Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

NB: De soto make an article about Mercantilism... how economic elite obtain help by government to block competition http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-enemy-for-trump-is-mercantilism-not-globalism-1480279192 the secret of economic rents, and what make people furious, from Tunisia to rust belt.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Alain, as usual a great analysis. The only way in an UBI economy, we would not have a better distribution of capital is that we let the establishment prevent natural development with political conservation laws. On Nov 27, 2016 18:11, "Alain Sepeda" wrote: > from

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

On Thu, Nov 24, 2016 at 3:27 PM, Alain Sepeda wrote: I am not afraid of the extreme wealth. > (1) In a neoliberal democracy such as the US, wealth buys political influence and power. Not necessarily in the same way that it does in a country like Nigeria or India, where

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

from exchange it seems that one big problem and neglected point is about allocation of the capitale. what people name "robots are taking our jobs" is simply the well known "replacement of work by capital". One psychological problem marxist but mostly old fashioned simply, is that people don't

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Daniel Rocha wrote: How will economy improve if people are simply not buying? And it will be > much more costly. I am thinking about 90% of unemployment. > Come, come. Why stop at 90%? Think 100% unemployment. Now imagine billions of robotic machines using cold fusion

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Last I looked the sea was rising about 2 -3 mm/yr. What makes you think so much will be flooded? On 11/26/2016 11:20 PM, Axil Axil wrote: cities worldwide within 100 miles of the coastline will be underwater and in need of relocation inland,

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

You are not paying attention to what has been said. One of the advantages of UBI is that it will provide money to the people to spend on things made by robots. Goods manufactured by robots will keep getting cheaper. The tax paid by manufacturers and service providers will be about the same

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Axil, Your scenario is a good example of how the economy really is. It is not a zero sum game. Our resources are built on previous generations innovations and progress. After that we all have 24 hours per day. We can use them productively (in a wide sense) or just misuse them. Computers, houses,

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

China will lead the way. China has 1.5 billion people to keep happy with no jobs to offer. It is true that all coastal cities worldwide within 100 miles of the coastline will be underwater and in need of relocation inland, That should produce a number of jobs. On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 11:02 PM,

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

How will economy improve if people are simply not buying? And it will be much more costly. I am thinking about 90% of unemployment.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Daniel Rocha wrote: Why do you think taxation won't be very heavy? > Because it will not cost much more than today's welfare systems, as I said. > Money won't appear out of nowhere, minimum wage will only accelerate > collapse. > Money always appears out of nowhere

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Why do you think taxation won't be very heavy? Money won't appear out of nowhere, minimum wage will only accelerate collapse. And there is still no answer about the debts. In any case, there will be a finance disaster way worse than that of 1929.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Daniel Rocha wrote: So, during the transition, when robots are too good, but not that good, > people will be unemployed (or very, very low pay job), right? > Perhaps, but not necessarily. Social policy such as the minimum wage can ameliorate such problems, at the cost of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

So, during the transition, when robots are too good, but not that good, people will be unemployed (or very, very low pay job), right? So, there is the UBI to fix that. Right. So, there will a very heavy taxation on those who make robots and other productive industry and that will be shared by the

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Here is another concept central to this discussion -- There are no permanent solutions in technology, economics or social policy. Take a Watson class supercomputer. Such a thing would be impossible with 19th century Babbage computer technology. In 1970 it would have been extraordinarily

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

H LV wrote: > The idea of a basic income is much older. > ​Here is a history of the idea of basic income and how it has evolved > alongside the emergence of the welfare state.​ > http://basicincome.org/basic-income/history/​ > > The idea is old, but the modern version

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

The U. Bath document references a seminal paper in this field by a libertarian: IN OUR HANDS A Plan to Replace the Welfare State Charles Murray THE AEI PRESS Publisher for the American Enterprise Institute WASHINGTON, D.C.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > H LV wrote: > > ​Universal basic income isn't a neo-communist proposal. >> > > It was first proposed by conservative economists Friederich Hayek and > Milton Friedman. There is a lot of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

​ O​ n Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Daniel Rocha wrote: > Basic Income is a neo liberal proposal. It would allow, at a first moment, > to politically privatize welfare and healthcare services, in places where > otherwise there would exist universal care, to be in the

