subject:"RE\: \[Vo\]\:Another article about the impact of automation on employment"

Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education is  
revealed in the comments.  We all agree that standards have been  
lowered for both high-school and college degrees.  As a result, many  
graduates are qualified only for low skilled jobs. Consequently, a big  
push is now underway by companies that have high skilled jobs to open  
more visa opportunities for skilled people from other countries to  
work here.  Naturally, these skilled people are cheaper to hire than  
the older skilled people who are already here, which provides the  
basic incentive.  I fear how the growing number of uneducated people  
will vote in the future. The population is almost equally divided now  
between people who do not have a clue and people who still can  
understand what is happening. The future does not look good.



On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:


It's funny and sad to see people in denial in the comments section.


2013/1/29 fznidar...@aol.com
Unemployment dropping?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/01/28/college-educated-over-qualified-study/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D262707





--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and are not
being hired even though they are doing occasional contract work at what
amounts to below minimum wage.

These aren't just any old engineers. They include guys who built the
Internet and have current skills.

Clue: HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2. Due to my
long history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's foray into
electronic newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as previously being on
the PLATO system programming staff for CDC), they tried to get me in and I
repeatedly declined because what they said they were doing made no sense
and I knew exactly what was needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my
capacity with ATT, worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he
was authoring the End to End Arguments paper.

I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little corner
of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk capital here -- the
largest single lump-sum invested during the dotcom bubble and it was being
invested by Silicon Valley's founding company.

All I wanted was one guy:. A PhD with a specialty in a branch of
relational mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate characteristic
of being a US citizen.

My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all the H-1b
visas from India I wanted.

Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education is
revealed in the comments. We all agree that standards have been lowered
for both high-school and college degrees. As a result, many graduates are
qualified only for low skilled jobs. Consequently, a big push is now
underway by companies that have high skilled jobs to open more visa
opportunities for skilled people from other countries to work here.
Naturally, these skilled people are cheaper to hire than the older skilled
people who are already here, which provides the basic incentive. I fear
how the growing number of uneducated people will vote in the future. The
population is almost equally divided now between people who do not have a
clue and people who still can understand what is happening. The future does
not look good.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

It's funny and sad to see people in denial in the comments section.

2013/1/29 fznidar...@aol.com

Unemployment dropping?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/01/28/college-educated-over-qualified-study/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D262707

--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid. The situation is growing
worse and your personal experience is one of many tragic
consequences. The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor.
People from other countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and
the robots are cheaper. This cost is not just salary. The cost of
healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high. As you made clear,
the quality of the person is not what matters in many industries, only
the cost. The standard of living in the US is adjusting downward and
everybody is suffering. When the inflation being created by the
Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain will increase again.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and
are not being hired even though they are doing occasional contract
work at what amounts to below minimum wage.

These aren't just any old engineers. They include guys who built
the Internet and have current skills.

Clue: HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2. Due
to my long history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's
foray into electronic newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as
previously being on the PLATO system programming staff for CDC),
they tried to get me in and I repeatedly declined because what they
said they were doing made no sense and I knew exactly what was
needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my capacity with ATT,
worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he was authoring
the End to End Arguments paper.

I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little
corner of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk
capital here -- the largest single lump-sum invested during the
dotcom bubble and it was being invested by Silicon Valley's founding
company.

All I wanted was one guy:. A PhD with a specialty in a branch of
relational mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate
characteristic of being a US citizen.

My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all
the H-1b visas from India I wanted.

Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education is
revealed in the comments. We all agree that standards have been
lowered for both high-school and college degrees. As a result, many
graduates are qualified only for low skilled jobs. Consequently, a
big push is now underway by companies that have high skilled jobs to
open more visa opportunities for skilled people from other countries
to work here. Naturally, these skilled people are cheaper to hire
than the older skilled people who are already here, which provides
the basic incentive. I fear how the growing number of uneducated
people will vote in the future. The population is almost equally
divided now between people who do not have a clue and people who
still can understand what is happening. The future does not look good.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

It's funny and sad to see people in denial in the comments section.

2013/1/29 fznidar...@aol.com
Unemployment dropping?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/01/28/college-educated-over-qualified-study/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D262707

--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

The low wage argument doesn't wash. The H-1b workers are not being paid
below minimum wage and that's what the un/deremployed older engineers are
getting. What is going on is an individualist culture is being taken over
by, not one, but multiple nepotistic cultures.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid. The situation is growing
worse and your personal experience is one of many tragic consequences.
The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor. People from other
countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and the robots are cheaper.
This cost is not just salary. The cost of healthcare, pension, and general
overhead is high. As you made clear, the quality of the person is not what
matters in many industries, only the cost. The standard of living in the US
is adjusting downward and everybody is suffering. When the inflation being
created by the Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain will increase
again.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and are
not being hired even though they are doing occasional contract work at what
amounts to below minimum wage.

These aren't just any old engineers. They include guys who built the
Internet and have current skills.

I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little
corner of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk capital here
-- the largest single lump-sum invested during the dotcom bubble and it was
being invested by Silicon Valley's founding company.

All I wanted was one guy:. A PhD with a specialty in a branch of
relational mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate characteristic
of being a US citizen.

My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all the H-1b
visas from India I wanted.

Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

It's funny and sad to see people in denial in the comments section.

2013/1/29 fznidar...@aol.com

Unemployment dropping?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/01/28/college-educated-over-qualified-study/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D262707

--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:57 AM, James Bowery wrote:

The low wage argument doesn't wash. The H-1b workers are not
being paid below minimum wage and that's what the un/deremployed
older engineers are getting. What is going on is an individualist
culture is being taken over by, not one, but multiple nepotistic
cultures.

This might be true on a few occasions, but it is not true throughout
the economy based on my experience. I would like to hear from some
people who actually decide whom to hire. Is this conclusion by David
valid?

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Edmund Storms
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid. The situation is
growing worse and your personal experience is one of many tragic
consequences. The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor.
People from other countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and
the robots are cheaper. This cost is not just salary. The cost of
healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high. As you made
clear, the quality of the person is not what matters in many
industries, only the cost. The standard of living in the US is
adjusting downward and everybody is suffering. When the inflation
being created by the Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain
will increase again.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and
are not being hired even though they are doing occasional contract
work at what amounts to below minimum wage.

These aren't just any old engineers. They include guys who built
the Internet and have current skills.

Clue: HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2.
Due to my long history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's
foray into electronic newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as
previously being on the PLATO system programming staff for CDC),
they tried to get me in and I repeatedly declined because what they
said they were doing made no sense and I knew exactly what was
needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my capacity with ATT,
worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he was authoring
the End to End Arguments paper.

I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a
little corner of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of
risk capital here -- the largest single lump-sum invested during
the dotcom bubble and it was being invested by Silicon Valley's
founding company.

All I wanted was one guy:. A PhD with a specialty in a branch of
relational mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate
characteristic of being a US citizen.

My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all
the H-1b visas from India I wanted.

Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
wrote:
Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education
is revealed in the comments. We all agree that standards have been
lowered for both high-school and college degrees. As a result,
many graduates are qualified only for low skilled jobs.
Consequently, a big push is now underway by companies that have
high skilled jobs to open more visa opportunities for skilled
people from other countries to work here. Naturally, these skilled
people are cheaper to hire than the older skilled people who are
already here, which provides the basic incentive. I fear how the
growing number of uneducated people will vote in the future. The
population is almost equally divided now between people who do not
have a clue and people who still can understand what is happening.
The future does not look good.

On Jan 29, 2013, at 8:17 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

It's funny and sad to see people in denial in the comments section.

2013/1/29 fznidar...@aol.com
Unemployment dropping?

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2013/01/28/college-educated-over-qualified-study/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl3%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D262707

--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Terry Blanton

I am an engineering manager in the consulting engineer business.  I do
run across cultural nepotism occasionally; but, right now, there is a
shortage of good engineering talent.

In my business, money is rarely the issue . . . it is expertise.  I
have two large engineering firms to draw from, AECOM in the US and
Atkins in GB fortunately.

In our local group, most of the engineers are around 60 years old.
Most of us are systems engineers with communications and
transportation experience.  We are presently taking in kids right out
of school and training them; but, people who have a good work ethic
are getting hard to find.  There seems to be a prevaling sense of
entitlement in this generation.

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

A position with a consulting engineering firm is not the same as a job with
the Fortune 500 -- and it is no surprise that otherwise unemployable older
engineers are ending up in consulting engineering firms that may service
the Fortune 500.  It is an obvious market niche and it is good to hear it
is providing some relief but the economic rent seekers gravitate to
ensconced positions -- full benefits, etc -- in the Fortune 500 which have
the resources to pursue public sector rent seeking as well as private
sector rent seeking.  One acquaintance of mine from the PLATO days was with
the Open Source Development Labs and doing consulting, recently died due to
no health insurance.



On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 12:27 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:

 I am an engineering manager in the consulting engineer business.  I do
 run across cultural nepotism occasionally; but, right now, there is a
 shortage of good engineering talent.

 In my business, money is rarely the issue . . . it is expertise.  I
 have two large engineering firms to draw from, AECOM in the US and
 Atkins in GB fortunately.

 In our local group, most of the engineers are around 60 years old.
 Most of us are systems engineers with communications and
 transportation experience.  We are presently taking in kids right out
 of school and training them; but, people who have a good work ethic
 are getting hard to find.  There seems to be a prevaling sense of
 entitlement in this generation.

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Mark Goldes

Ed, 

This is another reason why Second Incomes not dependent upon jobs or savings 
are becoming so important.

When a substantial portion of income,the goal is half by about age 50, is 
derived from diversified investments -  individuals have the time and money to 
pursue more of what they want to do, rather then what they are forced to do by 
circumstance.

Aesop Institute intends to offer an on-line course about this plan, and the 
binary economics invented by Louis Kelso that led him to develop the Second 
Income idea. Gary Reber, who will develop the course, has a website 
foreconomicjustice.org devoted to the subject.

Second Incomes on the www.aesopinstitute.org website provides additional 
information for anyone who might be interested.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:07 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:57 AM, James Bowery wrote:

The low wage argument doesn't wash.  The H-1b workers are not being paid 
below minimum wage and that's what the un/deremployed older engineers are 
getting.  What is going on is an individualist culture is being taken over by, 
not one, but multiple nepotistic cultures.

This might be true on a few occasions, but it is not true throughout the 
economy based on my experience.  I would like to hear from some people who 
actually decide whom to hire. Is this conclusion by David valid?

Ed

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Edmund Storms 
stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid.  The situation is growing worse 
and your  personal experience is one of many tragic consequences.  The driving 
force behind hiring is the cost of labor. People from other countries are 
cheaper, the young are cheaper, and  the robots are cheaper.  This cost is not 
just salary. The cost of healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high.  As 
you made clear, the quality of the person is not what matters in many 
industries, only the cost. The standard of living in the US is adjusting 
downward and everybody is suffering.  When the inflation being created by the 
Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain will increase again.


On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and are not 
being hired even though they are doing occasional contract work at what amounts 
to below minimum wage.

These aren't just any old engineers.  They include guys who built the Internet 
and have current skills.

Clue:  HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2.  Due to my long 
history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's foray into electronic 
newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as previously being on the PLATO 
system programming staff for CDC), they tried to get me in and I repeatedly 
declined because what they said they were doing made no sense and I knew 
exactly what was needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my capacity with 
ATT, worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he was authoring the 
End to End Arguments paper.

I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little corner of 
the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk capital here -- the largest 
single lump-sum invested during the dotcom bubble and it was being invested by 
Silicon Valley's founding company.

All I wanted was one guy:.  A PhD with a specialty in a branch of relational 
mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate characteristic of being a US 
citizen.

My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all the H-1b 
visas from India I wanted.

Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms 
stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education is revealed 
in the comments.  We all agree that standards have been lowered for both 
high-school and college degrees.  As a result, many graduates are qualified 
only for low skilled jobs. Consequently, a big push is now underway by 
companies that have high skilled jobs to open more visa opportunities for 
skilled people from other countries to work here.  Naturally, these skilled 
people are cheaper to hire than the older skilled people who are already here, 
which provides the basic incentive.  I fear how the growing number of 
uneducated people will vote in the future. The population is almost equally 
divided now between people who do not have a clue and people who still can 
understand what is happening. The future does not look good.


On Jan

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I agree Mark, a second income is important. Cold fusion had provided  
that for me until recently. Nevertheless, I find that a second income  
is not easy to achieve while still having time for anything else.  Of  
course, giving a course on second income can be a second income.;-) A  
friend makes soup and sells it to her neighbors, who fortunately have  
enough money to buy soup. Another friend cleans houses, so jobs are  
available that can supplement a less than adequate income from a  
regular job - so I see your point.


Ed


On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Mark Goldes wrote:


Ed,

This is another reason why Second Incomes not dependent upon jobs or  
savings are becoming so important.


When a substantial portion of income,the goal is half by about age  
50, is derived from diversified investments -  individuals have the  
time and money to pursue more of what they want to do, rather then  
what they are forced to do by circumstance.


Aesop Institute intends to offer an on-line course about this plan,  
and the binary economics invented by Louis Kelso that led him to  
develop the Second Income idea. Gary Reber, who will develop the  
course, has a website foreconomicjustice.org devoted to the subject.


Second Incomes on the www.aesopinstitute.org website provides  
additional information for anyone who might be interested.


Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:07 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment


On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:57 AM, James Bowery wrote:

The low wage argument doesn't wash.  The H-1b workers are not  
being paid below minimum wage and that's what the un/deremployed  
older engineers are getting.  What is going on is an individualist  
culture is being taken over by, not one, but multiple nepotistic  
cultures.


This might be true on a few occasions, but it is not true throughout  
the economy based on my experience.  I would like to hear from some  
people who actually decide whom to hire. Is this conclusion by David  
valid?


Ed

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid.  The situation is  
growing worse and your  personal experience is one of many tragic  
consequences.  The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor.  
People from other countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and   
the robots are cheaper.  This cost is not just salary. The cost of  
healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high.  As you made  
clear, the quality of the person is not what matters in many  
industries, only the cost. The standard of living in the US is  
adjusting downward and everybody is suffering.  When the inflation  
being created by the Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain  
will increase again.



On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

Garbage.

I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and  
are not being hired even though they are doing occasional contract  
work at what amounts to below minimum wage.


These aren't just any old engineers.  They include guys who built  
the Internet and have current skills.


Clue:  HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2.  Due  
to my long history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's  
foray into electronic newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as  
previously being on the PLATO system programming staff for CDC),  
they tried to get me in and I repeatedly declined because what they  
said they were doing made no sense and I knew exactly what was  
needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my capacity with ATT,  
worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he was authoring  
the End to End Arguments paper.


I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little  
corner of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk  
capital here -- the largest single lump-sum invested during the  
dotcom bubble and it was being invested by Silicon Valley's founding  
company.


All I wanted was one guy:.  A PhD with a specialty in a branch of  
relational mathematics who happened to have the unfortunate  
characteristic of being a US citizen.


My request for this consultant was declined but I was offered all  
the H-1b visas from India I wanted.


Literally.

Guess what ethnicity was of the guy in charge of that project?

The Fortune 500 is now taken over by India.

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
Not just sad but scary because such an apparent lack of education is  
revealed in the comments.  We all agree that standards have been  
lowered for both high-school and

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Mark Goldes

Ed,

What is important to recognize about this economic invention  -  is that it is 
not related to jobs or savings.

This is a revolutionary idea - with potential impact at least as great as LENR.

If opens a path to the most genuinely free society in human history.

And can be adapted in most industrial nations.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 11:35 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I agree Mark, a second income is important. Cold fusion had provided
that for me until recently. Nevertheless, I find that a second income
is not easy to achieve while still having time for anything else.  Of
course, giving a course on second income can be a second income.;-) A
friend makes soup and sells it to her neighbors, who fortunately have
enough money to buy soup. Another friend cleans houses, so jobs are
available that can supplement a less than adequate income from a
regular job - so I see your point.

Ed


On Jan 29, 2013, at 12:17 PM, Mark Goldes wrote:

 Ed,

 This is another reason why Second Incomes not dependent upon jobs or
 savings are becoming so important.

 When a substantial portion of income,the goal is half by about age
 50, is derived from diversified investments -  individuals have the
 time and money to pursue more of what they want to do, rather then
 what they are forced to do by circumstance.

 Aesop Institute intends to offer an on-line course about this plan,
 and the binary economics invented by Louis Kelso that led him to
 develop the Second Income idea. Gary Reber, who will develop the
 course, has a website foreconomicjustice.org devoted to the subject.

 Second Incomes on the www.aesopinstitute.org website provides
 additional information for anyone who might be interested.

 Mark

 Mark Goldes
 Co-Founder, Chava Energy
 CEO, Aesop Institute

 www.chavaenergy.com
 www.aesopinstitute.org

 707 861-9070
 707 497-3551 fax
 
 From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
 Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 10:07 AM
 To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
 Cc: Edmund Storms
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on
 employment

 On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:57 AM, James Bowery wrote:

 The low wage argument doesn't wash.  The H-1b workers are not
 being paid below minimum wage and that's what the un/deremployed
 older engineers are getting.  What is going on is an individualist
 culture is being taken over by, not one, but multiple nepotistic
 cultures.

 This might be true on a few occasions, but it is not true throughout
 the economy based on my experience.  I would like to hear from some
 people who actually decide whom to hire. Is this conclusion by David
 valid?

 Ed

 On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Edmund Storms
 stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
 Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid.  The situation is
 growing worse and your  personal experience is one of many tragic
 consequences.  The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor.
 People from other countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and
 the robots are cheaper.  This cost is not just salary. The cost of
 healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high.  As you made
 clear, the quality of the person is not what matters in many
 industries, only the cost. The standard of living in the US is
 adjusting downward and everybody is suffering.  When the inflation
 being created by the Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain
 will increase again.


 On Jan 29, 2013, at 10:09 AM, James Bowery wrote:

 Garbage.

 I know lots of US engineers who have been out of work for years and
 are not being hired even though they are doing occasional contract
 work at what amounts to below minimum wage.

 These aren't just any old engineers.  They include guys who built
 the Internet and have current skills.

 Clue:  HP spent a half billion dollars on Internet Chapter 2.  Due
 to my long history with the Internet (chief architect of ATT's
 foray into electronic newspapers with Knight-Rider 1982 as well as
 previously being on the PLATO system programming staff for CDC),
 they tried to get me in and I repeatedly declined because what they
 said they were doing made no sense and I knew exactly what was
 needed for Internet Chapter 2 having, in my capacity with ATT,
 worked directly with David P. Reed during the time he was authoring
 the End to End Arguments paper.

 I finally agreed to come on board if they would let me have a little
 corner of the project -- remember we're talking $500M of risk
 capital here -- the largest single lump-sum invested during the
 dotcom bubble and it was being invested by Silicon Valley's founding
 company.

 All I wanted

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Terry Blanton

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:47 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
 A position with a consulting engineering firm is not the same as a job with
 the Fortune 500 -- and it is no surprise that otherwise unemployable older
 engineers are ending up in consulting engineering firms that may service the
 Fortune 500.  It is an obvious market niche and it is good to hear it is
 providing some relief but the economic rent seekers gravitate to ensconced
 positions -- full benefits, etc -- in the Fortune 500 which have the
 resources to pursue public sector rent seeking as well as private sector
 rent seeking.  One acquaintance of mine from the PLATO days was with the
 Open Source Development Labs and doing consulting, recently died due to no
 health insurance.

I have full benefits.  All of us do.  We're not contract consultants.
We are employed by consulting firms who farm us out on a project by
project basis.  I have been 100% billable for the past 23 years.

One of the more difficult tasks as a consulting engineer is lining up
your projects.  Or, in my case, finding engineers for my projects.
There is a market out there for a software package which will
automatically align project requirements with engineering talents.
Right now, it is done pretty much by humint networking.  I'm talking
about a database which would connect 50,000 engineers with, say,
10,000 projects.  I have seen a few such software packages, but they
are less than perfect.

Most are.

