Ray, you pose some interesting questions - most of which I cannot even
attempt to formulate an answer. But, I will offer a few comments.
On Nov 24, 2010, at 1:41 PM, Ray Harrell wrote:
How does this relate to the problem discussed years ago that there
was a coming labor glut due to robotics and automation?
It seems apparent that most, if not all, of our current problems stem
from overpopulation/unneeded people. This is driving us, as Ed pointed
out some time ago, to the Sao Paulo -ization of the Western world. Or
at least to similar slum-life conditions for a large segment of our
population. Unemployment rates among some segments of society are
currently running around 40-50%, and may grow worse over time - at
least in part because of continued automation/mechanization of
relatively low-end service jobs as well as continued automation of
traditional factory work.
They predicted a 40% unemployment at the time as I remember. I
noted that because, automation hit our town on the reservation and
cut it by one third and robotics almost eliminated the mines as a
user of citizen labor.
I've seen the same phenomena in a couple of different places, but not
with as dire a consequence as you've seen because it was more spread
out over time and other organizations were able to absorb at least
some of the resultant labor surplus. Plus, movement to other cities
was still a viable option for many working families. It is
interesting to also note that when a primary breadwinner suffers a
period of unemployment, there will be an impact on the children in
such a way that the children's later earnings tend to be significantly
less than their parents' earnings. This is based on research conducted
in Canada in the 1980s, when a number of single-employer communities
experienced plant closings and other economic disruptions.
I do remember that 40% number because the productivity lag with all
Arts Organizations is 40% as well. An accident or a parallel?
Very interesting observation. I'm not sufficiently conversant with the
Arts to comment, but I would assume similar underlying mechanisms at
work here.
Might this simply be a way that the market adjusts itself to lower
expectations through outsourcing and over speculation so that
America will not rebel at a two tier society?
Yes, that's likely to be the case. It also may be the market's way of
returning America to a more traditional way of social organization.
Historically, I'd have to say that a large middle class seems to be an
aberration and that a 2-tier society (or possibly a 3-tier society) is
closer to the norm. It seems that we've typically relied on wars and
diseases to keep the lower classes from becoming too onerous (culling
the population and keeping the masses in an 'us vs. them' mode of
thought while making sure the 'them' is never the upper class that
controls the country (both directly and indirectly). There also seem
to be religious connotations to the act of war, in particular, that
may be relevant also. I believe you've tried to discuss this before in
one context or another.
Is Canada next?
I'm not sufficiently conversant with Canadian society to attempt an
answer to this. Perhaps some others could?
I still question whether this version of a market is really efficient.
I'm not convinced that efficiency of the market is really a
significant consideration. To me it seems to be more about control/
differentiation of the classes (us vs. them mentality again), and
possibly other things.
Are the Chinese the future with their communist committees of
technocrats?
Seems to be the future for China, at least for now. I don't think this
model could be easily imported to America at this time. Too much anti-
science demagoguery that has been used to gain and maintain influence.
Are Europeans epigenetically equipped to deal with the entrainment
that the average Chinese accepts as normal and good?
I don't think we even need to rely on epigenetic explanations to allow
for this. Cultural differences and background learning will account
for it quite nicely, with a liberal sprinkling of symbol manipulation
and cultural-level brainwashing.
Barry
REH
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]
] On Behalf Of Robert Stennett
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2010 1:29 PM
To: EDUCATION RE-DESIGNING WORK INCOME DISTRIBUTION
Subject: [Futurework] declining incomes....
Two articles came to me today from different sources. Taken
together, they paint a bleak future for working-class and middle-
class people for the foreseeable future. Comments?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-l-borosage/americas-confidence-defic_b_787987.html?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=112410&utm_medium=email&utm_content=FeatureTitle&utm_term=Daily+Brief
"The furious debate over how best to cut the deficit illustrates the
point. The debate is about how we best enforce austerity.....This is
a debate about who takes the hit. It is likely to turn ugly. There
are progressive answers and regressive ones; some that make more
sense, and some that make less.....it is possible to balance the
budget by taking more from the Pentagon, hiking corporate taxes, and
preserving Social Security....This debate rises from what has become
a bipartisan elite consensus, reinforced by a multimillion dollar
public relations campaign seeded by Pete Peterson, a Wall Street
billionaire, who has been rousing alarms about deficits for decades,
and is intent on using the current crisis to enforce the turn to
austerity. But if there is one thing we should have learned over the
years, it is that Americans should be particularly wary about
bipartisan elite consensus...."
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/11/24-2
The outlines of a massive new structural downshift in wages are
emerging more and more clearly.
The largest wage-cutting wave since the Great Depression has already
been sweeping the United States for the last couple years in
response to the Great Recession. At small firms, many of these pay
cuts have been viewed as a temporary means of reducing costs until
the recession is fully ended.
The pervasiveness of this trend undoubtedly leads much of the public
to assume large corporations are merely seeking the same temporary
relief as small firms when they demand concessions in high-profile
negotiations. The workers' pay will surely rise back to previous
levels when the situation improves for the company, as occurred
during the 1980s, right?
Not this time around.The recession camouflages a far more insidious
and long-lasting corporate strategy: Instead of temporary pay cuts
to get through a few tough months, major corporations have something
very, very different in mind.
As NY Times economics reporter and The Disposable American author
Louis Uchitelle wrote on Sunday, major firms are on the verge of
consolidating a long-sought goal with a two-tier wage system:
The managers of some marquee companies are aiming to make this
concession permanent. If they are successful, their contracts could
become blueprints for other companies in other cities, extending a
wage system that would be a startling retreat for labor.
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
