Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

[Jed Rothwell]

Brian Ahern  wrote:

> The population of Egypt and Nigeria are exploding and will soon results in
> widespread dislocation.
>
Egypt has fallen from 6.6 to 3.3 births per woman. That's still high, but
it is good progress. Nigeria does indeed have one of the fastest growing
populations. But other indicators are more hopeful, such as GDP and GDP per
capita:

http://data.worldbank.org/country/nigeria

Your data is conveniently under reporting this ascending problem.
>
It is not my data. It is from the World Bank. I doubt they are under
reporting, and I doubt that you know better than they do.

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

[Brian Ahern]

The population of Egypt and Nigeria are exploding and will soon results in 
widespread dislocation. Your data is conveniently under reporting this 
ascending problem.



From: Jed Rothwell <jedrothw...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 10:52 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

I wrote:

There has been great progress reducing population growth and poverty. Third 
world literacy is 80% and growing rapidly.

These three are closely tied together. High population growth is mainly caused 
by dire poverty, high infant mortality, lack of education, and lack of old age 
pensions. Couples have many children when they think the children may die, and 
when adult children take care of their parents who would otherwise starve. 
During the last 50 years, in nearly every country and culture in the world, 
poverty has been reduced, healthcare improved, infant mortality has fallen to 
the level it was in Europe and U.S. in the 1960s, and education has increased. 
This has always been followed by a sharp drop in population growth. Most 
couples in the world now have 1 or 2 children.

The only countries where this has not happened are those in wars. The number of 
wars and the number of people killed in them has drastically declined since 
1945. The present era is the most peaceful in recorded history. It does not 
seem that way, because news of war reaches us easily and in detail, but that is 
the case. See this video, especially starting around minute 14:

https://vimeo.com/128373915
[https://www.bing.com/th?id=OVP.V566546ebd18859b690be1031dfb3ed07=Api]<https://vimeo.com/128373915>

The Fallen of World War II<https://vimeo.com/128373915>
vimeo.com
For the interactive version, ticket payments, and more: http://fallen.io An 
animated data-driven documentary about war and peace, The Fallen of World War 
II looks...




- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

[Jed Rothwell]

I wrote:


> There has been great progress reducing population growth and poverty.
> Third world literacy is 80% and growing rapidly.
>

These three are closely tied together. High population growth is mainly
caused by dire poverty, high infant mortality, lack of education, and lack
of old age pensions. Couples have many children when they think the
children may die, and when adult children take care of their parents who
would otherwise starve. During the last 50 years, in nearly every country
and culture in the world, poverty has been reduced, healthcare improved,
infant mortality has fallen to the level it was in Europe and U.S. in the
1960s, and education has increased. This has always been followed by a
sharp drop in population growth. Most couples in the world now have 1 or 2
children.

The only countries where this has not happened are those in wars. The
number of wars and the number of people killed in them has drastically
declined since 1945. The present era is the most peaceful in recorded
history. It does not seem that way, because news of war reaches us easily
and in detail, but that is the case. See this video, especially starting
around minute 14:

https://vimeo.com/128373915

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

[Jed Rothwell]

Brian Ahern  wrote:
>
> The uncontrolled birth rates in Africa will overwhelm any possibility of
> UBI there.
>
Birth rates and infant mortality rates in sub-Saharan Africa are the same
as they were in the U.S. in 1963. I would describe that as high, but not
out of control. The rates are far lower than they were in the 1987, the
peak of population growth. The key statistic is the population cohort from
0 to 14 years of age. It that remains stable then overall growth will stop
when the current generation of children reaches old age. See:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO.ZS?locations=ZG

It is much lower in northern Africa:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO.ZS?locations=ZQ

For the world as a whole, population growth is slowing and will stop
completely if the current trends continue. Some countries are gaining while
others lose, but overall the 0 to 14 cohort is stable at 26%. Explosive
growth stopped in 1965:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW?locations=1W

Extreme poverty worldwide has decreased drastically, from 42 million in
1981 to 12 million today. It continues to decline. It will be extinct in a
generation if trends continue:

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.DDAY?locations=1W=1981=2013=chart

The birthrate per 1000 people has fallen from 27 to 20 during that time.
Per woman it is at 2.4, which is close to the replacement rate. It was 3.8
in 1981. There has been great progress reducing population growth and
poverty. Third world literacy is 80% and growing rapidly. You should be
optimistic. See:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FACK2knC08E

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:More on automation hubris

[Brian Ahern]

Hubris.LENR does not mix well with global economics.


The uncontrolled birth rates in Africa will overwhelm any possibility of UBI 
there.



From: Lennart Thornros 
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2016 7:32 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: 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, 
robots will be part of what we can do with those 24 hours a day.
There are needs all over the globe. There are also resources (everyone's 24 
hour a day).

This out of the box thinking about economy has its problems. We have built a 
debt system we inherit with all the good things (not only monetary debt). That 
needs a solution and I am sure confiscation is not a solution. However, billion 
dollar assets inherited has no justification either. I do not have that 
solution but I think those two factors will together with creative thinking 
build a better world.

Pacifistic? Idealistic? Perhaps both but if we can change thhe attitude toward  
money we can create a lot. Money are just means. Who need to accrue more 
resources than he/she can utilise.? The real resources are time (which is 
equally distributed) and creativity (which needs recognition).

Best Regards ,
Lennart Thornros


lenn...@thornros.com
+1 916 436 1899

Whatever you vividly imagine, ardently desire, sincerely believe and 
enthusiastically act upon, must inevitably come to pass. (PJM)


On Sun, Nov 27, 2016 at 12:20 AM, Axil Axil 
> wrote:
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, Jed Rothwell 
> wrote:
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 when the economy improves. This will 
improve the economy. The minimum wage is supposed to accelerate the process. We 
want a transition to robots doing all the work. A higher minimum wage will help 
produce that.


And there is still no answer about the debts.

We just need to raise taxes back to where they were under Reagan or Clinton. 
The deficit and the debts will gradually go away. There is no crisis.


In any case, there will be a finance disaster way worse than that of 1929.

There might be, if it is done wrong. If it is done right it might work as well 
as the period from 1945 to 1980, which was the most prosperous in U.S. history, 
with the highest taxes. The two can go together if it is done right.

- Jed