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Jed Rothwell

Ed Storms wrote:


 Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
 people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
 predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .


Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as here,
in 2005:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.



 In fact the
 difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
 problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.


Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a panic
for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a
personality thing. We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should.
Case in point: my mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on
November 1, 1950. President Truman was living there while the White House
was being rebuilt. There was a series of loud bangs. Someone said, they're
trying to assassinate the president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it
is just a car backfiring and went back to her newspaper. It turned out
someone was trying to assassinate the president.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

As for the poor educational outcomes of the US vs other countries:

When adjusted for economic class, the US is near the top.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/01/15/u-s-scores-on-international-test-lowered-by-sampling-error-report/

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as here,
in 2005:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.

In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.

Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a panic
for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a
personality thing. We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should.
Case in point: my mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on
November 1, 1950. President Truman was living there while the White House
was being rebuilt. There was a series of loud bangs. Someone said, they're
trying to assassinate the president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it
is just a car backfiring and went back to her newspaper. It turned out
someone was trying to assassinate the president.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as  
here, in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.


Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual  
generalities. He observes that a bubble was being created in the  
housing market. He even observed, apparently approvingly, that the  
government would create another after this one bursts, although he did  
not anticipate the way this is presently being done.  He made no  
mention that this bubble would almost bring down the entire world  
ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about the  
problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very exact  
about what would happen and when - three years later from this article.



In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.

Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a  
panic for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It  
is a personality thing.


I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of  
money during the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I do  
not intend to let this happen again.


Ed


We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in  
point: my mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on  
November 1, 1950. President Truman was living there while the White  
House was being rebuilt. There was a series of loud bangs. Someone  
said, they're trying to assassinate the president!! My mother  
said, don't be silly; it is just a car backfiring and went back to  
her newspaper. It turned out someone was trying to assassinate the  
president.


- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Chris Zell

Business Insider recently reported that Krugman may be discreetly admitting 
that he has made a serious oversight with regard to the viability of Social 
Security.  Automation is eliminating jobs at such a rate that the payroll tax 
funding source may be in peril.

From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as here, in 
2005:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.

Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual generalities. He 
observes that a bubble was being created in the housing market. He even 
observed, apparently approvingly, that the government would create another 
after this one bursts, although he did not anticipate the way this is presently 
being done.  He made no mention that this bubble would almost bring down the 
entire world ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about 
the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very exact 
about what would happen and when - three years later from this article.

In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.

Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a panic for 
the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a personality thing.

I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of money during 
the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I do not intend to let 
this happen again.

Ed

We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in point: my 
mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on November 1, 1950. 
President Truman was living there while the White House was being rebuilt. 
There was a series of loud bangs. Someone said, they're trying to assassinate 
the president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it is just a car backfiring 
and went back to her newspaper. It turned out someone was trying to assassinate 
the president.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I'm always amazed, no matter what the conclusion, someone can always
find evidence for the opposite. Here are some contrary opinions.

I expect the economic class has an influence and some fraction of any
population will always be well educated and some fraction will be
poorly educated. The question is how many people in the US are able to
hold the kind of jobs that need skill. This number appears to be
going down.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/national-math-reading-test-scores-2011_n_1068474.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/25/AR2011012502534.html

On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:23 PM, James Bowery wrote:

As for the poor educational outcomes of the US vs other countries:

When adjusted for economic class, the US is near the top.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/01/15/u-s-scores-on-international-test-lowered-by-sampling-error-report/

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:07 PM, Jed Rothwell
jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:

Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as
here, in 2005:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.

In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.

Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a
panic for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It
is a personality thing. We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when
we should. Case in point: my mother was riding a trolley car past
the Blair House on November 1, 1950. President Truman was living
there while the White House was being rebuilt. There was a series of
loud bangs. Someone said, they're trying to assassinate the
president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it is just a car
backfiring and went back to her newspaper. It turned out someone
was trying to assassinate the president.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:


I think you refer to your country.


Yes

But, I wouldn't be sure about people that goes to work there. From  
my personal experience, people who go to work in your country are  
selected in a much wider population than among your own and accept  
to work there with an wage bellow what people with the same high  
skill would get.


People come to the US for many reasons. But, I agree, a tendency  
exists to pay them less than US citizens.


Ed



2013/1/29 Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com
 We all agree that standards have been lowered for both high-school  
and college degrees.



--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Joe Hughes


I have to agree with Terry here.
As a hiring manager in the software industry (more specifically 
internet) over the last few years I've found it is more and more 
difficult to find adequate talent and or work ethic and motivation - 
especially amongst the younger generation.




There seems to be a prevaling sense of
entitlement in this generation.


I was forwarded this article recently discussing this very topic. Found 
it interesting in some ways as being a technologist my entire life it is 
written from the perspective of someone with a business/sales background.


http://www.millersmoney.com/money-weekly/straight-talk-for-the-underemployed-youth


Joe

On 01/29/2013 01:27 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:

I am an engineering manager in the consulting engineer business.  I do
run across cultural nepotism occasionally; but, right now, there is a
shortage of good engineering talent.

In my business, money is rarely the issue . . . it is expertise.  I
have two large engineering firms to draw from, AECOM in the US and
Atkins in GB fortunately.

In our local group, most of the engineers are around 60 years old.
Most of us are systems engineers with communications and
transportation experience.  We are presently taking in kids right out
of school and training them; but, people who have a good work ethic
are getting hard to find.  There seems to be a prevaling sense of
entitlement in this generation.

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Ed:

The housing bubble didn't almost bring down the entire world economy. That is 
pure sensationalism. As with any bubble, when it pops those holding the bag 
usually suffer.  In the case of 2008, the bag holders got the world governments 
to spread the suffering. 

Your comments sound like many of the doomsday predictors, peak oil etc so 
prevalent today.   Your concern is understandable given this age of pessimism 
but instead of getting worked up maybe you should stick to LENR, if that 
technology verifies this age of pessimism will certainly end and all your 
concerns will evaporate.  By the way, my take is that this age of pessimism is 
going to end soon even without LENR.

- Original Message - 
  From: Edmund Storms 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Cc: Edmund Storms 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:30 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment




  On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

  Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
  people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
  predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .


Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as here, 
in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0


He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.


  Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual generalities. 
He observes that a bubble was being created in the housing market. He even 
observed, apparently approvingly, that the government would create another 
after this one bursts, although he did not anticipate the way this is presently 
being done.  He made no mention that this bubble would almost bring down the 
entire world ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about 
the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very exact 
about what would happen and when - three years later from this article.




  In fact the
  difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
  problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.


Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a panic 
for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a personality 
thing. 


  I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of money 
during the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I do not intend to 
let this happen again.


  Ed




We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in point: my 
mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on November 1, 1950. 
President Truman was living there while the White House was being rebuilt. 
There was a series of loud bangs. Someone said, they're trying to assassinate 
the president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it is just a car backfiring 
and went back to her newspaper. It turned out someone was trying to assassinate 
the president.


- Jed




  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
  Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2639/5565 - Release Date: 01/29/13

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Randy wuller wrote:


Ed:

The housing bubble didn't almost bring down the entire world  
economy. That is pure sensationalism. As with any bubble, when it  
pops those holding the bag usually suffer.  In the case of 2008, the  
bag holders got the world governments to spread the  suffering.


That conclusion is in conflict with what was claimed at the time and  
provided justification for the Tarp funding.  As for pessimism, this  
is the description someone applies when they do not believe what is  
being described.  The description is acknowledged as being a true  
representation of reality if a person believes what is said. The  
question at this point is, who's view of reality is correct?  In 2008  
and in 1929, a pessimist would have taken their money out of the  
stock market. The optimist did not.  Your choice.  We all make choices  
that have consequences and these choices must be based on what is  
real. I'm trying to understand what is real. Are you?



 By the way, what ends the age of pessimism?  Do people get their  
jobs and homes back? How soon does this happen?


Ed


Your comments sound like many of the doomsday predictors, peak oil  
etc so prevalent today.   Your concern is understandable given this  
age of pessimism but instead of getting worked up maybe you should  
stick to LENR, if that technology verifies this age of pessimism  
will certainly end and all your concerns will evaporate.  By the  
way, my take is that this age of pessimism is going to end soon even  
without LENR.


- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what  
the

people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such  
as here, in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as  
junk.


Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual  
generalities. He observes that a bubble was being created in the  
housing market. He even observed, apparently approvingly, that the  
government would create another after this one bursts, although he  
did not anticipate the way this is presently being done.  He made no  
mention that this bubble would almost bring down the entire world  
ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about  
the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very  
exact about what would happen and when - three years later from this  
article.



In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.

Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a  
panic for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It  
is a personality thing.


I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of  
money during the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I  
do not intend to let this happen again.


Ed


We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in  
point: my mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on  
November 1, 1950. President Truman was living there while the White  
House was being rebuilt. There was a series of loud bangs. Someone  
said, they're trying to assassinate the president!! My mother  
said, don't be silly; it is just a car backfiring and went back  
to her newspaper. It turned out someone was trying to assassinate  
the president.


- Jed



No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2639/5565 - Release Date:  
01/29/13

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Call it social security, call it a citizen dividend, call it whatever you want, 
if world productivity continues to increase (ie, more is available to 
distribute) so will the give away to those living and not producing or not 
producing much.  Even if no one is working we will find a way to allocate the 
goods to those living on this planet, unless you want to give it to the robots 
who are doing the work.  In essence funding is unnecessary, allocating the 
productions is all that is needed.  

Many of you are missing the point of the article on automation,  the only thing 
that really matters is whether the pie increases and it is, dividing it up is 
never easy but will always be resolved by some method.

However as to the method, what I am hearing is this antiquated notion that 
Human Beings are really productive today or ultimately needed for production.  
That may be true of some of us but far fewer then in the past and far more 
today then will be needed in the future.  Most of us even now are just 
entertaining each other. It is made up work.  Everyone needs to get used to it 
and we really do need to find a better way to allocate the productivity of the 
world.  The problem in a service society is average ability is practically 
unwanted.  We all want the services of those on the edge of the bell shaped 
curve (those with something exceptional to give), so those are the ones who get 
paid a lot.  Everyone else is interchangeable and not worth spit and paid 
accordingly. So is that how you all want to allocate resources in the future? A 
tiny portion of the world population have 99% of what is produced and everyone 
else lives poorly (keeping in mind that we will be able to produce enough to 
allow everyone to live like the kings of the past if we want.)  I don't think 
that is such a good idea,   We need a better way to allocate production. We 
also need to expand beyond this planet to give us something to do before we go 
stir crazy.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Chris Zell 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:38 PM
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment


  Business Insider recently reported that Krugman may be discreetly admitting 
that he has made a serious oversight with regard to the viability of Social 
Security.  Automation is eliminating jobs at such a rate that the payroll tax 
funding source may be in peril.  



--
  From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Cc: Edmund Storms
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment




  On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote: 

  Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
  people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
  predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .


Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as here, 
in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0


He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.


  Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual generalities. 
He observes that a bubble was being created in the housing market. He even 
observed, apparently approvingly, that the government would create another 
after this one bursts, although he did not anticipate the way this is presently 
being done.  He made no mention that this bubble would almost bring down the 
entire world ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about 
the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very exact 
about what would happen and when - three years later from this article.




  In fact the
  difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
  problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.


Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a panic 
for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a personality 
thing. 


  I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of money 
during the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I do not intend to 
let this happen again.


  Ed




We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in point: my 
mother was riding a trolley car past the Blair House on November 1, 1950. 
President Truman was living there while the White House was being rebuilt. 
There was a series of loud bangs. Someone said, they're trying to assassinate 
the president!! My mother said, don't be silly; it is just a car backfiring 
and went back to her newspaper. It turned out someone was trying to assassinate 
the president.


- Jed




  No virus found in this message.
  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Mark Goldes

Time to work toward implementing a Second Income Plan.

The idea originated with the late Louis O. Kelso, father of the Employee Stock 
Ownership Plan used by 11,000 companies. It does not depend upon jobs or 
savings. See SECOND INCOMES at www.aesopinstitute.org for the most recent 
version.

Kelso saw automation coming. He believed it could liberate humans from toil, 
work we do not choose to do. He believed that by about age 50 almost everyone 
in America could receive sufficient income from diversified investments to 
allow toil to drop to perhaps 20 hours per week.

That achievement could make possible the first genuinely free society in human 
history. If we are wise, we will bring it into being as rapidly as is humanly 
possible. 

Here is a link to an excellent article about Kelso’s ideas:  We Are For 
Economic Justice   by Gary Reber 
http://foreconomicjustice.org/11/economic-justice/#comment-2388

Poverty would be eradicated and inequality dramatically reduced in a manner 
totally consistent with our highest ideals. Enact the Capital Homestead Act to 
create new owners of future productive capital investment in businesses 
simultaneously with the growth of the economy and thereby broaden private, 
individual ownership of America's future capital wealth. The CHA would enable 
every man, woman and child to establish a Capital Homestead Account or CHA (a 
super-IRA or asset tax-shelter for citizens) at their local bank to acquire a 
growing dividend-bearing stock portfolio to supplement their incomes from work 
and all other sources of income.

This link provides a video introduction to this plan:   
http://youtu.be/odDGX8q2o3I

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Randy wuller [rwul...@freeark.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:07 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Call it social security, call it a citizen dividend, call it whatever you want, 
if world productivity continues to increase (ie, more is available to 
distribute) so will the give away to those living and not producing or not 
producing much.  Even if no one is working we will find a way to allocate the 
goods to those living on this planet, unless you want to give it to the robots 
who are doing the work.  In essence funding is unnecessary, allocating the 
productions is all that is needed.

Many of you are missing the point of the article on automation,  the only thing 
that really matters is whether the pie increases and it is, dividing it up is 
never easy but will always be resolved by some method.

However as to the method, what I am hearing is this antiquated notion that 
Human Beings are really productive today or ultimately needed for production.  
That may be true of some of us but far fewer then in the past and far more 
today then will be needed in the future.  Most of us even now are just 
entertaining each other. It is made up work.  Everyone needs to get used to it 
and we really do need to find a better way to allocate the productivity of the 
world.  The problem in a service society is average ability is practically 
unwanted.  We all want the services of those on the edge of the bell shaped 
curve (those with something exceptional to give), so those are the ones who get 
paid a lot.  Everyone else is interchangeable and not worth spit and paid 
accordingly. So is that how you all want to allocate resources in the future? A 
tiny portion of the world population have 99% of what is produced and everyone 
else lives poorly (keeping in mind that we will be able to produce enough to 
allow everyone to live like the kings of the past if we want.)  I don't think 
that is such a good idea,   We need a better way to allocate production. We 
also need to expand beyond this planet to give us something to do before we go 
stir crazy.
- Original Message -
From: Chris Zellmailto:chrisz...@wetmtv.com
To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:38 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Business Insider recently reported that Krugman may be discreetly admitting 
that he has made a serious oversight with regard to the viability of Social 
Security.  Automation is eliminating jobs at such a rate that the payroll tax 
funding source may be in peril.


From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment


On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Ed:

An idiot would have taken their money out of the stock market in 2008 and 1929. 
 Now a really good prognosticator would have taken their money out in 2007 and 
1928 and put it right back into the market in 2009 and 1930, (but if you know 
any of those, you may want them to take a lie detector test) but truly 
pessimistic people rarely (the type who would have taken it out in 2007) find 
the courage to put it back in.  They just see the next disaster.

However, had you stayed the course, your assets would be worth more today than 
in 2007.  Also, keep in mind that secular bear markets (like the one we have 
been in since 2000) have a tendency to run their course in 15 years or so and 
we are at 13 now, so the market bear is getting really long in the tooth.  And 
what ends the age of pessimism is always interesting and rarely identified 
until years later.  I suspect it will have something to do with energy because 
that is one of the governors restricting world growth today.  Which by the way 
is the reason I have been watching LENR and chose to sign up to the Vortex. 
Nanotechnology may also be the stimulus.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Edmund Storms 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Cc: Edmund Storms 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:23 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment




  On Jan 29, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Randy wuller wrote:


Ed:

The housing bubble didn't almost bring down the entire world economy. That 
is pure sensationalism. As with any bubble, when it pops those holding the bag 
usually suffer.  In the case of 2008, the bag holders got the world governments 
to spread the  suffering. 


  That conclusion is in conflict with what was claimed at the time and provided 
justification for the Tarp funding.  As for pessimism, this is the description 
someone applies when they do not believe what is being described.  The 
description is acknowledged as being a true representation of reality if a 
person believes what is said. The question at this point is, who's view of 
reality is correct?  In 2008 and in 1929, a pessimist would have taken their 
money out of the stock market. The optimist did not.  Your choice.  We all make 
choices that have consequences and these choices must be based on what is real. 
I'm trying to understand what is real. Are you?




   By the way, what ends the age of pessimism?  Do people get their jobs and 
homes back? How soon does this happen?


  Ed


Your comments sound like many of the doomsday predictors, peak oil etc so 
prevalent today.   Your concern is understandable given this age of pessimism 
but instead of getting worked up maybe you should stick to LENR, if that 
technology verifies this age of pessimism will certainly end and all your 
concerns will evaporate.  By the way, my take is that this age of pessimism is 
going to end soon even without LENR.

- Original Message -
  From: Edmund Storms
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Cc: Edmund Storms
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:30 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on 
employment




  On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

  Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
  people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
  predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .


Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such as 
here, in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0


He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as junk.


  Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual 
generalities. He observes that a bubble was being created in the housing 
market. He even observed, apparently approvingly, that the government would 
create another after this one bursts, although he did not anticipate the way 
this is presently being done.  He made no mention that this bubble would almost 
bring down the entire world ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not 
as calm about the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were 
very exact about what would happen and when - three years later from this 
article.




  In fact the
  difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
  problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.


Wrong again. He is very much against the status quo. He is not in a 
panic for the same reason I am not, and my mother would not be. It is a 
personality thing.


  I also do not like to be in a panic. As a result, I lost a lot of money 
during the 2008 collapse by not taking the panic seriously. I do not intend to 
let this happen again.


  Ed




We don't get into a tizzy, perhaps even when we should. Case in point: 
my mother was

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread David Roberson

Randy, a lot depends upon which companies you invested in before the crash.  I 
put a fair amount of faith that GM would not be allowed to fail since it has a 
powerful union that has a great deal of influence upon the democratic party.  
My logic was that there was no possibility that the democrats would allow the 
union to be busted which usually happens when a company goes bankrupt.  That 
was my mistake.


The unions came out relatively secure, the bond holders got hit, while the 
share holders got ruined.  I found out that the government has a lot of leeway 
as to  how they interfere with private industry.  If you can put money on the 
unions, you will be fine when democrats are in power.  Better to stay away from 
industry that might have problems under these conditions, even those with a 
fantastic track record such as the auto industry.


It is not entirely clear as to what would have been the outcome had the 
republicans kept control, but I bet the unions would have not been so fortunate.


Dave



-Original Message-
From: Randy wuller rwul...@freeark.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tue, Jan 29, 2013 5:29 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment


Ed:
 
An idiot would have taken their money out of the stock market in 2008 and 1929. 
 Now a really good prognosticator would have taken their money out in 2007 and 
1928 and put it right back into the market in 2009 and 1930, (but if you know 
any of those, you may want them to take a lie detector test) but truly 
pessimistic people rarely (the type who would have taken it out in 2007) find 
the courage to put it back in.  They just see the next disaster.
 
However, had you stayed the course, your assets would be worth more today than 
in 2007.  Also, keep in mind that secular bear markets (like the one we have 
been in since 2000) have a tendency to run their course in 15 years or so and 
we are at 13 now, so the market bear is getting really long in the tooth.  And 
what ends the age of pessimism is always interesting and rarely identified 
until years later.  I suspect it will have something to do with energy because 
that is one of the governors restricting world growth today.  Which by the way 
is the reason I have been watching LENR and chose to sign up to the Vortex. 
Nanotechnology may also be the stimulus.
  