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Farmers will be able to take vacation, instead of having no life in France and ending to ask for a legal association (kind of cross-protection in case of death Civil wedding ) between older brother/sister who cannot find a mate and live together (it was asked during study of gay civil wedding bill

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Amazon can develope of product delivery system that will allow the customer to receive all his consumables via robot, This would eliminate all supermarket and brick and mortar stores from the product distribution chain and also remove the delivery driver from the delivery process, People will not

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Here is how Amazon.com robots work. The machines themselves are not particularly sophisticated. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtBa9yVZBJM

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Jed Rothwell wrote: The big question is: Will the robots themselves be owned by 1% elite, or controlled the 1%, or will they be like today's personal computers, owned by everyone, and used by everyone? I predict the latter, and I also predict the cost will fall because of competition by

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

a.ashfield wrote: I think for the foreseeable future robots will wear out and the industry > will be more like the car industry where you have to buy a new one every so > many years and it will then have more advanced features. > I agree, but cars cost a smaller fraction

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

i did not say you complained - maybe expressed myself poorly. i agree we have no government that can take radical steps. thus we fall behind in every juncture. we already have UBI just using 500 laws and regulations and it is totally unfair. one single social resource - free market - and no

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Laenart, I'm not complaining about UBI. The problem I see is that out present government will never implement it. At least Ontario is planning to give it a try and it needs to be tested to see what the problems are. http://www.intelligencer.ca/2016/11/18/can-guaranteed-basic-income-work On

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Ruby, I agree with Ford. It will have to get worse before our pathetic government will take the necessary steps. On 11/25/2016 3:12 PM, Ruby wrote: QUOTE "It's going to get worse. The inequality will get worse. There's going to be more anger and social upheaval," said Martin Ford

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Jed, I think for the foreseeable future robots will wear out and the industry will be more like the car industry where you have to buy a new one every so many years and it will then have more advanced features. Advanced robots will not be cheap. Likewise, the government will still be needed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

I think there are too mch of zero sum pessimism in the discussion. It will let people chose to do what they like and are good at. That will generate new enterprise and innovations. Thus creating more money to circulate.I think flat taxing is best as that keep the interest up to innovate. People do

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Danial, I don't agree. The output of robots can be taxed in a number of ways so that the money is distributed to the population Rather than being something the government spends it is something that the population does. With UBI it is an alternative to socialism. The money is just as real

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

On 11/22/16 2:24 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote: See: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/17/technology/trump-tech-populism-automation/ QUOTE "It's going to get worse. The inequality will get worse. There's going to be more anger and social upheaval," said Martin Ford

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Alain, The problem with what you say is that only a very few do better as a result of robotics. As Norbert Weiner (PhD at 17) wrote:three years after the first vacuum tube computer, “If we can do anything in a clear and intelligible way, we can do it by machine. An industrial revolution of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

H LV wrote: ​Universal basic income isn't a neo-communist proposal. > It was first proposed by conservative economists Friederich Hayek and Milton Friedman. There is a lot of conservative support for it. See: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

many good points but. about laundry, jed is right. But who own the machine ? future of work is just managing the capital... if the capital can do all the work, who work to install the capital? to make it? Anyway hand work and human contact will increase of value. Note that if there is too much

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Alain Sepeda wrote: > in fact robots make the value of the worker increase, as it always have. > It is continuous substitution of work by capital. > This cannot go on indefinitely. Sooner or later you run out of work. > washing machine makes the value of the laundry

RE: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

I think we need to go about this in steps – with part-time employment offering full time benefits, for example. I also wonder about the obsessive “interventionists” – the people who will endlessly attempt to start wars (now writing for the NY Times and Washington Post), the anti-drug

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Basic Income is a neo liberal proposal. It would allow, at a first moment, to politically privatize welfare and healthcare services, in places where otherwise there would exist universal care, to be in the hands of private institutions. This institutions could set expenses high enough and, thus,

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

communism. > > > -- > *From:* a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford > > I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

