. The logical thing to do would be to rethink how we distribute resources or to stop automation--the latter of which is impossible since technology is inevitable. That said, unfortunately I DON'T think that we will make the logical step. Rather, I think that the 21st century will be more similar to the 19th century than the 20th century in that the middle class will be non-existent with the majority of the population being poor and the small minority really rich. The prosperity of the 20th century ironically was the anamoly of human history. Hard times are ahead of us.