- Original Message - 
  
From:   Edmund   Storms 
  
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  
Cc: Edmund Storms 
  
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:23   PM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about   the impact of automation on employment
  



  
  
On Jan 29, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Randy wuller wrote:

  


Ed:

 

The housing bubble didn't almost bring down the entire world economy. That 
is pure sensationalism. As with any bubble, when it pops those holding the 
bag usually suffer.  In the case of 2008, the bag holders got the world 
governments to spread the  suffering. 

  


That conclusion is in conflict with what was claimed at the   time and provided 
justification for the Tarp funding.  As for pessimism,   this is the 
description someone applies when they do not believe what is being   described. 
 The description is acknowledged as being a true   representation of reality if 
a person believes what is said. The question at   this point is, who's view of 
reality is correct?  In 2008 and in 1929, a   pessimist would have taken 
their money out of the stock market. The optimist   did not.  Your choice.  We 
all make choices that have consequences   and these choices must be based on 
what is real. I'm trying to understand what   is real. Are you?
  


  


  
 By the way, what ends the age of pessimism?  Do people get   their jobs and 
homes back? How soon does this happen?
  


  
Ed
  


 

Your comments sound like many of the doomsday predictors, peak oil etc so 
prevalent today.   Your concern is understandable given this age of 
pessimism but instead of getting worked up maybe you should stick to LENR, 
if that technology verifies this age of pessimism will certainly end and 
all your concerns will evaporate.  By the way, my take is that this age of 
pessimism is going to end soon even without LENR.

 

- Original Message -

  
From: Edmund Storms
  
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  
Cc: Edmund Storms
  
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:30   PM
  
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about   the impact of automation on 
employment
  



  
  
On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

  
Ed Storms wrote:
 



Thanks   Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what
   the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because   they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .




Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I agree Randy, we need a way to distribute the goodies being made  
increasingly without human help. The free enterprise system worked  
well in the past and many other ideas have failed. However, transition  
to a new system will not be easy. I suggest every one read the book  
Essentials of Economics.  I was impressed about how the system  
actually works in contrast to the impression I got from less educated  
sources. The system is a well oiled machine with interconnected parts,  
all of which have to interact in certain ways. Of course, governments  
often throw sand in the works.  Nevertheless, certain rules must be  
followed or the machine stops working.  Before people suggest what is  
required to solve the growing problem of robots, I suggest you learn  
about how the machine actually works.  By the way, this problem is not  
new. Machines have been taking over for almost 200 years with growing  
effect.  The only difference is that the machines are now moving up  
the food chain and starting to affect a growing number of people  
especially at the higher skill and economic level. The natural  
expectation is that we all can be replaced - or is that too pessimistic?


Ed


On Jan 29, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Randy wuller wrote:

Call it social security, call it a citizen dividend, call it  
whatever you want, if world productivity continues to increase (ie,  
more is available to distribute) so will the give away to those  
living and not producing or not producing much.  Even if no one is  
working we will find a way to allocate the goods to those living on  
this planet, unless you want to give it to the robots who are doing  
the work.  In essence funding is unnecessary, allocating the  
productions is all that is needed.


Many of you are missing the point of the article on automation,  the  
only thing that really matters is whether the pie increases and it  
is, dividing it up is never easy but will always be resolved by some  
method.


However as to the method, what I am hearing is this antiquated  
notion that Human Beings are really productive today or ultimately  
needed for production.  That may be true of some of us but far fewer  
then in the past and far more today then will be needed in the  
future.  Most of us even now are just entertaining each other. It is  
made up work.  Everyone needs to get used to it and we really do  
need to find a better way to allocate the productivity of the  
world.  The problem in a service society is average ability is  
practically unwanted.  We all want the services of those on the edge  
of the bell shaped curve (those with something exceptional to give),  
so those are the ones who get paid a lot.  Everyone else is  
interchangeable and not worth spit and paid accordingly. So is that  
how you all want to allocate resources in the future? A tiny portion  
of the world population have 99% of what is produced and everyone  
else lives poorly (keeping in mind that we will be able to produce  
enough to allow everyone to live like the kings of the past if we  
want.)  I don't think that is such a good idea,   We need a better  
way to allocate production. We also need to expand beyond this  
planet to give us something to do before we go stir crazy.

- Original Message -
From: Chris Zell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:38 PM
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment


Business Insider recently reported that Krugman may be discreetly  
admitting that he has made a serious oversight with regard to the  
viability of Social Security.  Automation is eliminating jobs at  
such a rate that the payroll tax funding source may be in peril.


From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what  
the

people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such  
as here, in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as  
junk.


Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual  
generalities. He observes that a bubble was being created in the  
housing market. He even observed, apparently approvingly, that the  
government would create another after this one bursts, although he  
did not anticipate the way this is presently being done.  He made no  
mention that this bubble would almost bring down the entire world  
ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm about  
the problem as was Sir Greenspan.  Meanwhile, other people were very  
exact about what

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 3:29 PM, Randy wuller wrote:


Ed:

An idiot would have taken their money out of the stock market in  
2008 and 1929.


Unfortunately most of the world is an idiot. Nevertheless, I take your  
point.


Now a really good prognosticator would have taken their money out in  
2007 and 1928 and put it right back into the market in 2009 and  
1930, (but if you know any of those, you may want them to take a lie  
detector test) but truly pessimistic people rarely (the type who  
would have taken it out in 2007) find the courage to put it back  
in.  They just see the next disaster.


However, had you stayed the course, your assets would be worth more  
today than in 2007.  Also, keep in mind that secular bear markets  
(like the one we have been in since 2000) have a tendency to run  
their course in 15 years or so and we are at 13 now, so the market  
bear is getting really long in the tooth.  And what ends the age of  
pessimism is always interesting and rarely identified until years  
later.  I suspect it will have something to do with energy because  
that is one of the governors restricting world growth today.  Which  
by the way is the reason I have been watching LENR and chose to sign  
up to the Vortex. Nanotechnology may also be the stimulus.


Yes Randy, staying in would have been wise. Getting out in 2007 and  
getting back in in 2009 would have been better. But who knew?  Now the  
situation is starting to repeat according to some observers because  
the system was not fixed in 2008.   As they say, once fooled 


I agree, availability of energy is the basic limitation to growth. Now  
use of conventional energy is also causing limitations, both present  
and potential.  LENR will solve many problems if we can get it into  
the mainstream, but this effort also has basic limitations.
Nanotechnology will open new markets and, ironically, provide the  
solution to making CF work.  We just need to understand how to apply  
it, which I'm trying to do.


Ed

- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 2:08 PM, Randy wuller wrote:


Ed:

The housing bubble didn't almost bring down the entire world  
economy. That is pure sensationalism. As with any bubble, when it  
pops those holding the bag usually suffer.  In the case of 2008,  
the bag holders got the world governments to spread the  suffering.


That conclusion is in conflict with what was claimed at the time and  
provided justification for the Tarp funding.  As for pessimism, this  
is the description someone applies when they do not believe what is  
being described.  The description is acknowledged as being a true  
representation of reality if a person believes what is said. The  
question at this point is, who's view of reality is correct?  In  
2008 and in 1929, a pessimist would have taken their money out of  
the stock market. The optimist did not.  Your choice.  We all make  
choices that have consequences and these choices must be based on  
what is real. I'm trying to understand what is real. Are you?



 By the way, what ends the age of pessimism?  Do people get their  
jobs and homes back? How soon does this happen?


Ed


Your comments sound like many of the doomsday predictors, peak  
oil etc so prevalent today.   Your concern is understandable given  
this age of pessimism but instead of getting worked up maybe you  
should stick to LENR, if that technology verifies this age of  
pessimism will certainly end and all your concerns will evaporate.   
By the way, my take is that this age of pessimism is going to end  
soon even without LENR.


- Original Message -
From: Edmund Storms
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on  
employment



On Jan 29, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Ed Storms wrote:

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what  
the

people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not. . . .

Krugman did predict it, and warned against it several times. Such  
as here, in 2005:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=0

He repeatedly described the banks' investments in real estate as  
junk.


Jed, I read this article and I see no concern except the usual  
generalities. He observes that a bubble was being created in the  
housing market. He even observed, apparently approvingly, that the  
government would create another after this one bursts, although he  
did not anticipate the way this is presently being done.  He made  
no mention that this bubble would almost bring down the entire  
world ecconomy.   I will give him some credit, He was not as calm  
about the problem as was

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Ed:

Not pessimistic at all.  But, yes we can probably all be replaced.  However, 
Human Beings will just find something else to do.  

The dilemma between Government directed and market directed is that the 
Government does a real bad job of running a business. I spent years on Capital 
Hill trying to encourage a change in the Space program to a more commercial 
model in which government provided incentives ( I even wrote a tax credit bill 
for the space transportation industry )  to encourage investment and let those 
investing direct the effort.  That is the model that needs to be implemented, 
especially in the sciences.  But alas, it is hard to change the thinking of 
those in charge.  But government is good at collecting resources and 
redistributing them.

- Original Message - 
  From: Edmund Storms 
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com 
  Cc: Edmund Storms 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 4:45 PM
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment


  I agree Randy, we need a way to distribute the goodies being made 
increasingly without human help. The free enterprise system worked well in the 
past and many other ideas have failed. However, transition to a new system will 
not be easy. I suggest every one read the book Essentials of Economics.  I 
was impressed about how the system actually works in contrast to the impression 
I got from less educated sources. The system is a well oiled machine with 
interconnected parts, all of which have to interact in certain ways. Of course, 
governments often throw sand in the works.  Nevertheless, certain rules must be 
followed or the machine stops working.  Before people suggest what is required 
to solve the growing problem of robots, I suggest you learn about how the 
machine actually works.  By the way, this problem is not new. Machines have 
been taking over for almost 200 years with growing effect.  The only difference 
is that the machines are now moving up the food chain and starting to affect a 
growing number of people especially at the higher skill and economic level. The 
natural expectation is that we all can be replaced - or is that too pessimistic?


  Ed





  On Jan 29, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Randy wuller wrote:


Call it social security, call it a citizen dividend, call it whatever you 
want, if world productivity continues to increase (ie, more is available to 
distribute) so will the give away to those living and not producing or not 
producing much.  Even if no one is working we will find a way to allocate the 
goods to those living on this planet, unless you want to give it to the robots 
who are doing the work.  In essence funding is unnecessary, allocating the 
productions is all that is needed. 

Many of you are missing the point of the article on automation,  the only 
thing that really matters is whether the pie increases and it is, dividing it 
up is never easy but will always be resolved by some method.

However as to the method, what I am hearing is this antiquated notion that 
Human Beings are really productive today or ultimately needed for production.  
That may be true of some of us but far fewer then in the past and far more 
today then will be needed in the future.  Most of us even now are just 
entertaining each other. It is made up work.  Everyone needs to get used to it 
and we really do need to find a better way to allocate the productivity of the 
world.  The problem in a service society is average ability is practically 
unwanted.  We all want the services of those on the edge of the bell shaped 
curve (those with something exceptional to give), so those are the ones who get 
paid a lot.  Everyone else is interchangeable and not worth spit and paid 
accordingly. So is that how you all want to allocate resources in the future? A 
tiny portion of the world population have 99% of what is produced and everyone 
else lives poorly (keeping in mind that we will be able to produce enough to 
allow everyone to live like the kings of the past if we want.)  I don't think 
that is such a good idea,   We need a better way to allocate production. We 
also need to expand beyond this planet to give us something to do before we go 
stir crazy.
  - Original Message -
  From: Chris Zell
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 2:38 PM
  Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on 
employment


  Business Insider recently reported that Krugman may be discreetly 
admitting that he has made a serious oversight with regard to the viability of 
Social Security.  Automation is eliminating jobs at such a rate that the 
payroll tax funding source may be in peril. 



--
  From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
  Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2013 3:30 PM
  To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
  Cc: Edmund Storms
  Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Harry Veeder

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Terry Blanton hohlr...@gmail.com wrote:
There seems to be a prevaling sense of
 entitlement in this generation.





When your generation entered the workforce it was generally realistic
for them to expect their income would eventually exceed their parents
income. For today's generation that expectation is generally
unrealistic.  Instead they want more say over their workplace.

Harry

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

From Ed:

 

 Thanks Jim for making my comment more vivid.  The situation 

 is growing worse and your  personal experience is one of many tragic

 consequences.  The driving force behind hiring is the cost of labor.

 People from other countries are cheaper, the young are cheaper, and 

 the robots are cheaper.  This cost is not just salary. The cost of

 healthcare, pension, and general overhead is high.  As you made clear,

 the quality of the person is not what matters in many industries,

 only the cost. The standard of living in the US is adjusting downward

 and everybody is suffering.  When the inflation being created by the

 Federal Reserve increases in ernest, our pain will increase again.

 

personal rant

 

Having worked in Info Tech for over 30 years I have to say that the amount
of out sourcing I've experienced, professionally speaking, within the last
10 - 15 years has been dramatic. This outsourcing virus seems to have
increased exponentially within the last 5 years. 

 

For most of my professional InfoTech career I've worked for state government
institutions. I am currently responsible for maintaining an expensive
software package that is owned by EMC. EMC is a huge conglomerate company
that, among many eclectic activities, manages high volume scanning software.
What we have purchased from them is a tiny portion of the company's entire
revenues. As such, we're small fish as far as EMC is concerned. 

 

Whenever we encounter a problem (or bug) with their scanning software for
which that we cannot resolve on our own we open up another on-line Service
Request through the EMC web site. 98% of the time we will be hooked up with
an individual whose name, as spelled in the English language, is a
significant challenge for me to pronounce correctly.

 

I certainly don't fault countries like India for having wisely educated a
huge portion of their population base with highly employable technical
degrees that presumably include accompanying skills. Just like everyone else
on this planet they deserve to earn  live a better life than their parents.

 

However, what I find inexcusable, ABSOLUTELY INEXCUSABLE, is that companies
like EMC appear to have gutted a significant portion of their experienced
English speaking technical staff and replaced them with a significantly
cheaper and inexperienced labor force in the misguided assumption by doing
so they will be able to service their customers with the same degree of
expertise, and all on the cheap.

 

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING

 

You just try conducting an on-line WebX session with an individual
concerning highly technical matters when their command of the English
language (combined with heavy accent) results in me hopefully comprehending
about 70 to 80 percent of what they say over the phone.

 

For about two years now we have been trying to upgrade to a newer version of
a high-volume scanning software package. We had been using reasonably STABLE
versions of this software for well over 5 years. Unfortunately, these older
versions are going out of service very soon. But now... and you heard that
right... for TWO YEARS now we have been trying to upgrade to a newer
version. This upgrade has been going on for so long that this new version we
are currently trying to upgrade to, we have been told by EMC, will ITSELF go
out of service this summer. So, we are trying to upgrade to this version so
that we can then turn around and upgrade to the next version which should
hopefully last several more years longer before EMC decides it's time to
pull it out of service. (I'll spare you the details about the politics
involved with this upgrade strategy. Needless to say, it wasn't my
choice.) 

 

Earlier this week I documented the fact that the software version we are
still trying to upgrade to exhibits show stopping serious functional
flaws. Our users will be unable to use the software as-is. I emailed EMC
concerning the specifics of what I uncovered. I sent them a very explicit
eMail message that documented the problems we've encountered. I also CC'd as
my boss with my findings. I included a very clear hint to EMC (as well as my
boss) that I'm recommending we seriously consider shopping around for
another high volume scanning software package. (I've heard that KOFAX's,
Ascent Capture s/w, is a good competitor.)

 

I finally got a tech person who's native language is English. Hopefully EMC
will take this matter seriously. Hopefully we'll get some EXPERIENCED
development staff working on fixing the bugs. Hopefully this will be
accomplished before I am possibly forced to retire prematurely (because
someone has to be blamed) because I can't make their #$%# software work for
us in our building. In 30 plus years of working in the Info Tech
environment, I have never encountered a piece of #$$ software as bad as
this. It is SO NOT ready for primetime. 

 

I can understand why EMC recently announced a brand new version that they
are now trying to peddle to their

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Eric Walker

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 7:10 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 However, what I find inexcusable, ABSOLUTELY INEXCUSABLE, is that
 companies like EMC appear to have gutted a significant portion of their
 experienced English speaking technical staff and replaced them with a
 significantly cheaper and inexperienced labor force in the misguided
 assumption by doing so they will be able to service their customers with
 the same degree of expertise, and all on the cheap.

I find the outsourcing discussion interesting on several levels.

Part of my responsibilities at work include liaising with a team in
Singapore.  They have taken over some of the work that my team previously
worked on, and my team are gradually transitioning to other
responsibilities.  The people in Singapore are a real pleasure to work with.

One thing that is interesting about the outsourcing discussion is that, I
believe, one cannot self-consistently advocate hard-core capitalist market
ideology, on hand, and get upset about outsourcing, on the other. (I'm not
suggesting you're in the group of hard-core free-market advocates, Steven.)
 If you believe in purely market-driven solutions, outsourcing seems like a
natural fit.  If you have qualms with outsourcing, you may need to burnish
up your free-market credentials.  I believe this goes for any contracts the
US government would need to fill as well -- unless, perhaps, one is willing
to grant themselves a dispensation to depart a little from the spirit of
market-based solutions.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Eric Walker

I wrote:

unless, perhaps, one is willing to grant themselves a dispensation to
 depart a little from the spirit of market-based solutions.


I should add that Singapore, during its period of rapid development, did
not hesitate to depart from free-market principles.  There were trade
barriers and protectionism and government subsidies and so on.  I've been
to Singapore, and its economic policy appears to have been wise in
hindsight. China appears to be pursuing a similar policy, and I suspect it
will reap similar rewards in the future.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Eric Walker

On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 8:46 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote:

China appears to be pursuing a similar policy, and I suspect it will reap
 similar rewards in the future.


I'm having fun trolling tonight, so I'll add one more fascinating thought
-- the folks in China are hardworking and diligent, and despite the
economic inequalities that are starting to appear and the various troubles
that the government is currently facing, you can be assured that it will
gradually work through any issues.  And so it is progressing, year by year,
its people working quietly and diligently, and before too long you will see
that it will attain the level of development of Singapore.  So at that
point you will have a country the size of China, with roughly three times
the population of the US, at the level of prosperity of Singapore.  At such
a time there will be sufficient tax revenue to build up and maintain
a sizable fleet of aircraft carriers and project force across the Pacific
rim.  And unlike Singapore, China has a large army of young, restless
soldiers eager to win glory for the motherland and willing to prove
themselves in the field against any country they perceive, rightly or
wrongly, to be overbearing.

In this context a sound, practical, wholly un-ideological economic policy,
which does not ask too many questions about whether something is
socialist or capitalist, will make all the difference in bringing this
vision about.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-29 Thread Alain Sepeda

this is also the position of the writer on the next convergence.

Real policy for emerging countries is not laisser-faire, but TEMPORARY
protectionism, huge investment in education and infrastructure, support for
NEW industry...
and reinventing all, breaking the old model, every 10 years. also one key
idea is to forget about perfect solutions.

Korea nearly missed the occidentallevel of developement because they wanted
to enjoy their low-cost economy of the time. hopefully the workers moaned
so much that wages increased, and that with education, they could get at a
higher level of economy.
don't forget that Korea was at a level nor far from East China today.