There is an intermediate until full robotization. That is, when robots are efficient but not that much. So, I wonder who will pay the debts when robots/smart algorithms become more and more advanced. With people being jobless, companies won't have to whom to sell stuff. There is the suggestion of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

thornros.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 25, 2016 5:51 AM *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford Brian, Axillary.I wrote about how poorly the LENR community works together. Every one just keep what they know so everyone needs to go through the same i

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

com> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2016 5:51 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford Brian, Axillary.I wrote about how poorly the LENR community works together. Every one just keep what they know so everyone needs to go through the same issues. The main

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

ch of dilitantes expounding a socialist agenda. How did that work for Russia? -- *From:* alain.coetm...@gmail.com <alain.coetm...@gmail.com> on behalf of Alain Sepeda <alain.sep...@gmail.com> *Sent:* Thursday, November 24, 2016 4:27 PM *To:* Vortex Li

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

>>>The future of the laundry worker is not to work for a laundry boss with a >>>thousands of machine. It is to own a thousand of machine, like a Roman >>>citizen was owning slaves. the word "robot" has its origins from word "slave" The word robot was coined by artist Josef Čapek, the brother of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

2016-11-25 2:38 GMT+01:00 Jed Rothwell : > In the future, computers and robots can do nearly all work such as driving > cars, building houses, diagnosing x-rays and performing surgery. Human > labor will gradually become worthless. This is a point where I disagree. in

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Well, it would become so easy, well, we could expect also an extreme proliferation of nuclear devices, depending on the capabilities of such machines.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Brian Ahern wrote: > Is this a technical discussion group or: A bunch of dilitantes expounding > a socialist agenda. > Many of the people advocating this plan, such as Elon Musk, are not socialist or communists. They are leading modern capitalists, including some the

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

ay, November 24, 2016 4:27 PM To: Vortex List Subject: Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford I am not afraid of the extreme wealth. Ad De Soto explains (he is connected to real world or emerging economies) most of the "wealth" is pure hot air on stock market... What count is what

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

I am not afraid of the extreme wealth. Ad De Soto explains (he is connected to real world or emerging economies) most of the "wealth" is pure hot air on stock market... What count is what you buy for your fun. Never forget that what you invest is no more your money but one of an entrepreneur.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Alain, I agree with much of what you wrote. Not so sure about a flat tax. Something more will be required to redistribute the extreme wealth of the top 1%. As you say, many will take the opportunity to work, Many small startup companies. There will be growth in the entertainment business

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Very well explained Alain. Lennart Thornros On Nov 24, 2016 07:21, "Alain Sepeda" wrote: > UBI can be implement in many way. > Libertarians/Liberalist/FreeMarketFan promote a vision that is intended > to replace charity, yet to keep unconditionally an incentive to work.

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

UBI can be implement in many way. Libertarians/Liberalist/FreeMarketFan promote a vision that is intended to replace charity, yet to keep unconditionally an incentive to work. the big recognized problem of todays social safety nets is that it is a tax, a disincentive on people who get out of

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Brian Ahern wrote: > This is neo-communism. > Yes, it is. Except that instead of exploiting other people's labor, it would exploit robots. Robots don't care. They will not be upset. All of us helped develop robots and computers with our tax money, so we should all get the

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

n Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Brian Ahern <ahern_br...@msn.com> wrote: > This is neo-communism. > > > -- > *From:* a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Su

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

communism. > > > -- > *From:* a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM > *To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com > *Subject:* Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford > > I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a t

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

This is neo-communism. From: a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2016 10:36 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial. No

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

I'm very glad to see Ontario is thinking about giving UBI a trial. Not only is a trial needed to see what the snags are, but the concept is so alien to the GOP that right now they would never consider it. There has to be some way of taking care of those made unemployed by AI and robotics. I

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

>From The Belleville Intelligencer 'Ontario is on the precipice of a three-year pilot to test out the concept of a guaranteed basic income and residents have been invited to share their views on the proposal online, as well as during several public consultations ... 'It’s a consultation Ruth

Re: [Vo]:More on automation and Martin Ford

Quoting the article: "Yet figuring out how such a system [Universal Basic Income] could be afforded -- and not turn a country into a nation of slackers -- is unclear." As usual the author misses the point. If robots do all the work why should anyone care whether people turn into slackers? This