Title: FW: How to we get from here to there when there keeps changing
Some thoughts about Futurework:
The other night, I was re-reading some papers that had been piling up on the nightstand when I came across an article by Robert Theobold, the economist. As the first 4 pages were missing, I'm not sure of the circumstances of the essay, but I have the feeling it was a transcription of a talk he had given somewhere. The main inspiration for this essay, came from George Bush Jr., the Texas Governor running for the Presidency of the US. In the sound bite I caught, he was referring to his idea of compassionate Conservatism - an oxymoron if I have ever heard one. As I recall, he stated that it was compassionate to eliminate welfare and other forms of assistance so that everyone would/could have a chance to contribute by working. I guess this is called tough love but thank you very much, I much prefer tender love in my relationships.
Anyway, the presupposition behind Mr. Bush's idea is the belief that there will be jobs for everyone. I notice when neo-con's speak of jobs, they often forget renumeration as the real idea is "to work" not to get rewarded in any adequate way. Well, back to Theobald and the issue that caught my attention.
Quote:
The Economic Crisis.
Economists have managed to hide the most basic economic reality from the public. To listen to the discussions, one would think that the real issue is how to produce enough. In reality, the core problem has been how to insure that demand kept up with production so that factories could keep humming and services would be purchased.
The solution in the nineteenth century was for the colonial powers to send goods to the dependencies and to accept debt in return. The United States also benefited from this strategy. (TL often by not repaying their debts) The early twentieth century approach was to provide workers with a living wage.
The late twentieth century strategy has been to encourage people to go into debt. Demand has also been generated by the movement of people in many countries into the middle class. On the other side of the equation ever-increasing inequality makes it more difficult to maintain levels of consumption.
Thomas:
So, here is the crux of the problem of futurework. For there to be work, there has to be demand for the results of the work. However, with industrialization and computerization, the ability to create goods and services far exceeds the demand for those goods and services or perhaps as James Galbraith has mentioned - nobody is paying workers enough to create enough disposable income to use the supply that is available.
So, let us reflect for a minute. The predominate political thinking is that everyone should work. However, even with approx 20% of the population unemployed or underemployed, our political masters keep flogging this old industrial age solution. Sorta makes ya wonder - doesn't it?
Continuining Quote from Theobold:
Demand has also been maintained by high investment in certain developing countries, notably the Asian tigers. The current Asian crisis has exposed the dangers of the strategies which have been used over recent decades. There is now massive overcapacity in the world in many areas of production such as computers and automobiles. The conventional view is still that the economies of the United States and Canada are so strong that the Asian crisis will have little negative effect.
Others share my deep concerns. It is now possible for Asian countries to sell goods at prices far below those achievable by Western producers. The consequences of this reality seem potentially far more serious than most analysts seem willing to recognize. We may well see deflation rather than inflation, this can carry acute dangers for economic systems.
Thomas:
Now one of the truisms of capitalism, is that it is a growth model and it does not lend itself very well to sustainability or - god forbid, deflationary pressures. One can only speculate what the montetarist Central Banks would do if they had to stop fighting inflation through interest rates and actually try and create employment, especially when it is hardly practical to lower interest rates much below the current settings. So now, we come to the third piece of information that caught my attention. Vivian Hutchinson gave a talk to the Mayors in New Zealand regarding his views on creating more work. With no disrespect, I would note in the following quote, that he too feels that the answer is job creation.
Quote:
I think people expect me to talk about some new sectors that are
opening up in our economy ... or new business opportunities
appearing on the horizon. I can and do enjoy sharing stories like
that, as we research and scan local and international trends and
publish them in The Jobs Letter.
But, these days, my answers to that question are changing. I no
longer believe that new business opportunities will be the only
drivers of future employment.
The jobs of the future will also come from us valuing different
things. And this is not an act of economics or business
development as we traditionally know it. These jobs will come from
the acts of community and cultural leadership that have the capacity
to make choices for a common good.
Thomas:
Now I am cognizant that he is speaking to a bunch of mayors caught up in the cultural myths of our times, but really, is the only answer widening the job market to include more services, using more resources, creating the demand for more consumers with the attendant problems of how to pay them so they can buy more? For myself, I am beginning to question more and more - why do we all have to work - especially when we have the ability to created such surpluses. Might it not be possible to accept that not everyone wants to work or has to work or needs to work? Why should their status be less because their needs are different. Might we not consider that those who want to climb mountians, read books, write essays, wander around as a tourist or just be a couch potato have some redeeming value. They do, they can consume. Perhaps we need a professional class of consumers to create a demand for all those who still find value in work.
Continuining quote from Vivian Hutchinson:
The great paradox is this: at a time of high unemployment, we are
surrounded by insurmountable opportunities of good work that
needs to be done. But it is work that needs to be valued.
The job-rich areas of the future will emerge in two main sectors: The
first sector contains the jobs that come from knowing we need to
look after one another better. The second sector contains the jobs
that know we need to look after the earth better. These sectors are
not driven simply by market desire. They are driven by a community
and cultural leadership that values our inter-dependence.
Both these sectors are very rich in terms of job potential ... and we
would all be much better off if the work was done. The great irony is
that the skills to do these jobs are not dependent on high
technology ... they require the caring and high-touch skills that are
already held in abundance by unemployed New Zealanders.
Thomas:
These are two good ideas, however they still spring from the same concepts as George Bush Jr. holds sacrosant - that somehow, you are less if you do not work. I think that there are people who find enjoyment in not working and that perhaps by not allowing them to work and giving them some resources to distribute, they will in turn spur those who do want to work - to work even harder - which is what they appear to want. At this point, we move to the concept of allowing people to have what they want as the guiding criteria for public policy, rather than the enforcement of the idea of work as the only solution.
Now the following quote, along with the insights of Theobold will show that the problem will only get worse in the future. You see, a significant number of people can't work - they're sick. Of course, that's an acceptable reason for not working and it does provide work for many people who want to work and I guess we accept it because rather than just be layabouts, they are actually suffering because they can't work and that makes their idleness ok.
Dr. Collins posted these comments in the UniSci Science News and I copied it off a Graffix posting.
Quote:
Dr. Collins believes the information will allow researchers to uncover
many of the major hereditary factors for virtually every disease that
has a hereditary contribution. The findings will reveal the causes of
complex and common diseases such as multiple sclerosis, common
cancers, hypertension and schizophrenia.
"These discoveries will put us in a position to design individualized
programs of preventive medicine to focus on keeping people well
because people will know what their greatest risk conditions are, and
they'll be able to design their lifestyle and medical surveillance
accordingly," says Dr. Collins.
Thomas:
Now just imagine if all the people incapacitated by the above diseases were suddenly reintroduced into the work force. If we have an army of unemployed now, imagine the problem when all the ill work and all those who care for and heal the ill become unemployed.
Most of "the blueprint of human beings," the human genome sequence,
will be completed in the coming year, which will enable researchers to
determine hereditary factors, causes and treatments for major diseases
such as heart disease, diabetes and common cancers, according to
Francis Collins, M.D., Ph.D., Director of the National Human Genome
Research Institute (NHGRI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
Well, it's late and enough of my ruminations.
Respectfully,
Thomas Lunde
- Re: How to we get from here to there when there keeps changing Anonymous