What I see in france, is on one side some broken protectionism, leading to
support zombies economy, voters lobbies, economic rent lobbies, and thus to
starve the real needed investments, over taxing the new industry and the
innovators (as people, and as industry)...
On another side the work market is so unreal that there is bad habits of
throwing experienced worked (too expensive, hard to control, pretended as
outdated)...
Pressure of taxes and alike are so high that work have to be very very
productive (ve are very productive, too much for most) so it eliminates
unexperienced workers (young, not qualified much), and older workers
(slowers, obsoleted)or believed so.
The gap in working cost is so wide with germany, that companies have quite
no benefit to reinvest in innovation, and we lose markets(we have nearly
the worst margin in EU).
One problem is that it is harder to break a working contract than divorce.
I've tested mysef for a small job for repairing house, that breaking a
contract because ther is no more anything to do, IS NOT ALLOWED (checked
many times with the work law administration). This make the emplyers very
selective about employee who have to be perfect and predictable. No
possibility to say that you will see if the man is good, if he can be
trained...
the effect is we have problem of low employment for aged workers, and so
for young workers, leading to retirement fund bankrupcy.
Young worker start to have a stable job (instability of work in france is
very painful, since our mindset is not adapted so. we stress. it is hard to
find a rent, a loan).
being old in an enterprise start at 45 in france... at 45 you are assumed
to be unable to change. at 50 you have to be fired at first occasion(not
many), and nobody will employ you anymore. at 55 nobody will expect
anything for you, no pressure, no training, no employment, just hope to
fire you when a window open. at 65-67 you can hope to have your
retirement... in between... and in france it is hard to pay people below
that standard, so aged experienced worker are not employed, rather that
underpaid...

my question is whether LENR and robotic will save us, or if it will simply
help Asia to develop, Africa after, letting us locked in our demagogy,
until we have to move to Asia, where there is work and opportunities...
If things get bad for me, this is one opportunity (not China, which is too
locked, but one of the next tiger : Indonesia. still open and where I have
a family network).
Maybe Africa will be more adapted for most French since we have history and
family links there, yet Asian diaspora develop many links since a decade...

2013/1/30 Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com

 I wrote:

 unless, perhaps, one is willing to grant themselves a dispensation to
 depart a little from the spirit of market-based solutions.


 I should add that Singapore, during its period of rapid development, did
 not hesitate to depart from free-market principles.  There were trade
 barriers and protectionism and government subsidies and so on.  I've been
 to Singapore, and its economic policy appears to have been wise in
 hindsight. China appears to be pursuing a similar policy, and I suspect it
 will reap similar rewards in the future.

 Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Alain Sepeda

That is a general point about how governments manage transition.
They want to protect jobs, and existing industries, not to help things to
change to a better point.

as i repeat often it is well explained in the Next convergence as the big
problems with governments.
Laisser-faire and saving jobs are opposite version of the same bad decision.

the good one is to help the transition by investing in asset that are too
longterm for the private sector, and to help workforec to survive during
the (short) unemployment period, then train them so they can move (quickly)
to the new industry/economy...

it is very hard where the politic system is a demagogy.

for the army, remoiving the huge waste would allow much more effcient army
and strongest action...
In france when you want to remove on barack campus, all the local
authorities panic because ther is (still) nothing to replace...
not so different from what happens when you shutdown a big industry in a
place where it it have no more reason to exist...

we shoul help people to move, instead of preventing them to move. in france
the problems are well identified (real-estate, taxes, work laws) and not at
all corrected, to protect incumbent, mouse in the cheese,  and other
economic rent.

for US army, note that big par of Army budget is in fact subsidies hidden
from WTO.
Free market in US is a myth.

2013/1/26 Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com

 Yes, Mark, this would be the best place to start. But jobs will be lost,
 the only issue is which jobs.  Congress does not want to cut any jobs
 because these are voters.  They only want to cut things that will piss off
 the fewest number of people who vote. The poor do not vote so they are fair
 game.  Of course, a combination of increased taxes especially at the high
 end and careful cuts over a period of time would be the way to go. But as
 you note - fat chance.

 Ed



 On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Mark Goldes wrote:

  Ed,

 Huge cuts could be made in our military budget which is bloated, wasteful
 and largely redundant. (I was a USAF Officer and speak with first hand
 knowledge).

 That alone would make an enormous difference.

 Try and get Congress to approve it! Fat chance!

 Mark Goldes
 Co-Founder, Chava Energy
 CEO, Aesop Institute

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Nigel Dyer

The fact that an analysis conflicts with every economist does not make 
it wrong. After their almost complete failure (yes I know there were 
some notable exceptions) to predict our current crisis I no longer have 
much faith in what economists say.  A few years ago the UK Queen asked 
some economists at a function why they had not predicted the current 
mess, and to their credit they went away and came back with a report.  
The first real royal commission that we have had in a long time


Nigel


On 26/01/2013 23:54, Edmund Storms wrote:
Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I 
have read and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not 
possible because the economy is not growing as fast as it was then so 
that the tax rate would have to be a bigger fraction of the income to 
provide the same amount of money, which people resist. Also, the debt 
is much larger now.  We have passed the point of no return according 
to most analysts.


Ed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread fznidarsic





Ed, Where can we hide? 


I have studied hard and obtained 2 and 1/2 college degrees, have worked 
overtime for 34 years, and  have downsized as companies closed down five times. 
 There is no chance that Bethlehem Steel will ever hire me back.  Same to say 
for the rest.   I have saved some in my 401 K.  I have earned social security.  
I have a small defined company pension.  Got it while they were still giving 
it.  The sum total is nothing glorious; however  I did what they told me and 
kept my nose to the grindstone.   I hope to have a used car in my future.  Many 
are worse off.



I have been doing contracts and have recently noted that nobody wants you much 
over 60. They don't want you full time after 42.  .  They want a young man that 
they can dispose of.  They want to set him up for no job after forty.   They 
want the middle age man just in case business conditions warrant that they 
might need him for a longer time.   I have no clue what the young man is going 
to do.  Who is my dentist going to bill excessively?


Where do we go after 60 when all of the savings and entitlements are gone?   I 
don't have another life time to do it again?  There are a lot of us in this 
boat.  I have been told that the Obama Care death panel may have an answer.


Surely it will not end like this, this is America, it will be better.  There 
may even be new productive opportunities begging to be filled.  Maybe the 
assets invented in the entitlements will soar to new heights. 


What is your plan Ed?  Please let me know.


Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Edmund Storms

Like all subjects, some people understand and are generally basically  
right and there are people who do not have a clue and are basically  
wrong even though they have positions of power and fame. It really  
does matter whom you believe since we as individuals cannot master  
everything. To understand what is happening I suggest you read Empire  
of Debt  and Currency Wars.  Much of what goes on in the financial  
word is invisible to most people until the crash comes and they have  
lost everything, as millions have done during the latest collapse. The  
next shoe is about to drop and it will be much worse according to the  
same people who predicted the last collapse.


Do not believe anything the government says or anything you hear from  
the spokesmen on TV. A disconnect exists between reality and what you  
are told by these people, just like exists with respect to cold  
fusion. We live essentially in two different realities these days.   
But then, that is my conclusion which you have no reason to believe  
either.


Ed


On Jan 27, 2013, at 6:54 AM, Nigel Dyer wrote:

The fact that an analysis conflicts with every economist does not  
make it wrong. After their almost complete failure (yes I know there  
were some notable exceptions) to predict our current crisis I no  
longer have much faith in what economists say.  A few years ago the  
UK Queen asked some economists at a function why they had not  
predicted the current mess, and to their credit they went away and  
came back with a report.  The first real royal commission that we  
have had in a long time


Nigel


On 26/01/2013 23:54, Edmund Storms wrote:
Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I  
have read and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not  
possible because the economy is not growing as fast as it was then  
so that the tax rate would have to be a bigger fraction of the  
income to provide the same amount of money, which people resist.  
Also, the debt is much larger now.  We have passed the point of no  
return according to most analysts.


Ed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Edmund Storms


Hi Frank,

Thanks for a copy of your book. I'm part way through and find it very  
interesting.


As to your question, a financial collapse always affects different  
people different ways depending where they live and their personal  
financial situation. Generally, a skilled person who uses common sense  
will do much better than other people. So, giving personal advice is  
hard. I can only suggest guide lines that I attempt to follow.


The process will have two stages, an acute stage during which basic  
services may be affected in a few areas and a chronic stage during  
which the suffering will spread to almost everyone. The acute stage  
was avoided last time in 2008 while the chronic stage continues.  The  
acute state was avoid by pumping a huge amount of money into the  
system by the Federal Reserve. This process continues and will fuel  
the next collapse.  The government is trying to lessen the effects of  
the chronic phase but the Republicans are resisting this effort in  
favor of protecting the wealthy who are not affected by the process.   
So, the rest of us are on our own.


So, what should an individual do? First, pay off all debt and take on  
no more. Buy gold and silver (I favor high quality coins) as a hedge  
against inflation and have cash in your home in case your bank has to  
close for awhile.  Save every cent you can and buy nothing that is not  
essential.  Learn how to invest your own savings in an IRA or personal  
account using internet trading. This tool is an amazing gift of the  
modern age that can allow a person of knowledge to avoid the worst of  
the collapse.  In any case, sell any bond funds you have. If you can,  
move to a place where you can count on protection and access to basic  
services.  And finally, do not worry - no event is as bad as it can be  
imagined.


Sorry if this is too personal and off topic. Hopefully this advice is  
of interest to other people.


Ed


On Jan 27, 2013, at 8:52 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:



Ed, Where can we hide?

I have studied hard and obtained 2 and 1/2 college degrees, have  
worked overtime for 34 years, and  have downsized as companies  
closed down five times.  There is no chance that Bethlehem Steel  
will ever hire me back.  Same to say for the rest.   I have saved  
some in my 401 K.  I have earned social security.  I have a small  
defined company pension.  Got it while they were still giving it.   
The sum total is nothing glorious; however  I did what they told me  
and kept my nose to the grindstone.   I hope to have a used car in  
my future.  Many are worse off.


I have been doing contracts and have recently noted that nobody  
wants you much over 60. They don't want you full time after 42.  .   
They want a young man that they can dispose of.  They want to set  
him up for no job after forty.   They want the middle age man just  
in case business conditions warrant that they might need him for a  
longer time.   I have no clue what the young man is going to do.   
Who is my dentist going to bill excessively?


Where do we go after 60 when all of the savings and entitlements are  
gone?   I don't have another life time to do it again?  There are a  
lot of us in this boat.  I have been told that the Obama Care death  
panel may have an answer.


Surely it will not end like this, this is America, it will be  
better.  There may even be new productive opportunities begging to  
be filled.  Maybe the assets invented in the entitlements will soar  
to new heights.


What is your plan Ed?  Please let me know.

Frank Znidarsic

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread James Bowery

The problem is xenophobia.  With more high skilled laborers from Asia, none
of this would have happened:

A bipartisan group of Senators is planning to introduce a bill that allows
the H-1B visa cap to rise automatically with demand to a maximum of 300,000
visas annually. This 20-page bill, called the Immigration Innovation Act of
2013 or the 'I-Squared Act of 2013,' is being developed by Sens. Orrin
Hatch (R-Utah), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Chris
Coons (D-Del.). It may be introduced next week. Presently, the U.S. has an
H-1B visa cap of 65,000. There are another 20,000 H-1B visas set aside for
advanced degree gradates of U.S. universities, for 85,000 in total. Under
the new bill, the base H-1B cap would increase from 65,000 to 115,000. But
the cap would be allowed to rise automatically with demand, according to a
draft of the legislation.

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/25/187203/senators-seek-h-1b-cap-that-can-reach-30

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:58 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:

 A list of my friends.

  1.  Electrical Engineer me.  At the start I could send out a resume and
 expect to be hired.
  Hung on at the end by taking contracts doing dirty work in coal fired
 power plants.
  Coal fire is down and I am hunkering.

  2.  Nurse RN, her  husband abandoned her.  Got rheumatoid arthritis and
 is now on the system.  She is waiting for a rich man to help her and her
 son out.  She will sue for money.  Don't hit her on the road.

  3.  Nurse LPN, has fibra malaga and is now on the system.  Prays a lot
 and turned born again.  Hopes for an answer there and believes it.  Nice
 looking if you can stand full time preaching.  It appears that no one can.

  4.  Woman with schizophrenia, lives with elderly parents and is now on
 the system.  Worried that her parents will die and leave her.

  5.  Telephone switching engineer.  AS in engineering at 58
 was thrown out.  He is thinking of moving to Ecuador where has SSN will do
 more.  Claims his X cleaned him out.

  6.  Aircraft mechanic with large airline.  Wiffed out at 55 in the
 recession and now they don't want him back.  He is to old.  He is fixing up
 a piper cub for a friend.

  7.  Woman artist, nice looking 55.  No one has money for art any more.
  She has no electrical power and has a hole in the kidney of her hot air
 coal furnace.  I am worried that she will die of CO poisoning.  Lye heap is
 coming, someday and the govt may provide a new furnace.  I have sent her
 money and helped her.  I will patch the furnace.  She placed angles at the
 word trade center and at flight 95 when business was up.  They will not
 give her food stamps because she was self employed.  I brought her a case
 of chili.  Its $1 a can at Walmart.

  8.  Woman, really nice looking hot 53 year old.  Got the boot after 23
 years at from clerical position at an electric utility and now works at
 Saint Vincent Depaul.  She tells me that aluminium is up and you can get
 $30 for a trunk full of crushed cans.  I give her credit she will pick up
 cans and take them to the dump.  She is republican and will do it, she
 grows her own food and is getting ready.   Ed may want to learn from her.
  A Beautiful looking woman by any means.  I enjoy her company and she will
 listen.  I wonder how long she can hold out.

  9.  Meter reader doing well.  Informed that smart meters are coming.

  10.  Coal miner 60.  UMWA mine closed down when he was 56.  He can thank
 his lucky starts that his wife has a job in health care.

  11.  Elementary Ed teacher, young.  Never got a job after graduation.
  Worked in Walmart handing out samples.  Recently got a
 church related preschool teaching job.  Does not make enough money for
 beans.

  12.  Public sector employee.  Retired early at 55 and is riding high on
 the hog.


  Are these people going to pay off the national dept?  Maybe I just need
 new friends and this
 is not real.

  Frank

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread James Bowery

But seriously, folks, check out this site:

http://www.resilientcommunities.com/

On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:33 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:

 The problem is xenophobia.  With more high skilled laborers from Asia,
 none of this would have happened:

 A bipartisan group of Senators is planning to introduce a bill that
 allows the H-1B visa cap to rise automatically with demand to a maximum of
 300,000 visas annually. This 20-page bill, called the Immigration
 Innovation Act of 2013 or the 'I-Squared Act of 2013,' is being developed
 by Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Marco Rubio
 (R-Fla.), and Chris Coons (D-Del.). It may be introduced next week.
 Presently, the U.S. has an H-1B visa cap of 65,000. There are another
 20,000 H-1B visas set aside for advanced degree gradates of U.S.
 universities, for 85,000 in total. Under the new bill, the base H-1B cap
 would increase from 65,000 to 115,000. But the cap would be allowed to rise
 automatically with demand, according to a draft of the legislation.


 http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/01/25/187203/senators-seek-h-1b-cap-that-can-reach-30

 On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 10:58 AM, fznidar...@aol.com wrote:

 A list of my friends.

  1.  Electrical Engineer me.  At the start I could send out a resume and
 expect to be hired.
  Hung on at the end by taking contracts doing dirty work in coal
 fired power plants.
  Coal fire is down and I am hunkering.

  2.  Nurse RN, her  husband abandoned her.  Got rheumatoid arthritis and
 is now on the system.  She is waiting for a rich man to help her and her
 son out.  She will sue for money.  Don't hit her on the road.

  3.  Nurse LPN, has fibra malaga and is now on the system.  Prays a lot
 and turned born again.  Hopes for an answer there and believes it.  Nice
 looking if you can stand full time preaching.  It appears that no one can.

  4.  Woman with schizophrenia, lives with elderly parents and is now on
 the system.  Worried that her parents will die and leave her.

  5.  Telephone switching engineer.  AS in engineering at 58
 was thrown out.  He is thinking of moving to Ecuador where has SSN will do
 more.  Claims his X cleaned him out.

  6.  Aircraft mechanic with large airline.  Wiffed out at 55 in the
 recession and now they don't want him back.  He is to old.  He is fixing up
 a piper cub for a friend.

  7.  Woman artist, nice looking 55.  No one has money for art any more.
  She has no electrical power and has a hole in the kidney of her hot air
 coal furnace.  I am worried that she will die of CO poisoning.  Lye heap is
 coming, someday and the govt may provide a new furnace.  I have sent her
 money and helped her.  I will patch the furnace.  She placed angles at the
 word trade center and at flight 95 when business was up.  They will not
 give her food stamps because she was self employed.  I brought her a case
 of chili.  Its $1 a can at Walmart.

  8.  Woman, really nice looking hot 53 year old.  Got the boot after 23
 years at from clerical position at an electric utility and now works at
 Saint Vincent Depaul.  She tells me that aluminium is up and you can get
 $30 for a trunk full of crushed cans.  I give her credit she will pick up
 cans and take them to the dump.  She is republican and will do it, she
 grows her own food and is getting ready.   Ed may want to learn from her.
  A Beautiful looking woman by any means.  I enjoy her company and she will
 listen.  I wonder how long she can hold out.

  9.  Meter reader doing well.  Informed that smart meters are coming.

  10.  Coal miner 60.  UMWA mine closed down when he was 56.  He can
 thank his lucky starts that his wife has a job in health care.

  11.  Elementary Ed teacher, young.  Never got a job after graduation.
  Worked in Walmart handing out samples.  Recently got a
 church related preschool teaching job.  Does not make enough money for
 beans.

  12.  Public sector employee.  Retired early at 55 and is riding high on
 the hog.


  Are these people going to pay off the national dept?  Maybe I just need
 new friends and this
 is not real.

  Frank

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Jed sez:

 Meant people do NOT like paying taxes . . .

 It is a shame we cannot edit these messages.

No harm done, Jed.

I thought you were just being sarcastic. Seemed perfectly appropriate at the
time.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks
tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread fznidarsic


Hi Frank,


Thanks for a copy of your book. I'm part way through and find it


 very interesting.





Thats what Bohr said when he did not like something.  Its interesting  He 
never said very interesting.  So you really do like it.  I am happy with that.


I am selling 3 books a week.  Not much.  I could not make them and print them 
for the $10 cost that Amazon does.  I am amazed by the print on demand 
technology.


I am always rewriting.  In now compute the velocity of sound in the nucleus 
from the wave number approach not the harmonic frequency approach.  rp is the 
radius of the particle not the radius of the proton.  I will clear this up on 
the new rewrite in a month or so.


I had had no proof reads or co-author and I did my best.  


Frank Znidarsic

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Jones Beene

But is he reading it while sitting in the smallest room in his house?

 

:-)

 

From: fznidar...@aol.com 

 

 

Hi Frank,
 

Thanks for a copy of your book. I'm part way through and find it 

 

 very interesting.

 

 

Thats what Bohr said when he did not like something.  Its interesting  He
never said very interesting.  So you really do like it.  I am happy with
that.

 

I am selling 3 books a week.  Not much.  I could not make them and print
them for the $10 cost that Amazon does.  I am amazed by the print on demand
technology.

 

I am always rewriting.  In now compute the velocity of sound in the nucleus
from the wave number approach not the harmonic frequency approach.  rp is
the radius of the particle not the radius of the proton.  I will clear this
up on the new rewrite in a month or so.


I had had no proof reads or co-author and I did my best.  

 

Frank Znidarsic

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-27 Thread Mark Goldes

Ed, Yes. Time will tell.

But the solution to our economic dilemmas requires bold thinking.

SECOND INCOMES and HUMAN INVESTMENT TAX CREDITS can make a huge contribution.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 1:14 PM
To: Mark Goldes
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Thanks Mark. Their view of reality differs significantly from what the
people I read describe. I tend to believe my people because they
predicted the 2008 collapse while Krugman did not.  In fact the
difference is frightening similar to that earlier. Krugman sees no
problem with the status quo while the people I read are in a panic.  I
expect we will have to wait and see who is right once again and then
pick up the pieces afterward.  Perhaps if Krugman et al. are wrong
again, they can be ignored next time.

Ed


On Jan 27, 2013, at 12:13 PM, Mark Goldes wrote:

 Ed, Here is a clear answer regarding the deficit that recently
 appeared in a Krugman column in the NY Times

 Mr. Obama’s clearly deliberate neglect of Washington’s favorite
 obsession was just the latest sign that the self-styled deficit
 hawks — better described as deficit scolds — are losing their hold
 over political discourse. And that’s a very good thing.

 Why have the deficit scolds lost their grip? I’d suggest four
 interrelated reasons.

 First, they have cried wolf too many times. They’ve spent three
 years warning of imminent crisis — if we don’t slash the deficit now
 now now, we’ll turn into Greece, Greece, I tell you. It is, for
 example, almost two years since Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles
 declared that we should expect a fiscal crisis within, um, two years.

 But that crisis keeps not happening. The still-depressed economy has
 kept interest rates at near-record lows despite large government
 borrowing, just as Keynesian economists predicted all along. So the
 credibility of the scolds has taken an understandable, and well-
 deserved, hit.

 Second, both deficits and public spending as a share of G.D.P. have
 started to decline — again, just as those who never bought into the
 deficit hysteria predicted all along.

 The truth is that the budget deficits of the past four years were
 mainly a temporary consequence of the financial crisis, which sent
 the economy into a tailspin — and which, therefore, led both to low
 tax receipts and to a rise in unemployment benefits and other
 government expenses. It should have been obvious that the deficit
 would come down as the economy recovered. But this point was hard to
 get across until deficit reduction started appearing in the data.

 Now it has — and reasonable forecasts, like those of Jan Hatzius of
 Goldman Sachs, suggest that the federal deficit will be below 3
 percent of G.D.P., a not very scary number, by 2015.

 And it was, in fact, a good thing that the deficit was allowed to
 rise as the economy slumped. With private spending plunging as the
 housing bubble popped and cash-strapped families cut back, the
 willingness of the government to keep spending was one of the main
 reasons we didn’t experience a full replay of the Great Depression.
 Which brings me to the third reason the deficit scolds have lost
 influence: the contrary doctrine, the claim that we need to practice
 fiscal austerity even in a depressed economy, has failed decisively
 in practice.

 Consider, in particular, the case of Britain. In 2010, when the new
 government of Prime Minister David Cameron turned to austerity
 policies, it received fulsome praise from many people on this side
 of the Atlantic. For example, the late David Broder urged President
 Obama to “do a Cameron”; he particularly commended Mr. Cameron for
 “brushing aside the warnings of economists that the sudden, severe
 medicine could cut short Britain’s economic recovery and throw the
 nation back into recession.”

 Sure enough, the sudden, severe medicine cut short Britain’s
 economic recovery, and threw the nation back into recession.

 At this point, then, it’s clear that the deficit-scold movement was
 based on bad economic analysis. But that’s not all: there was also
 clearly a lot of bad faith involved, as the scolds tried to exploit
 an economic (not fiscal) crisis on behalf of a political agenda that
 had nothing to do with deficits. And the growing transparency of
 that agenda is the fourth reason the deficit scolds have lost their
 clout.

 Mark Goldes
 Co-Founder, Chava Energy
 CEO, Aesop Institute

 www.chavaenergy.com
 www.aesopinstitute.org

 707 861-9070
 707 497-3551 fax
 
 From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
 Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 10:11 AM
 To: Mark Goldes
 Cc: Edmund Storms
 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

A truly scary prospect, I would say. Humans now have three ways they
could make themselves extinct - atomic weapons, biological weapons,
and smart computers. The list seems to be growing. What happens when
the smart computer is run by cold fusion so that it can never be
turned off?

On Jan 26, 2013, at 8:37 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-world-without-work-as-robots-computers-get-smarter-will-humans-have-anything-left-to-do/2013/01/18/61561b1c-61b7-11e2-81ef-a2249c1e5b3d_story.html

This subject is starting to attract attention in the mass media. I
wish cold fusion would.

Cold fusion will lead to more unemployment than most breakthroughs,
but not as much as improvements to computers. I have a chapter about
that in my book. It is surprising how few people work in energy.

Here is a thought-provoking table showing all major occupations in
the U.S.:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

That is the entire universe of work.

Here are some comments I made about this table elsewhere:

The economy has not produced any new Major Occupational Group
since roughly 1880 (when precision manufacturing began) because
every kind of labor we want done for us is already done. As I said,
people have moved from one group to another, as the amount of labor
ebbs and flows in different sectors. But there are no new groups,
and robots will move into all groups simultaneously. . . .

Granted, Category 15, Computer and Mathematical Occupations did
not exist in 1880. But every task now done by Computer occupations
was done back then by people in category 43, Office and
Administrative Support. All of the other occupations in this list
were already in existence by 1880. Most of them existed in Heian
Japan, for that matter.

There are no new tasks. That is to say, there are no occupations
with novel outcomes or purposes that did not exist back then. The
methods of achieving these purposes have changed. For example, in
category 27 our methods of entertainment have changed, but the
purpose -- entertaining people with fiction, music and so on -- is
the same. There is a limited market for this. We cannot watch TV or
listen to music 20 hours a day.

Nearly all of the occupations on this list, and the sub-category
occupations in the table, could be done better by a Watson-class
computer than by a human being. . . .

Someone else summarized the situation quite well: Until recently,
technology advances made machines stronger, faster, and more
reliable than average Joes. But, even at the slow end, he was much
better at mopping a floor, understanding speech, packing a box, or
driving a lorry than even the best supercomputer. So, he had some
major competitive advantages for just being human.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

Ed sez:

 What happens when the smart computer is run by cold fusion so that it
 can never be turned off?

Men will be free to go back to watching professional wrestling  football on
TV 20 hours a day.

Women... cooking shows.

Thus spoke, THGTTG: Mostly harmless.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

A truly scary prospect, I would say. Humans now have three ways they could
 make themselves extinct - atomic weapons, biological weapons, and smart
 computers.


I do not see it that way. Nuclear or biological weapons would cause only
massive harm. Nothing good can come of using them. Whereas it is easy to
imagine a society in which computers do nearly all the work, but we all
prosper.

I am confident that if we can devise wonderful robots, we can also devise
an economy to fit them and benefit everyone. An economy is a human
invention like any other -- like a building, a railroad or a computer.
People sometimes say that an economy must follow the rules of economics so
we have no choice about how we shape it. It has to be free market
capitalistic. No other kind works. That is silly. A building must follow
the laws of engineering. You cannot make it out materials so weak the walls
will collapse. You cannot make a house out of straw or bubble gum; you have
to use wood, stone, brick or steel. But within these restrictions we can
make an infinite variety of different houses.

Martin Ford described one possible economy based on robot labor. (
http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/) Other people will come up with better
ideas. I am sure we can work something out, if we try. Mankind has fixed
countless similar problems in the past. Life has improved tremendously for
most people. History gives us every reason to be optimistic.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Well Steven, as usual you cleverly identified another way humans will  
become extinct. These activities will cause excessive sex from  
boredom, which will require the computer to thin the population,  
perhaps by an excessive amount using the other tools I mentioned.


Ed


On Jan 26, 2013, at 8:54 AM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:


Ed sez:


What happens when the smart computer is run by cold fusion so that it
can never be turned off?


Men will be free to go back to watching professional wrestling   
football on

TV 20 hours a day.

Women... cooking shows.

Thus spoke, THGTTG: Mostly harmless.

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I agree Jed, you are correct if humans were rational. Unfortunately, a
significant fraction are not rational, as can be easily seen at all
levels. When irrational people have the ability, they always attempt
to destroy. In the past, their ability was very limited. This ability
is growing.

On Jan 26, 2013, at 9:05 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

A truly scary prospect, I would say. Humans now have three ways they
could make themselves extinct - atomic weapons, biological weapons,
and smart computers.

I do not see it that way. Nuclear or biological weapons would cause
only massive harm. Nothing good can come of using them. Whereas it
is easy to imagine a society in which computers do nearly all the
work, but we all prosper.

I am confident that if we can devise wonderful robots, we can also
devise an economy to fit them and benefit everyone. An economy is a
human invention like any other -- like a building, a railroad or a
computer. People sometimes say that an economy must follow the rules
of economics so we have no choice about how we shape it. It has to
be free market capitalistic. No other kind works. That is silly. A
building must follow the laws of engineering. You cannot make it out
materials so weak the walls will collapse. You cannot make a house
out of straw or bubble gum; you have to use wood, stone, brick or
steel. But within these restrictions we can make an infinite variety
of different houses.

Martin Ford described one possible economy based on robot labor. (http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/
) Other people will come up with better ideas. I am sure we can work
something out, if we try. Mankind has fixed countless similar
problems in the past. Life has improved tremendously for most
people. History gives us every reason to be optimistic.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

I agree Jed, you are correct if humans were rational.


They are, at times. If we were not rational, civilization and technology
would not exist.



 Unfortunately, a significant fraction are not rational, as can be easily
 seen at all levels. When irrational people have the ability, they always
 attempt to destroy. In the past, their ability was very limited. This
 ability is growing.


I do not see evidence that the power irrationality is growing faster than
the power of rational people. The balance seems to be about the same as it
was in the past.

There were times in the past when irrational people held sway, and plunged
the world into disaster. The most dramatic examples were the U.S. Civil
War, WWI and WWII. I think we are much better off than we were then. A
Third World War is highly unlikely. Rationality is winning that competition.

The likelihood of a major war is receding, and many other positive trends
continue. The Cold War ended peacefully. Democracy is spreading. Pollution
is gradually being reduced. Out of control population growth is moderating,
even in third world countries. Food factory technology is improving, and it
could easily eliminate the threat of famine or massive water shortages. The
Internet is bringing unprecedented access to information and education to
people everywhere, even in the Third World. It is even possible that cold
fusion will succeed. I will grant it is a long shot, but if I thought it
could never happen -- that we will never overcome irrational opposition --
I would quit trying to promote it.

I think you are unrealistic. Unwarranted pessimism is as unrealistic as
Panglossian optimism.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 26, 2013, at 9:39 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

I agree Jed, you are correct if humans were rational.

They are, at times. If we were not rational, civilization and  
technology would not exist.



Unfortunately, a significant fraction are not rational, as can be  
easily seen at all levels. When irrational people have the ability,  
they always attempt to destroy. In the past, their ability was very  
limited. This ability is growing.


I do not see evidence that the power irrationality is growing faster  
than the power of rational people. The balance seems to be about the  
same as it was in the past.


I'm not saying that the number of irrational people is changing,  
although that might not be true of Congress. I'm saying the the number  
who are irrational now have tools able to produce more widespread harm.


There were times in the past when irrational people held sway, and  
plunged the world into disaster. The most dramatic examples were the  
U.S. Civil War, WWI and WWII. I think we are much better off than we  
were then. A Third World War is highly unlikely. Rationality is  
winning that competition.


So far.


The likelihood of a major war is receding, and many other positive  
trends continue. The Cold War ended peacefully. Democracy is  
spreading.




Pollution is gradually being reduced.


Except in China and India, which is most of the world.

Out of control population growth is moderating, even in third world  
countries.


The population is still growing exponentially world-wide.

Food factory technology is improving, and it could easily eliminate  
the threat of famine or massive water shortages.


Apparently not so easily. Hunger is even growing in the US at the low  
end of the economy.


The Internet is bringing unprecedented access to information and  
education to people everywhere, even in the Third World.


True, but to what effect?

It is even possible that cold fusion will succeed. I will grant it  
is a long shot, but if I thought it could never happen -- that we  
will never overcome irrational opposition -- I would quit trying to  
promote it.


I would not want to see that happen. Perhaps I had better shut up. :-)


I think you are unrealistic. Unwarranted pessimism is as unrealistic  
as Panglossian optimism.


I agree. But what role does rational and objective observation have in  
any evaluation? It seems to me, we need to identify a problem before  
we can attempt to correct it. This identification always leads to what  
might be called pessimism.


Ed


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 26, 2013, at 10:45 AM, a.ashfield wrote:

Interesting discussion.  I have been writing about this for years  
but it is good to see the main media is starting to pick it up.  The  
referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but noted the  
basic question: “who is going buy all these nice goodies if they  
are  unemployed?”




This is obviously a basic question and the obvious answer is a form of  
socialism. Money will have be extracted from the system to give basic  
support to the unemployed and underemployed. As we know from sad  
experience, when people are hungary and bored they gum up the system.  
This consequence is not hard to predict.  The US will be particularly  
susceptible to this problem because of the irrational attitude toward  
such social support held by people who call themselves Republicans and  
libertarians.



The irrationality of humans is such that it is probably impossible  
to see how this will play out.


If no attention is given to this problem, the consequences are easy to  
see. We saw this happen in England when the machines put people out of  
work in early 1800. They rioted and attempted to destroy the  
machines.  Now people have much better tools to do this than stones  
and clubs.



Consider how fanatical religions may effect things.  Consider the  
Amish for example.




The Amish are not the problem, but I get your point. We have violent  
religions now operating throughout the world and gumming up the works  
for the reason I describe above.


There are a lot more Greenies who think we should go back to basics  
no matter what.  The majority doesn’t think about this at all and  
just worries about getting or keeping food on the table.




As always.

Our politicians are not interested.  I can’t even get a response  
from my Congressman’s office on the subject.


Congress is out to lunch on so many subjects, this one is not even  
close to their awareness.



So they have not started planning how to deal with what is likely to  
happen.   Although the transformation could happen fast I don’t  
think it will without some dramatic crisis.




I agree.

Ed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Louis Kelso, inventor of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan - ESOP - used by 
11,000 companies, saw this coming decades ago. He suggested a Second Income 
Plan. See: SECOND INCOMES at www.aesopinstitute.org for a current version. 

Independent of savings, it would open a path to end poverty, and provide the 
purchasing power removed from the economy when jobs rapidly disappear due to 
automation. It offers a way to harmlessly deconcentrate wealth.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Jed Rothwell [jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 7:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-world-without-work-as-robots-computers-get-smarter-will-humans-have-anything-left-to-do/2013/01/18/61561b1c-61b7-11e2-81ef-a2249c1e5b3d_story.html

This subject is starting to attract attention in the mass media. I wish cold 
fusion would.

Cold fusion will lead to more unemployment than most breakthroughs, but not as 
much as improvements to computers. I have a chapter about that in my book. It 
is surprising how few people work in energy.

Here is a thought-provoking table showing all major occupations in the U.S.:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

That is the entire universe of work.

Here are some comments I made about this table elsewhere:


The economy has not produced any new Major Occupational Group since roughly 
1880 (when precision manufacturing began) because every kind of labor we want 
done for us is already done. As I said, people have moved from one group to 
another, as the amount of labor ebbs and flows in different sectors. But there 
are no new groups, and robots will move into all groups simultaneously. . . .

Granted, Category 15, Computer and Mathematical Occupations did not exist in 
1880. But every task now done by Computer occupations was done back then by 
people in category 43, Office and Administrative Support. All of the other 
occupations in this list were already in existence by 1880. Most of them 
existed in Heian Japan, for that matter.

There are no new tasks. That is to say, there are no occupations with novel 
outcomes or purposes that did not exist back then. The methods of achieving 
these purposes have changed. For example, in category 27 our methods of 
entertainment have changed, but the purpose -- entertaining people with 
fiction, music and so on -- is the same. There is a limited market for this. We 
cannot watch TV or listen to music 20 hours a day.

Nearly all of the occupations on this list, and the sub-category occupations in 
the table, could be done better by a Watson-class computer than by a human 
being. . . .


Someone else summarized the situation quite well: Until recently, technology 
advances made machines stronger, faster, and more reliable than average Joes. 
But, even at the slow end, he was much better at mopping a floor, understanding 
speech, packing a box, or driving a lorry than even the best supercomputer. So, 
he had some major competitive advantages for just being human.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread a.ashfield

Edmund Storms wrote: This is obviously a basic question and the obvious 
answer is a form of socialism. Money will have be extracted from the 
system to give basic support to the unemployed and underemployed. As we 
know from sad experience, when people are hungary and bored they gum up 
the system. This consequence is not hard to predict. The US will be 
particularly susceptible to this problem because of the irrational 
attitude toward such social support held by people who call themselves 
Republicans and libertarians.


Basic support to the unemployed won't do it.That doesn't allow for the 
market of luxuries that gradually improve the standard of living and 
civilization in general.There are some possibilities in a much shorter 
working week, much earlier retirement and a direct payment to every 
individual from the government.The problem is the transition and from 
where the government would get the money for the change.There are very 
few ways that fit within the current cultural and political framework in 
the US.So like the Chinese proverb says:Interesting times.

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread Terry Blanton

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 1:56 PM, a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net wrote:

 So like the Chinese proverb says:   “Interesting times.”

That has been considered a curse more than a proverb.

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

From Ashfield:

 

 ... The referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but

 noted the basic question: who is going buy all these nice goodies

 if they are unemployed? 

 

Precisely.

 

personal rant

 

IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided belief that balancing
the national budget is the most important thing, above everything else, that
must be tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that money is
nothing more than a contractual representation of the exchange of goods and
services between individuals and legal entities. Most don't like to ponder
the realization that money is quite ephemeral in nature, despite all
attempts to back it with a representation of limited physical resources like
gold and silver. In a sense, I think this is false advertising of the worst
kind. It's worshiping the value of money over the value of the actual work
 labor that creates said goods and services that money attempts to
accurately represent. It's as if money is being worshiped as a false god.
It's putting the cart before the horse.

 

IMHO, politicians need to focus more on whatever it takes to create
environments that allow people to go back to work (or remain working) so
that that they can start (or continue) acquiring enough of these symbolic
representations of goods and services that they can cash in for themselves.
I don't think one can accomplish that by constantly slashing national
budgets in a misguided belief that doing so will stabilize the value of
money, which in turn will somehow miraculously cause businesses to
automatically flourish so that they will automatically start employing more
people... many whom may end up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a
job! All that national budget slashing... the national budget employs a lot
of people too, just like out in the private sector. If massive amounts of
them lose their jobs due to forced budget cutting and are forced into the
unemployment lines, it's absolutely no different than private companies
firing it's employees because it has insufficient money to pay them for
their services. Everyone suffers as fewer goods and services are being
generated which, in turn, devalues the value to money.

 

We need to stop finding scapegoats to blame (i.e. national budget), and
start focusing on ways to make sure everyone has a chance to continue to
make valuable contributions to society. In the end, allowing enough people
to continue to make valuable contributions to society is the only real way
of saving the value of money. I don't think one can accomplish that by, in
a draconian manner, slashing the budget.

 

/personal rant

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread Alain Sepeda

as explained in the wired, and as experienced in the 50s,
the automation will reduce some work, but create others that we don't
imagine, or we don't dare to.

there is also old need that will be covered better like elderly care,
better health care, disabled care, ...
vacation will develop (I don't understand why people in US don't imagine
that worktime will change).

about deconcentrating wealth, during technology transition the card are
redistributed and the old riche , keep their wealth, but since all other
wealth increase, they are relatively lowered if they don't adapt and
innovate... this is why incumbent try to block innovation, typically by
frightening the mass with fear to lose their old job...
A bit like Malthusian ideas, that are spread by the fear of invation by
enriched poors, and lead to manipulation of the mass to block the change.

never seen a Malthusian prediction true.
never seen a productivity increase bad for the population on long term...
and you can even suspect that the trouble of technology change are not
because of change, but because the incumbent try to block change, and use
resource that would rather help to train the workforce to enter the new
generation.

2013/1/26 Mark Goldes mgol...@chavaenergy.com

Louis Kelso, inventor of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan - ESOP - used
by 11,000 companies, saw this coming decades ago. He suggested a Second
Income Plan. See: SECOND INCOMES at www.aesopinstitute.org for a current
version.

Independent of savings, it would open a path to end poverty, and provide
the purchasing power removed from the economy when jobs rapidly disappear
due to automation. It offers a way to harmlessly deconcentrate wealth.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Jed Rothwell [jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 7:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-world-without-work-as-robots-computers-get-smarter-will-humans-have-anything-left-to-do/2013/01/18/61561b1c-61b7-11e2-81ef-a2249c1e5b3d_story.html

This subject is starting to attract attention in the mass media. I wish
cold fusion would.

Cold fusion will lead to more unemployment than most breakthroughs, but
not as much as improvements to computers. I have a chapter about that in my
book. It is surprising how few people work in energy.

Here is a thought-provoking table showing all major occupations in the
U.S.:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

That is the entire universe of work.

Here are some comments I made about this table elsewhere:

The economy has not produced any new Major Occupational Group since
roughly 1880 (when precision manufacturing began) because every kind of
labor we want done for us is already done. As I said, people have moved
from one group to another, as the amount of labor ebbs and flows in
different sectors. But there are no new groups, and robots will move into
all groups simultaneously. . . .

Granted, Category 15, Computer and Mathematical Occupations did not
exist in 1880. But every task now done by Computer occupations was done
back then by people in category 43, Office and Administrative Support.
All of the other occupations in this list were already in existence by
1880. Most of them existed in Heian Japan, for that matter.

There are no new tasks. That is to say, there are no occupations with
novel outcomes or purposes that did not exist back then. The methods of
achieving these purposes have changed. For example, in category 27 our
methods of entertainment have changed, but the purpose -- entertaining
people with fiction, music and so on -- is the same. There is a limited
market for this. We cannot watch TV or listen to music 20 hours a day.

Nearly all of the occupations on this list, and the sub-category
occupations in the table, could be done better by a Watson-class computer
than by a human being. . . .

Someone else summarized the situation quite well: Until recently,
technology advances made machines stronger, faster, and more reliable than
average Joes. But, even at the slow end, he was much better at mopping a
floor, understanding speech, packing a box, or driving a lorry than even
the best supercomputer. So, he had some major competitive advantages for
just being human.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Second Incomes, as suggested by Louis Kelso, would be derived from a broad new 
program of capital investment. This is not in any way Socialism. Kelso's first 
book, with Mortimer Adler, was The Capitalist Manifesto. 

There is a link, under SECOND INCOMES, on the Aesop Institute website, to a 
recent article by Gary Reber, that provides a complete overview of Kelso's 
legacy.

This is an invention in the field of economics that might be viewed as an 
analog to LENR, insofar as it addresses a huge problem - and is, to date, 
largely ignored by the mainstream media.


Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: a.ashfield [a.ashfi...@verizon.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 10:56 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms wrote: “This is obviously a basic question and the obvious answer 
is a form of socialism. Money will have be extracted from the system to give 
basic support to the unemployed and underemployed. As we know from sad 
experience, when people are hungary and bored they gum up the system. This 
consequence is not hard to predict. The US will be particularly susceptible to 
this problem because of the irrational attitude toward such social support held 
by people who call themselves Republicans and libertarians.”
Basic support to the unemployed won’t do it.  That doesn’t allow for the market 
of luxuries that gradually improve the standard of living and civilization in 
general.  There are some possibilities in a much shorter working week, much 
earlier retirement and a direct payment to every individual from the 
government.  The problem is the transition and from where the government would 
get the money for the change.  There are very few ways that fit within the 
current cultural and political framework in the US.   So like the Chinese 
proverb says:   “Interesting times.”

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Agreed. 

See HUMAN INVESTMENT, on the Aesop Institute site, for a way to sharply 
increase employment. Weak versions of the incentives we suggested in Discussion 
Papers we wrote for the Economic Development Administration (U.S. Department of 
Commerce) were included in the Jobs Tax Credit of 1977 and resulted in 2 
million jobs. The Human Investment Tax Credit program is designed to generate 6 
million jobs and help 4 million small firms. 

The sad fact is that the current Congress is not likely to pass such sensible 
law.


Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson [orionwo...@charter.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:45 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

From Ashfield:



 ... The referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but

 noted the basic question: “who is going buy all these nice goodies

 if they are unemployed?”



Precisely.



personal rant



IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided belief that balancing 
the national budget is the most important thing, above everything else, that 
must be tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that money is nothing 
more than a contractual representation of the exchange of goods and services 
between individuals and legal entities. Most don't like to ponder the 
realization that money is quite ephemeral in nature, despite all attempts to 
back it with a representation of limited physical resources like gold and 
silver. In a sense, I think this is false advertising of the worst kind. It's 
worshiping the value of money over the value of the actual work  labor that 
creates said goods and services that money attempts to accurately represent. 
It's as if money is being worshiped as a false god. It's putting the cart 
before the horse.



IMHO, politicians need to focus more on whatever it takes to create 
environments that allow people to go back to work (or remain working) so that 
that they can start (or continue) acquiring enough of these symbolic 
representations of goods and services that they can cash in for themselves. I 
don't think one can accomplish that by constantly slashing national budgets in 
a misguided belief that doing so will stabilize the value of money, which in 
turn will somehow miraculously cause businesses to automatically flourish so 
that they will automatically start employing more people... many whom may end 
up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a job! All that national budget 
slashing... the national budget employs a lot of people too, just like out in 
the private sector. If massive amounts of them lose their jobs due to forced 
budget cutting and are forced into the unemployment lines, it's absolutely no 
different than private companies firing it's employees because it has 
insufficient money to pay them for their services. Everyone suffers as fewer 
goods and services are being generated which, in turn, devalues the value to 
money.



We need to stop finding scapegoats to blame (i.e. national budget), and start 
focusing on ways to make sure everyone has a chance to continue to make 
valuable contributions to society. In the end, allowing enough people to 
continue to make valuable contributions to society is the only real way of 
saving the value of money. I don't think one can accomplish that by, in a 
draconian manner, slashing the budget.



/personal rant



Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Kelos's goal was to enable almost everyone to receive half your income from 
diversified investments by about age 50.

That could  lower the nominal work week to 20 hours. 

Herbert Marcuse defined toil as work you do not choose to do. All other work he 
viewed as play. His only optimistic book, Eros and Civilization, greeted 
automation as an important way to liberate  mankind.

In his opinion, if we can reduce toil to less than 25 hours per week, we would 
see a dramatic, extremely positive, change in civilization. 


Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: alain.coetm...@gmail.com [alain.coetm...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Alain 
Sepeda [alain.sep...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:50 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

as explained in the wired, and as experienced in the 50s,
the automation will reduce some work, but create others that we don't imagine, 
or we don't dare to.

there is also old need that will be covered better like elderly care, better 
health care, disabled care, ...
vacation will develop (I don't understand why people in US don't imagine that 
worktime will change).

about deconcentrating wealth, during technology transition the card are 
redistributed and the old riche , keep their wealth, but since all other wealth 
increase, they are relatively lowered if they don't adapt and innovate... this 
is why incumbent try to block innovation, typically by frightening the mass 
with fear to lose their old job...
A bit like Malthusian ideas, that are spread by the fear of invation by 
enriched poors, and lead to manipulation of the mass to block the change.

never seen a Malthusian prediction true.
never seen a productivity increase bad for the population on long term... and 
you can even suspect that the trouble of technology change are not because of 
change, but because the incumbent try to block change, and use resource that 
would rather help to train the workforce to enter the new generation.


2013/1/26 Mark Goldes mgol...@chavaenergy.commailto:mgol...@chavaenergy.com
Louis Kelso, inventor of the Employee Stock Ownership Plan - ESOP - used by 
11,000 companies, saw this coming decades ago. He suggested a Second Income 
Plan. See: SECOND INCOMES at 
www.aesopinstitute.orghttp://www.aesopinstitute.org for a current version.

Independent of savings, it would open a path to end poverty, and provide the 
purchasing power removed from the economy when jobs rapidly disappear due to 
automation. It offers a way to harmlessly deconcentrate wealth.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.comhttp://www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.orghttp://www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070tel:707%20861-9070
707 497-3551tel:707%20497-3551 fax

From: Jed Rothwell [jedrothw...@gmail.commailto:jedrothw...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 7:37 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.commailto:vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

See:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/a-world-without-work-as-robots-computers-get-smarter-will-humans-have-anything-left-to-do/2013/01/18/61561b1c-61b7-11e2-81ef-a2249c1e5b3d_story.html

This subject is starting to attract attention in the mass media. I wish cold 
fusion would.

Cold fusion will lead to more unemployment than most breakthroughs, but not as 
much as improvements to computers. I have a chapter about that in my book. It 
is surprising how few people work in energy.

Here is a thought-provoking table showing all major occupations in the U.S.:

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm

That is the entire universe of work.

Here are some comments I made about this table elsewhere:


The economy has not produced any new Major Occupational Group since roughly 
1880 (when precision manufacturing began) because every kind of labor we want 
done for us is already done. As I said, people have moved from one group to 
another, as the amount of labor ebbs and flows in different sectors. But there 
are no new groups, and robots will move into all groups simultaneously. . . .

Granted, Category 15, Computer and Mathematical Occupations did not exist in 
1880. But every task now done by Computer occupations was done back then by 
people in category 43, Office and Administrative Support. All of the other 
occupations in this list were already in existence by 1880. Most of them 
existed in Heian Japan, for that matter.

There are no new tasks. That is to say, there are no occupations with novel 
outcomes or purposes that did not exist back then. The methods of achieving 
these purposes have changed. For example, in category 27 our methods of 
entertainment have changed, but the purpose -- entertaining people with 
fiction,

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 26, 2013, at 11:45, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 I don't think one can accomplish that by constantly slashing national budgets 
 in a misguided belief that doing so will stabilize the value of money, 
 which in turn will somehow miraculously cause businesses to automatically 
 flourish so that they will automatically start employing more people... many 
 whom may end up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a job!

I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. But I think the problems are 
deeper. This level of analysis is repugnant to the people proposing the deep 
budget cuts. They don't want to follow the implications of their policy 
recommendations far enough to see this kind of thing.

The deeper problems go back to education and critical thinking. We've neglected 
the matter of education for a generation or more, and now we are being 
confronted with the consequences.

I'm optimistic that we'll eventually be able to leverage the increasing 
automation to everyone's benefit. But that will require people worthier than 
those alive today. Until then, enjoy the ride.

Eric

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Steven:

How many people could $400 BILLION dollars feed?

-Mark

From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson [mailto:orionwo...@charter.net] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 11:46 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on
employment

From Ashfield:

 ... The referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but

 noted the basic question: who is going buy all these nice goodies

 if they are unemployed? 

Precisely.

personal rant

IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided belief that balancing
the national budget is the most important thing, above everything else, that
must be tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that money is
nothing more than a contractual representation of the exchange of goods and
services between individuals and legal entities. Most don't like to ponder
the realization that money is quite ephemeral in nature, despite all
attempts to back it with a representation of limited physical resources like
gold and silver. In a sense, I think this is false advertising of the worst
kind. It's worshiping the value of money over the value of the actual work
 labor that creates said goods and services that money attempts to
accurately represent. It's as if money is being worshiped as a false god.
It's putting the cart before the horse.

IMHO, politicians need to focus more on whatever it takes to create
environments that allow people to go back to work (or remain working) so
that that they can start (or continue) acquiring enough of these symbolic
representations of goods and services that they can cash in for themselves.
I don't think one can accomplish that by constantly slashing national
budgets in a misguided belief that doing so will stabilize the value of
money, which in turn will somehow miraculously cause businesses to
automatically flourish so that they will automatically start employing more
people... many whom may end up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a
job! All that national budget slashing... the national budget employs a lot
of people too, just like out in the private sector. If massive amounts of
them lose their jobs due to forced budget cutting and are forced into the
unemployment lines, it's absolutely no different than private companies
firing it's employees because it has insufficient money to pay them for
their services. Everyone suffers as fewer goods and services are being
generated which, in turn, devalues the value to money.

We need to stop finding scapegoats to blame (i.e. national budget), and
start focusing on ways to make sure everyone has a chance to continue to
make valuable contributions to society. In the end, allowing enough people
to continue to make valuable contributions to society is the only real way
of saving the value of money. I don't think one can accomplish that by, in
a draconian manner, slashing the budget.

/personal rant

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 26, 2013, at 12:45 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:


From Ashfield:

 ... The referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but
 noted the basic question: “who is going buy all these nice goodies
 if they are unemployed?”

Precisely.

personal rant

IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided belief that  
balancing the national budget is the most important thing, above  
everything else, that must be tackled. What most fail to realize is  
the fact that money is nothing more than a contractual  
representation of the exchange of goods and services between  
individuals and legal entities.


No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is that money has  
been lent to the US in various forms and by various people and they  
want their money back eventually. Meanwhile they want to be paid  
interest. The US is rapidly approaching a level of debt such that if  
the interest rates rose to normal levels, we could not pay the  
interest without shutting down significant parts of the government.  
The US is presently printing dollars to cover this expense.  As a  
result, the debt is growing because this money is borrowed from the  
Federal Reserve, which is a private bank owned by individuals who want  
to be paid. At some point in the near future, the debt will be so  
large, it simply can not be paid. At that point, the US is in default,  
and the financial system of the world collapses. This means starvation  
and civil strife.  The problem is serous and can not be solved without  
great pain, which means further loss of jobs. The fools in Congress  
over the last 20 years have created a no win situation that very few  
people understand.


Ed


Most don't like to ponder the realization that money is quite  
ephemeral in nature, despite all attempts to back it with a  
representation of limited physical resources like gold and silver.  
In a sense, I think this is false advertising of the worst kind.  
It's worshiping the value of money over the value of the actual  
work  labor that creates said goods and services that money  
attempts to accurately represent. It's as if money is being  
worshiped as a false god. It's putting the cart before the horse.


IMHO, politicians need to focus more on whatever it takes to create  
environments that allow people to go back to work (or remain  
working) so that that they can start (or continue) acquiring enough  
of these symbolic representations of goods and services that they  
can cash in for themselves. I don't think one can accomplish that by  
constantly slashing national budgets in a misguided belief that  
doing so will stabilize the value of money, which in turn will  
somehow miraculously cause businesses to automatically flourish so  
that they will automatically start employing more people... many  
whom may end up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a job!  
All that national budget slashing... the national budget employs a  
lot of people too, just like out in the private sector. If massive  
amounts of them lose their jobs due to forced budget cutting and are  
forced into the unemployment lines, it's absolutely no different  
than private companies firing it's employees because it has  
insufficient money to pay them for their services. Everyone  
suffers as fewer goods and services are being generated which, in  
turn, devalues the value to money.


We need to stop finding scapegoats to blame (i.e. national budget),  
and start focusing on ways to make sure everyone has a chance to  
continue to make valuable contributions to society. In the end,  
allowing enough people to continue to make valuable contributions to  
society is the only real way of saving the value of money. I don't  
think one can accomplish that by, in a draconian manner, slashing  
the budget.


/personal rant

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworks

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Ed,

Huge cuts could be made in our military budget which is bloated, wasteful and 
largely redundant. (I was a USAF Officer and speak with first hand knowledge). 

That alone would make an enormous difference. 

Try and get Congress to approve it! Fat chance!

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 12:16 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 26, 2013, at 12:45 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote:

From Ashfield:

 ... The referenced article was rather unimaginative in places but
 noted the basic question: “who is going buy all these nice goodies
 if they are unemployed?”

Precisely.

personal rant

IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided belief that balancing 
the national budget is the most important thing, above everything else, that 
must be tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that money is nothing 
more than a contractual representation of the exchange of goods and services 
between individuals and legal entities.

No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is that money has been lent 
to the US in various forms and by various people and they want their money back 
eventually. Meanwhile they want to be paid interest. The US is rapidly 
approaching a level of debt such that if the interest rates rose to normal 
levels, we could not pay the interest without shutting down significant parts 
of the government. The US is presently printing dollars to cover this expense.  
As a result, the debt is growing because this money is borrowed from the 
Federal Reserve, which is a private bank owned by individuals who want to be 
paid. At some point in the near future, the debt will be so large, it simply 
can not be paid. At that point, the US is in default, and the financial system 
of the world collapses. This means starvation and civil strife.  The problem is 
serous and can not be solved without great pain, which means further loss of 
jobs. The fools in Congress over the last 20 years have created a no win 
situation that very few people understand.

Ed


Most don't like to ponder the realization that money is quite ephemeral in 
nature, despite all attempts to back it with a representation of limited 
physical resources like gold and silver. In a sense, I think this is false 
advertising of the worst kind. It's worshiping the value of money over the 
value of the actual work  labor that creates said goods and services that 
money attempts to accurately represent. It's as if money is being worshiped 
as a false god. It's putting the cart before the horse.

IMHO, politicians need to focus more on whatever it takes to create 
environments that allow people to go back to work (or remain working) so that 
that they can start (or continue) acquiring enough of these symbolic 
representations of goods and services that they can cash in for themselves. I 
don't think one can accomplish that by constantly slashing national budgets in 
a misguided belief that doing so will stabilize the value of money, which in 
turn will somehow miraculously cause businesses to automatically flourish so 
that they will automatically start employing more people... many whom may end 
up being hired at minimum wage. But Hey! It's a job! All that national budget 
slashing... the national budget employs a lot of people too, just like out in 
the private sector. If massive amounts of them lose their jobs due to forced 
budget cutting and are forced into the unemployment lines, it's absolutely no 
different than private companies firing it's employees because it has 
insufficient money to pay them for their services. Everyone suffers as fewer 
goods and services are being generated which, in turn, devalues the value to 
money.

We need to stop finding scapegoats to blame (i.e. national budget), and start 
focusing on ways to make sure everyone has a chance to continue to make 
valuable contributions to society. In the end, allowing enough people to 
continue to make valuable contributions to society is the only real way of 
saving the value of money. I don't think one can accomplish that by, in a 
draconian manner, slashing the budget.

/personal rant

Regards,
Steven Vincent Johnson
www.OrionWorks.comhttp://www.OrionWorks.com
www.zazzle.com/orionworkshttp://www.zazzle.com/orionworks

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Yes, Mark, this would be the best place to start. But jobs will be  
lost, the only issue is which jobs.  Congress does not want to cut any  
jobs because these are voters.  They only want to cut things that will  
piss off the fewest number of people who vote. The poor do not vote so  
they are fair game.  Of course, a combination of increased taxes  
especially at the high end and careful cuts over a period of time  
would be the way to go. But as you note - fat chance.


Ed


On Jan 26, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Mark Goldes wrote:


Ed,

Huge cuts could be made in our military budget which is bloated,  
wasteful and largely redundant. (I was a USAF Officer and speak with  
first hand knowledge).


That alone would make an enormous difference.

Try and get Congress to approve it! Fat chance!

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.comwrote:

No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is that money has been
 lent to the US in various forms and by various people and they want their
 money back eventually. Meanwhile they want to be paid interest. The US is
 rapidly approaching a level of debt such that if the interest rates rose to
 normal levels, we could not pay the interest without shutting down
 significant parts of the government. The US is presently printing dollars
 to cover this expense.  As a result, the debt is growing because this money
 is borrowed from the Federal Reserve, which is a private bank owned by
 individuals who want to be paid. At some point in the near future, the debt
 will be so large, it simply can not be paid. At that point, the US is in
 default, and the financial system of the world collapses. This means
 starvation and civil strife.  The problem is serous and can not be solved
 without great pain, which means further loss of jobs. The fools in Congress
 over the last 20 years have created a no win situation that very few people
 understand.


I should clarify an earlier remark I made about people who propose deep
budget cuts not wanting to think through the implications.  This is
obviously not the case for everyone making such a proposal, as Ed's
thoughtful analysis here shows.  What becomes clear is that there is a
complex situation that must be carefully worked through.

I see no need to slash government entitlements that are basically
self-funding and which, if anything, help to bring down costs. But I also
appreciate the reasoning behind calls to limit the amount of US government
debt that has been issued.  As with any complex problem, there are no
simple solutions.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:11 PM, Eric Walker wrote:

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:16 PM, Edmund Storms  
stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:


No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is that money  
has been lent to the US in various forms and by various people and  
they want their money back eventually. Meanwhile they want to be  
paid interest. The US is rapidly approaching a level of debt such  
that if the interest rates rose to normal levels, we could not pay  
the interest without shutting down significant parts of the  
government. The US is presently printing dollars to cover this  
expense.  As a result, the debt is growing because this money is  
borrowed from the Federal Reserve, which is a private bank owned by  
individuals who want to be paid. At some point in the near future,  
the debt will be so large, it simply can not be paid. At that point,  
the US is in default, and the financial system of the world  
collapses. This means starvation and civil strife.  The problem is  
serous and can not be solved without great pain, which means further  
loss of jobs. The fools in Congress over the last 20 years have  
created a no win situation that very few people understand.


I should clarify an earlier remark I made about people who propose  
deep budget cuts not wanting to think through the implications.   
This is obviously not the case for everyone making such a proposal,  
as Ed's thoughtful analysis here shows.  What becomes clear is that  
there is a complex situation that must be carefully worked through.


I see no need to slash government entitlements that are basically  
self-funding and which, if anything, help to bring down costs. But I  
also appreciate the reasoning behind calls to limit the amount of US  
government debt that has been issued.


Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount of  
debt exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to pay  
the interest. This is why people lost their homes. The US government  
has now reached a debt so large that it cannot be paid back and can  
barely be serviced.  This is a fact.  We had been living off China,  
who lent us the money we had spent on items made in China. China has  
largely stopped doing this.  To keep interest rates low on this debt,  
the FR is printing money and lending it to the US government, i.e.  
buying Treasury bonds , which artificially keeps interest rates low so  
that the interest payments are low. So they are fixing one major  
problem by creating another. As the debt grows, the amount of interest  
grows. At some point, the government does not have enough money to pay  
this interest without taking the money from a government program. The  
hope is that the economy would repair itself and start to generate  
income for the government before the debt become impossible to  
support. That hope has not been fulfilled. So, we are essentially  
having to sell the furniture to pay the mortgage.  The next step is on  
the street. The family cannot agree who's bed to sell, so the sheriff  
will decide when the house is foreclosed. God help us all, everyone.


Ed



 As with any complex problem, there are no simple solutions.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Pollution is gradually being reduced.

Except in China and India, which is most of the world.

Pollution per dollar of GDP is down in both. China is making rapid strides,
adding nuclear and wind power.

Out of control population growth is moderating, even in third world
countries.

The population is still growing exponentially world-wide.

The growth rate is now 1%, which is lower than it was anytime in the 20th
century.

https://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_met_y=sp_pop_growtdim=truedl=enhl=enq=world%20population%20growth

The rate is down sharply, even in developing countries. It is below
replacement in most first world countries:

http://www.worldbank.org/depweb/english/beyond/beyondco/beg_03.pdf

Food factory technology is improving, and it could easily eliminate the
threat of famine or massive water shortages.

Apparently not so easily. Hunger is even growing in the US at the low end
of the economy.

That is a political problem, not a technical problem. There is plenty of
food in the U.S.

That is a bit like saying cold fusion research is not funded because there
is a shortage of money. At present the world is awash in money. We are knee
deep in unused capital to such an extent that investors are effectively
paying the U.S. government to take their money (less than zero interest
after inflation).

The Internet is bringing unprecedented access to information and education
to people everywhere, even in the Third World.

True, but to what effect?

Why would the effect be any different than educating First World people?
Education is always a good thing.

But what role does rational and objective observation have in any
evaluation? It seems to me, we need to identify a problem before we can
attempt to correct it. This identification always leads to what might be
called pessimism.

Not in my case. I don't know where we stand on the rationality or
objectivity scale, but I do know history. I read a lot of history. It is
clear to me that things have never been better, and they are presently
heading in the right direction by most metrics. Something like global
warming may clobber us, but then again we might act to prevent it in time.
We have often fixed problems and made things better. We tend to forget
that, because we take good things for granted and we come to ignore them,
while we always see problems. Improvements which seemed miraculous when
they were introduced are now invisible. For example: automobiles,
electricity, computers, word processing and the Internet.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread a.ashfield


I should have described the difficulty of transition.

When a few companies have changed to fully automated production it is 
hard to see how they can be made to use a shorter work week, earlier 
retirement, higher taxes etc.To impose those things just on companies 
changing to full automation would lower the incentive to do so and 
dramatically slow the transition.Yet to impose those things on companies 
that have not yet made the change would probably kill them.I think the 
result is a transition that will be much slower to take advantage of new 
technologies than one would otherwise like.


It is already cheaper to make many things here with high automation, 
than to buy them from abroad, from countries with low labor costs.Then 
what happens to those third world countries?Meanwhile we have sustained, 
then growing, high unemployment that we can't afford.


If Rossi's Hot Cat actually works as well as he claims, there is a 
chance it could be the black swan event that would allow/pay for the 
transition.The slow, painful transition is more likely.

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Technology is only part of the solution.

Second Incomes can be adapted to most of the industrialized world. If we are 
wise enough to pass such legislation the pain of transition can be reduced. 

See a proposed act for the U.S. Congress at SECOND INCOMES on the Aesop site.

See CHEAP GREEN, on the same site, for a few other Black Swan technologies that 
do not depend on the commercialization of LENR.

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: a.ashfield [a.ashfi...@verizon.net]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 1:58 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I should have described the difficulty of transition.
When a few companies have changed to fully automated production it is hard to 
see how they can be made to use a shorter work week, earlier retirement, higher 
taxes etc.  To impose those things just on companies changing to full 
automation would lower the incentive to do so and dramatically slow the 
transition.  Yet to impose those things on companies that have not yet made the 
change would probably kill them.  I think the result is a transition that will 
be much slower to take advantage of new technologies than one would otherwise 
like.
It is already cheaper to make many things here with high automation, than to 
buy them from abroad, from countries with low labor costs.  Then what happens 
to those third world countries?   Meanwhile we have sustained, then growing, 
high unemployment that we can’t afford.
If Rossi’s Hot Cat actually works as well as he claims, there is a chance it 
could be the black swan event that would allow/pay for the transition. The 
slow, painful transition is more likely.

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:


Pollution is gradually being reduced.


Except in China and India, which is most of the world.

Pollution per dollar of GDP is down in both. China is making rapid  
strides, adding nuclear and wind power.


That does not seem to translate into improvement.  Last night the news  
showed a picture from space where the pollution was clearly visible.


Beijing's Air Pollution Steps Get Poor Reception Among Some In ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com / 2013 / 01 / 22 / beijings-new-air- 
polluti... -

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

AIR POLLUTION: Plant extremely fast growing forests to sharply reduce it. See 
details at 
http://www.adamsmithtoday.com/an-australian-solution-to-the-co2-problem. It 
could readily be tried in China. Water might be supplied by air wells instead 
of desalination. 

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 2:39 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Jan 26, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Pollution is gradually being reduced.

Except in China and India, which is most of the world.

Pollution per dollar of GDP is down in both. China is making rapid strides, 
adding nuclear and wind power.

That does not seem to translate into improvement.  Last night the news showed a 
picture from space where the pollution was clearly visible.

Beijing's Air Pollution Steps Get Poor Reception Among Some In 
...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/beijings-new-air-pollution-china_n_2523742.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com / 2013 / 01 / 22 / 
beijings-new-air-polluti...http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/22/beijings-new-air-pollution-china_n_2523742.html
 -

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

 Pollution per dollar of GDP is down in both. China is making rapid
 strides, adding nuclear and wind power.


 That does not seem to translate into improvement.  Last night the news
 showed a picture from space where the pollution was clearly visible.


It will translate into an improvement if they keep it up. They have 16
nuclear power plants, and they are building 30 more. I believe that is the
fastest rate of expansion in the history of nuclear power, exceeding U.S.
expansion in the 1970s. See:

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf63.html

I do not think it would be wise to build them any faster.

They are adding wind power faster than any other country. I think they are
up to 60 GW nameplate, and the turbines are mostly in very windy places
where the COP is high. Probably ~20 GW at least, which is roughly as much
as those 16 nukes. 32 nukes worth of pollution-free energy is a lot!

If they begin introducing electric cars they will soon reduce pollution
even as they expand the economy. The U.S., Europe and Japan reduced
pollution over the last 50 years. The Chinese can as well, and I think they
intend to.

Their energy efficiency is way up.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:


 Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount of
 debt exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to pay the
 interest. This is why people lost their homes. The US government has now
 reached a debt so large that it cannot be paid back and can barely be
 serviced.  This is a fact.


That is not true. All we have to do is raise taxes back to the level they
were under Mr. Clinton. If the economy recovers the debt will soon begin to
decline. It was declining rapidly under Clinton. Government expenditures
have not increased, except for the Pentagon, and now that the wars are over
I don't see why the military budget should be so high.

The debt crisis is ginned up nonsense, in my opinion. It could be fixed
with slightly higher tax rates so small we would hardly notice them. Mainly
on wealthy people. I am sure that wealthy people can afford to pay 3% more
than they now do. It is trivial matter for them.

For that matter, the U.S. government can print money. A little inflation
would soon reduce the debt as a percent of the GDP. We would hardly notice
that, either. The Japanese government under PM Abe is deliberately trying
to inflate by 3%, after years of deflation. It is about time! If they
succeed and the economy also grows, their debt will decline. It is twice as
high as the U.S., as a percent of the GDP, but Japan is not in crisis.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Eric wrote:

“I see no need to slash government entitlements that are basically self-funding 
and which, if anything, help to bring down costs.”

 

Care to explain how government entitlements are ‘self-funding’… 

And how do they ‘help to bring down costs’…

 

-Mark

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 1:12 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

 

snip

 

I see no need to slash government entitlements that are basically self-funding 
and which, if anything, help to bring down costs. But I also appreciate the 
reasoning behind calls to limit the amount of US government debt that has been 
issued.  As with any complex problem, there are no simple solutions.

 

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:35 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

Care to explain how government entitlements are ‘self-funding’…

 And how do they ‘help to bring down costs’…


No problem.

Medicare is believed to bring down costs through its bargaining power and
ability to control costs [1].  If you broke up the system into agencies
that operate at the level of US states, it is likely that health care
inflation would increase.

Social security is self-funding, through the payroll tax.  It is not a
strain on the current deficit.  See, for example, [2].  Its self-funding
arrangement is part of a longer term problem, because this arrangement
creates the illusion that it can just run on its own indefinitely.  But
social security is not a problem at the present moment.  Beyond its budget
neutrality, I would guess that, if anything, it is sustaining a lot of
older people who would be on the streets and placing additional strain on
public services and private entities such as hospitals.

Eric


[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/opinion/Krugman.html?_r=0
[2]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/budget-baloney-why-social_b_824331.html

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I  
have read and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not  
possible because the economy is not growing as fast as it was then so  
that the tax rate would have to be a bigger fraction of the income to  
provide the same amount of money, which people resist. Also, the debt  
is much larger now.  We have passed the point of no return according  
to most analysts.


Ed


On Jan 26, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:


Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount  
of debt exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to  
pay the interest. This is why people lost their homes. The US  
government has now reached a debt so large that it cannot be paid  
back and can barely be serviced.  This is a fact.


That is not true. All we have to do is raise taxes back to the level  
they were under Mr. Clinton. If the economy recovers the debt will  
soon begin to decline. It was declining rapidly under Clinton.  
Government expenditures have not increased, except for the Pentagon,  
and now that the wars are over I don't see why the military budget  
should be so high.


The debt crisis is ginned up nonsense, in my opinion. It could be  
fixed with slightly higher tax rates so small we would hardly notice  
them. Mainly on wealthy people. I am sure that wealthy people can  
afford to pay 3% more than they now do. It is trivial matter for them.


For that matter, the U.S. government can print money. A little  
inflation would soon reduce the debt as a percent of the GDP. We  
would hardly notice that, either. The Japanese government under PM  
Abe is deliberately trying to inflate by 3%, after years of  
deflation. It is about time! If they succeed and the economy also  
grows, their debt will decline. It is twice as high as the U.S., as  
a percent of the GDP, but Japan is not in crisis.


- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

You simply can’t rely on one-sided references to make important decisions with 
these kinds of complex programs...

 

All articles, regardless of whether they are on a liberal website or 
conservative, are one-sided; they usually leave out important points which do 
not support the article’s slant.  Thus, I find that reading the comment section 
helps to more accurately inform me; but that depends on whether knowledgeable 
folks are participating.  E.g., here are two comments which bring up good 
points:

 

--

Paul Krugman [the author of the referenced article] has also distorted the 
facts.

As a practicing doctor I can attest to the waste and fraud in the Medicare 
system.

There will be rationing of care. The very elderly will not receive a hip 
replacement if their estimated longevity does not justify it. The Obama money 
will be insufficient as costs escalate. The system will be overwhelmed when 
large numbers of newly covered patients seek care.

Hospitals will close as their reimbursement drops.  Doctors will drop out of 
Medicare.  Only the well off will be able to buy private care.

We need competition in the system.  Medicare has a cost of insurance per 
patient as do vouchers.  This cost has been increasing exponentially.  Medicare 
Advantage has more benefits, thus higher costs and premiums.

What does Obamacare do for Medicare.  It removes a large number of dollars. I 
doubt if this money can be made up with savings elsewhere in Medicare.

What makes Krugman the ultimate authority on Medicare? Are there not other ways 
to reform heath care? Perhaps a combination of conservative and liberal ideas 
might work?

(The number for voucher care in the comment section by Kimberly is incorrect.)

Let's sort out the real facts, then we can take a reasonable course.



Paul, by defending the Medicare status quo you're missing the point. The growth 
of Medicare costs is unsustainable. The Republicans plan to solve that problem 
via private insurers who will shift cost onto the patient, who then is forced 
to choose just how much that MRI scan is worth to him or her. That would be an 
effective, market-based solution, but it rations care based on ability to pay. 
Total health costs may go up or down - the purses of the people decide. The 
Democrats, on the other hand, propose that the government will study health 
care decisions and determine by edict which treatments are worth paying for. 
Thus, the government would ration health care for everyone and force costs down 
whether people like it or not. Which form of rationing do you prefer: big 
government or free market?

---

 

I would agree with the liberal side that a single-payer system would likely be 
more efficient, and that medical insurance companies take too much of our 
premiums in administrative costs, but then, with the federal govt raiding the 
social security ‘fund’ and numerous other bloated and wasteful programs, one 
would have to be blind to think that the govt is going to do it more 
efficiently than a competitive system.

 

-Mark

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:46 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

 

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 3:35 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:

 

Care to explain how government entitlements are ‘self-funding’…

And how do they ‘help to bring down costs’…

 

No problem.

 

Medicare is believed to bring down costs through its bargaining power and 
ability to control costs [1].  If you broke up the system into agencies that 
operate at the level of US states, it is likely that health care inflation 
would increase.

 

Social security is self-funding, through the payroll tax.  It is not a strain 
on the current deficit.  See, for example, [2].  Its self-funding arrangement 
is part of a longer term problem, because this arrangement creates the illusion 
that it can just run on its own indefinitely.  But social security is not a 
problem at the present moment.  Beyond its budget neutrality, I would guess 
that, if anything, it is sustaining a lot of older people who would be on the 
streets and placing additional strain on public services and private entities 
such as hospitals.

 

Eric

 

 

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/opinion/Krugman.html?_r=0

[2] 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-reich/budget-baloney-why-social_b_824331.html

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

FYI:

 

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm

 

Interest on the Federal Debt

Historical Data, Fiscal Year End

2012   $359,796,008,919.49

2011   $454,393,280,417.03

2010   $413,954,825,362.17

2009   $383,071,060,815.42

2008   $451,154,049,950.63

2007   $429,977,998,108.20

2006   $405,872,109,315.83

2005   $352,350,252,507.90

2004   $321,566,323,971.29

2003   $318,148,529,151.51

2002   $332,536,958,599.42

2001   $359,507,635,242.41

2000   $361,997,734,302.36

 

Again I ask. how many people could $400 BILLION  feed, or provide basic
medical care for

 

And when interest rates begin to go up, those interest payments will also go
up and consume the vast majority of the fed'l budget. the income tax rate
would have to go up to 80+% to maintain fed'l spending.

 

The interest payments are tax-dollars WASTED. 

Ever ask yourself who is getting those interest payments. that's a helluva
lot of money going somewhere!

 

-Mark

 

 

From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on
employment

 

Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I have read
and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not possible because the
economy is not growing as fast as it was then so that the tax rate would
have to be a bigger fraction of the income to provide the same amount of
money, which people resist. Also, the debt is much larger now.  We have
passed the point of no return according to most analysts. 

 

Ed

 

 

On Jan 26, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:





Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

 

Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount of debt
exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to pay the
interest. This is why people lost their homes. The US government has now
reached a debt so large that it cannot be paid back and can barely be
serviced.  This is a fact.

 

That is not true. All we have to do is raise taxes back to the level they
were under Mr. Clinton. If the economy recovers the debt will soon begin to
decline. It was declining rapidly under Clinton. Government expenditures
have not increased, except for the Pentagon, and now that the wars are over
I don't see why the military budget should be so high.

 

The debt crisis is ginned up nonsense, in my opinion. It could be fixed with
slightly higher tax rates so small we would hardly notice them. Mainly on
wealthy people. I am sure that wealthy people can afford to pay 3% more than
they now do. It is trivial matter for them.

 

For that matter, the U.S. government can print money. A little inflation
would soon reduce the debt as a percent of the GDP. We would hardly notice
that, either. The Japanese government under PM Abe is deliberately trying to
inflate by 3%, after years of deflation. It is about time! If they succeed
and the economy also grows, their debt will decline. It is twice as high as
the U.S., as a percent of the GDP, but Japan is not in crisis.

 

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

You simply can’t rely on one-sided references to make important decisions
 with these kinds of complex programs...


Agreed.


 

 Thus, I find that reading the comment section helps to more accurately
 inform me; but that depends on whether knowledgeable folks are
 participating.


Yes -- the comments can be very interesting.


 with the federal govt raiding the social security ‘fund’ and numerous
 other bloated and wasteful programs, one would have to be blind to think
 that the govt is going to do it more efficiently than a competitive system.


I have no problem with the basic gist of this -- I am sure there is a lot
of government bloat that can be trimmed.  I guess I'm one for trying to
sift the wheat from the chaff, rather than throw everything out, and for
making use of bargaining power when it can be used to the advantage of the
public good.  Careful measures, carefully taken, enacted in light of
positive experience in similar areas in other parts of the world.

I am also not one to believe the a purely market based system is going to
do an old person who has no money any good.  He or she will suffer more
than anyone else, because he or she will have no purchasing power, and a
market based system will end up specializing in plastic surgery rather than
helping him or her with some basic geriatric problem.  A similar thing goes
for the mentally retarded, the chronically ill, the physically disabled and
those who, for whatever reason, are unlikely to ever be gainfully employed
because they don't have the skills or ability to be employed.  Whenever I
hear of market-based solutions, I think of these people and the likelihood
that they will be forever scrounging around for their basic needs.

I think the market has a role to play, but I think we should also not
be persuaded into thinking it is a magic bullet.  I don't imagine you have
been persuaded that it is, but I think a lot of people have.  Everything in
moderation.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread David Roberson

I agree, this is extremely dangerous for our economy.  The usual solution is to 
allow inflation to erase the hard earned money of those that save instead of 
spend.  If you want to have a bit of fun, consider doing the following.


Take the poorest country in the world and lend each of the residents the same 
amount of money that each citizen of the USA owes.  Now, they find themselves 
in debt, but they use the money to make enormous improvements to their homes, 
infrastructures, and etc.  Or, they could solve all their food problems with 
plenty left over.


When you think of the US debt in the above manner, you realize that we are not 
in that great shape here.  Most of the others in the third world are less 
indebted than the US.  What is going to happen to the future generations unless 
this is stopped somehow?


Dave



-Original Message-
From: MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Sat, Jan 26, 2013 7:26 pm
Subject: RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment



FYI:
 
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
 
Interest on the Federal Debt
Historical Data, Fiscal Year End
2012   $359,796,008,919.49
2011   $454,393,280,417.03
2010   $413,954,825,362.17
2009   $383,071,060,815.42
2008   $451,154,049,950.63
2007   $429,977,998,108.20
2006   $405,872,109,315.83
2005   $352,350,252,507.90
2004   $321,566,323,971.29
2003   $318,148,529,151.51
2002   $332,536,958,599.42
2001   $359,507,635,242.41
2000   $361,997,734,302.36
 
Again I ask… how many people could $400 BILLION  feed, or provide basic medical 
care for
 
And when interest rates begin to go up, those interest payments will also go up 
and consume the vast majority of the fed’l budget… the income tax rate would 
have to go up to 80+% to maintain fed’l spending.
 
The interest payments are tax-dollars WASTED… 
Ever ask yourself who is getting those interest payments… that’s a helluva lot 
of money going somewhere!
 
-Mark
 
 

From: Edmund Storms [mailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:55 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

 
Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I have read 
and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not possible because the 
economy is not growing as fast as it was then so that the tax rate would have 
to be a bigger fraction of the income to provide the same amount of money, 
which people resist. Also, the debt is much larger now.  We have passed the 
point of no return according to most analysts. 

 

Ed

 

 

On Jan 26, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:




Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

 



Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount of debt 
exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to pay the interest. 
This is why people lost their homes. The US government has now reached a debt 
so large that it cannot be paid back and can barely be serviced.  This is a 
fact.



 

That is not true. All we have to do is raise taxes back to the level they were 
under Mr. Clinton. If the economy recovers the debt will soon begin to decline. 
It was declining rapidly under Clinton. Government expenditures have not 
increased, except for the Pentagon, and now that the wars are over I don't see 
why the military budget should be so high.

 

The debt crisis is ginned up nonsense, in my opinion. It could be fixed with 
slightly higher tax rates so small we would hardly notice them. Mainly on 
wealthy people. I am sure that wealthy people can afford to pay 3% more than 
they now do. It is trivial matter for them.

 

For that matter, the U.S. government can print money. A little inflation would 
soon reduce the debt as a percent of the GDP. We would hardly notice that, 
either. The Japanese government under PM Abe is deliberately trying to inflate 
by 3%, after years of deflation. It is about time! If they succeed and the 
economy also grows, their debt will decline. It is twice as high as the U.S., 
as a percent of the GDP, but Japan is not in crisis.

 

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread Daniel Rocha

There is always the option of forfeiting growth and trying to be a world
power. Let it be a job to be of China or India. Scrap the military bases,
inside and outside US. Heavily tax the rich to the point of bankruptcy for
those who like to live off unproductive business (Wall Street). Employ the
unemployed in government backed jobs. Plan the damn economy.

Or, there is the option of let it go and see the quality of life of the
average people decrease to South American levels.


-- 
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Ed,

Paul Krugman of Princeton (and a NY Times columnist) believes they are 
seriously in error. Robert Reich at Berkeley agrees. This appears to be a case 
where conventional belief may prove to be as wrong as it has been with regard 
to LENR.

Mark

Mark Goldes
Co-Founder, Chava Energy
CEO, Aesop Institute

www.chavaenergy.com
www.aesopinstitute.org

707 861-9070
707 497-3551 fax

From: Edmund Storms [stor...@ix.netcom.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 3:54 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Cc: Edmund Storms
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I have read 
and I read many. Raising taxes back to Clayton is not possible because the 
economy is not growing as fast as it was then so that the tax rate would have 
to be a bigger fraction of the income to provide the same amount of money, 
which people resist. Also, the debt is much larger now.  We have passed the 
point of no return according to most analysts.

Ed


On Jan 26, 2013, at 4:11 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.commailto:stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Debt is good within limits, Eric. The problem comes when the amount of debt 
exceeds the ability to pay back or even to service, i.e. to pay the interest. 
This is why people lost their homes. The US government has now reached a debt 
so large that it cannot be paid back and can barely be serviced.  This is a 
fact.

That is not true. All we have to do is raise taxes back to the level they were 
under Mr. Clinton. If the economy recovers the debt will soon begin to decline. 
It was declining rapidly under Clinton. Government expenditures have not 
increased, except for the Pentagon, and now that the wars are over I don't see 
why the military budget should be so high.

The debt crisis is ginned up nonsense, in my opinion. It could be fixed with 
slightly higher tax rates so small we would hardly notice them. Mainly on 
wealthy people. I am sure that wealthy people can afford to pay 3% more than 
they now do. It is trivial matter for them.

For that matter, the U.S. government can print money. A little inflation would 
soon reduce the debt as a percent of the GDP. We would hardly notice that, 
either. The Japanese government under PM Abe is deliberately trying to inflate 
by 3%, after years of deflation. It is about time! If they succeed and the 
economy also grows, their debt will decline. It is twice as high as the U.S., 
as a percent of the GDP, but Japan is not in crisis.

- Jed

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

I think that a competitive market-based system for most things results in the 
best price for the end-consumer, but for certain critical needs such as medical 
and basic research, some govt/industry cooperation is warranted.  This goes 
with the caveat that the markets are truly competitive with NO 
collusion/favoritism from government, which is a rarity these days. 

 

For a hundred years after the country was founded, there were no ‘entitlement’ 
programs;  the only aid that the founders felt the fed’l govt was obligated to 
was caring for veterans injured in the line of duty… and that certainly makes 
sense.  As far as other forms of entitlements, whatever happened to families 
taking care of their own; why is it the govt’s responsibility to care for 
people when they have family to do it! Or local charities, which are MUCH more 
efficient than any government program will ever be… How about giving tax-payers 
and companies generous tax breaks for contributing to local charities to 
provide enough incentive to adequately fund the town’s social welfare needs.

 

We also need to look at how the entitlement programs are structured… I’ve seen 
examples about how the rules are not structured to encourage one to become 
self-reliant, but promote dependency… dependency is just another way the 
control freaks (politicians) maintain control, and their power and elitist 
positions.  I would have no problem if the programs ‘taught you how to fish’ in 
addition to giving you some fish for a limited period of time.  Washington DC’s 
avg household income is now the highest in the country; surpassing the Silicon 
Valley of California… that should tell you all you need to know about 
politicians.  We need to go back to one-term, citizen politicians; get rid of 
all lobbyists and corporate influence-peddlers in DC.

 

From: Eric Walker [mailto:eric.wal...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 4:31 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

 

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 4:16 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.net wrote:

 

You simply can’t rely on one-sided references to make important decisions with 
these kinds of complex programs...

Agreed. 

Thus, I find that reading the comment section helps to more accurately inform 
me; but that depends on whether knowledgeable folks are participating.

Yes -- the comments can be very interesting.

with the federal govt raiding the social security ‘fund’ and numerous other 
bloated and wasteful programs, one would have to be blind to think that the 
govt is going to do it more efficiently than a competitive system.

I have no problem with the basic gist of this -- I am sure there is a lot of 
government bloat that can be trimmed.  I guess I'm one for trying to sift the 
wheat from the chaff, rather than throw everything out, and for making use of 
bargaining power when it can be used to the advantage of the public good.  
Careful measures, carefully taken, enacted in light of positive experience in 
similar areas in other parts of the world.

 

I am also not one to believe the a purely market based system is going to do an 
old person who has no money any good.  He or she will suffer more than anyone 
else, because he or she will have no purchasing power, and a market based 
system will end up specializing in plastic surgery rather than helping him or 
her with some basic geriatric problem.  A similar thing goes for the mentally 
retarded, the chronically ill, the physically disabled and those who, for 
whatever reason, are unlikely to ever be gainfully employed because they don't 
have the skills or ability to be employed.  Whenever I hear of market-based 
solutions, I think of these people and the likelihood that they will be forever 
scrounging around for their basic needs.

 

I think the market has a role to play, but I think we should also not be 
persuaded into thinking it is a magic bullet.  I don't imagine you have been 
persuaded that it is, but I think a lot of people have.  Everything in 
moderation.

 

Eric

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

I ranted:

 IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided

 belief that balancing the national budget is the most

 important thing, above everything else, that must be

 tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that

 money is nothing more than a contractual

 representation of the exchange of goods and services

 between individuals and legal entities. 

 

Ed replied:

 

 No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is

 that money has been lent to the US in various forms and

 by various people and they want their money back

 eventually. Meanwhile they want to be paid interest. The

 US is rapidly approaching a level of debt such that if the

 interest rates rose to normal levels, we could not pay the

 interest without shutting down significant parts of the

 government. The US is presently printing dollars to cover

 this expense.  As a result, the debt is growing because

 this money is borrowed from the Federal Reserve, which is

 a private bank owned by individuals who want to be paid.

 At some point in the near future, the debt will be so

 large, it simply can not be paid. At that point, the US is

 in default, and the financial system of the world

 collapses. This means starvation and civil strife.  The

 problem is serous and can not be solved without great pain,

 which means further loss of jobs. The fools in Congress

 over the last 20 years have created a no win situation

 that very few people understand.

 

I'm 100% in agreement with your debt analysis, Ed. I suspect we are probably
discussing the same issue, but from slightly different angles. And perhaps
with slightly different objective as well.

 

As we all know the nation is getting more and more in debt. However, as Jed
points out in a follow-up post, I also suspect this debt crisis is a
contrivance with a specific objective in mind. That objective being that
those with the most amount of money now stand to end up making even more
money in the future! This obviously can't continue. Such a scam will
eventually break system.

 

For me, this gets back to my prior comment that money is nothing more than a
contractual representation of the exchange of goods and services between
parties. The only thing that gives value to money is the generation of goods
and services the piece of paper attempts to represent at the precise moment
of the exchange. It's not due to the fact that we have printed up a fixed
amount of money that others then, through hard work, try to accumulate - as
if money itself has some mysterious kind of intrinsic magical value in
itself. 

 

Massive debt on the national level can only be created as a result of
keeping the amount of money that can ever be allowed in circulation
maintained at a fixed aggregate amount. There are those in power who want to
keep everyone worshipping the notion that the total amount of aggregate
money in the system must remain a FIXED amount. And they are ...duh...
those with the most amount of money languishing about in their vaults. Under
this convenient arrangement the temporary illusion of extra cash that
suddenly flows into the macroeconomic system can only be generated by those
who have more money than they know what to do with who, in turn, generously
LEND it back into the system. And we all know what happens when it's finally
time to pay the piper. The rich end up with an even bigger slice of the
entire pie while everyone else ends up with less. This simply can't
continue. Some archetypical form of a Robin Hood scenario will eventually
force itself upon the political area as the only means left to help balance
the books in a more equitable manner. IMHO, the only means left to a nation
rapidly growing its debt load would be to start printing up more money -
money which will not be paid for through issuing more bonds. Printing up
more unaccountable money would be the only means left to a nation as a
means to better redistribute slices of the pie.

 

If we don't, I think we will ironically sow the seeds of where the intrinsic
value of money will become devalued, if not seriously damaged. This will
happen because more and more of the work force will be forced out of
business and into employment. When that happens there will be fewer and
fewer goods and services being generated for which money... ANY MONEY still
circulating in the system could be used to purchase them.

 

IMHO, if we end up enduring a scenario where there are far fewer goods and
services being generated, it is not wise to assume that offering up gold
coins as payment will be any more advantageous than offering up the
equivalent amount in the form of paper bills. For one thing, only a tiny
number of individuals will profit under a scenario of amassing gold with the
expectation they will later use it to buy all the goods and services they
need. As we all know there is only so much gold to go around on the planet.
It would not be wise to assume that they will be able to better insulate

RE: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson

From Mark:

 

 How many people could $400 BILLION dollars feed?

 

Your point being.

 

Regards,

Steven Vincent Johnson

www.OrionWorks.com

www.zazzle.com/orionworks

tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 5:28 PM, MarkI-ZeroPoint zeropo...@charter.netwrote:

I think that a competitive market-based system for most things results in
 the best price for the end-consumer, but for certain critical needs such as
 medical and basic research, some govt/industry cooperation is warranted.
 This goes with the caveat that the markets are truly competitive with NO
 collusion/favoritism from government, which is a rarity these days.


This makes a lot of sense.  I am not at all enthusiastic about enriching
the pockets of a few lucky subcontractors who have no incentive to find
efficiencies.

 

 For a hundred years after the country was founded, there were no
 ‘entitlement’ programs;  the only aid that the founders felt the fed’l govt
 was obligated to was caring for veterans injured in the line of duty… and
 that certainly makes sense.


I have only respect to the US founding fathers.  They had some great ideas
and put in place a remarkably stable democracy, and they had an allergic
reaction to paternalism and to an extractive UK mercantilist policy.  But I
don't think they were any wiser than you or I, or that we need to feel
bound by the solutions that they came up with to the problems of their
times.  Some of our problems are similar to what they were facing, and some
are a world apart.  We should look at the problems we face today and come
up with our own solutions.  This is what they would have done in our
situation, and what they would have recommended to us that we do.


 As far as other forms of entitlements, whatever happened to families
 taking care of their own; why is it the govt’s responsibility to care for
 people when they have family to do it! Or local charities, which are MUCH
 more efficient than any government program will ever be… How about giving
 tax-payers and companies generous tax breaks for contributing to local
 charities to provide enough incentive to adequately fund the town’s social
 welfare needs.


Saying that people should rely upon their families is effectively saying
we're content to ignore the problem.  Some people have no families.  Some
people are estranged from their families.  Those who can do so are no doubt
already relying upon their families.  That leaves all of the rest, who are
the ones I was thinking of.

At a deeper level, I think this gets down to what divides the US -- what
the basic social contract is.  I'm arguing that as a society we will all do
well and prosper if we look to the good of everyone, including those who
are left behind in the current system.

I'm open to the idea of tax-breaks to local charities for handling some of
these problems.  Let's look for some examples of where this model is being
effectively used, and then go from there.


 We also need to look at how the entitlement programs are structured… I’ve
 seen examples about how the rules are not structured to encourage one to
 become self-reliant, but promote dependency… dependency is just another way
 the control freaks (politicians) maintain control, and their power and
 elitist positions.  I would have no problem if the programs ‘taught you how
 to fish’ in addition to giving you some fish for a limited period of time.
 Washington DC’s avg household income is now the highest in the country;
 surpassing the Silicon Valley of California… that should tell you all you
 need to know about politicians.  We need to go back to one-term, citizen
 politicians; get rid of all lobbyists and corporate influence-peddlers in
 DC.


Yes, would not be surprised if dependency were a problem -- I have
witnessed some of it myself.  But with that I have two reservations.
 First, let's approach the problem empirically.  Are there existing
programs out there that have a proven track record of helping people at the
margins of society without encouraging dependency?  Let's copy what they're
doing and see if we can tweak it.  Second, dependency is only a problem for
those who can avoid it.  There are many people, incompetents among them,
who are, by their nature, dependent.  There is no conceivable way that we
will educate them out of it; they will simply either sink into the existing
social darwinism or, if we can help them, they will lead out lives in
dignity at a modest cost to the public.  I am persuaded that this will not
only be satisfying in some ethical sense, but that we will all be better
off economically as well.

Eric

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

Edmund Storms stor...@ix.netcom.com wrote:

Sorry Jed, but your analysis conflicts with every economist that I have
read and I read many.

Read Krugman.

Raising taxes back to Clayton is not possible because the economy is not
growing as fast as it was then so that the tax rate would have to be a
bigger fraction of the income to provide the same amount of money . . .

I said we should raise the rates back, and then wait for the economy to
recover. I did not say we should raise total revenues back right away.

. . . which people resist.

People do like paying taxes, that's for sure.

Also, the debt is much larger now. We have passed the point of no return
according to most analysts.

Hey, I can do arithmetic. I am good with spreadsheets. Assuming the economy
recovers, I can see that the debt will soon stabilize. As a percent of the
GDP it has not risen much. It may soon start to fall even with the present
tax rates. It is nothing to worry about. See:

http://www.progressinaction.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/debt_gdp_dollars_percentage1.png

Note the percent of GPD. That's what matters. The actual dollar amount is
unimportant. If the economy expands by a factor of ten and everyone's
income goes up by a factor of 10, it would make no difference if the total
national debt also increased by a factor of 10. We would be in the same
place.

That graph is from this article, which is partisan, but no one disputes
that data, which is from the government as noted in the second graph:

http://www.progressinaction.com/republicans/conservative-dishonesty-and-their-deficit-scare/

Seriously, I do not know which analysts you refer to but it seems they
cannot do arithmetic. This is not rocket science.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread Randy Wuller

Ed and others:  

The US net wealth after all debt is deducted is higher now than it has ever 
been in US history.  Print the money, default or make the citizens of the US 
pay it off, it makes almost no difference.  Debt is more or less an illusion.  
Picking one or the other of the above choices will cause different 
redistributions of wealth among the weathy of the world but will have almost no 
impact on overall product production. 

Those that claim otherwise do so principally to promote allocation of wealth to 
those protected by their policy approach.

Nothing is more  illusion than the concept of debt. (From the world's point of 
view).

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 26, 2013, at 8:11 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson 
orionwo...@charter.net wrote:

 I ranted:
  IMHO, too many politicians are focusing on a misguided
  belief that balancing the national budget is the most
  important thing, above everything else, that must be
  tackled. What most fail to realize is the fact that
  money is nothing more than a contractual
  representation of the exchange of goods and services
  between individuals and legal entities.
  
 Ed replied:
  
  No Steven, what you say is not the issue. The issue is
  that money has been lent to the US in various forms and
  by various people and they want their money back
  eventually. Meanwhile they want to be paid interest. The
  US is rapidly approaching a level of debt such that if the
  interest rates rose to normal levels, we could not pay the
  interest without shutting down significant parts of the
  government. The US is presently printing dollars to cover
  this expense.  As a result, the debt is growing because
  this money is borrowed from the Federal Reserve, which is
  a private bank owned by individuals who want to be paid.
  At some point in the near future, the debt will be so
  large, it simply can not be paid. At that point, the US is
  in default, and the financial system of the world
  collapses. This means starvation and civil strife.  The
  problem is serous and can not be solved without great pain,
  which means further loss of jobs. The fools in Congress
  over the last 20 years have created a no win situation
  that very few people understand.
  
 I'm 100% in agreement with your debt analysis, Ed. I suspect we are probably 
 discussing the same issue, but from slightly different angles. And perhaps 
 with slightly different objective as well.
  
 As we all know the nation is getting more and more in debt. However, as Jed 
 points out in a follow-up post, I also suspect this debt crisis is a 
 contrivance with a specific objective in mind. That objective being that 
 those with the most amount of money now stand to end up making even more 
 money in the future! This obviously can't continue. Such a scam will 
 eventually break system.
  
 For me, this gets back to my prior comment that money is nothing more than a 
 contractual representation of the exchange of goods and services between 
 parties. The only thing that gives value to money is the generation of goods 
 and services the piece of paper attempts to represent at the precise moment 
 of the exchange. It's not due to the fact that we have printed up a fixed 
 amount of money that others then, through hard work, try to accumulate - as 
 if money itself has some mysterious kind of intrinsic magical value in itself.
  
 Massive debt on the national level can only be created as a result of keeping 
 the amount of money that can ever be allowed in circulation maintained at a 
 fixed aggregate amount. There are those in power who want to keep everyone 
 worshipping the notion that the total amount of aggregate money in the system 
 must remain a FIXED amount. And they are ...duh...  those with the most 
 amount of money languishing about in their vaults. Under this convenient 
 arrangement the temporary illusion of extra cash that suddenly flows into the 
 macroeconomic system can only be generated by those who have more money than 
 they know what to do with who, in turn, generously LEND it back into the 
 system. And we all know what happens when it's finally time to pay the piper. 
 The rich end up with an even bigger slice of the entire pie while everyone 
 else ends up with less. This simply can't continue. Some archetypical form of 
 a Robin Hood scenario will eventually force itself upon the political area as 
 the only means left to help balance the books in a more equitable manner. 
 IMHO, the only means left to a nation rapidly growing its debt load would be 
 to start printing up more money - money which will not be paid for through 
 issuing more bonds. Printing up more “unaccountable” money would be the only 
 means left to a nation as a means to better redistribute slices of the pie.
  
 If we don't, I think we will ironically sow the seeds of where the intrinsic 
 value of money will become devalued, if not seriously damaged. This will 
 happen because more and more of the

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment

2013-01-26 Thread Harry Veeder

Notably, F. Hayek, one of the greatest advocates of free market
economics, argued that everyone should receive a basic income or (what
he called a minimum income) regardless of employment. See chapter 9
Security and Freedom in his book _Road to Serfdom_ .

https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.286147002267.143173.676517267type=1l=e117e9f0c2

Harry

Re: [Vo]:Another article about the impact of automation on employment