Ray,
Maybe your family is more than averagely fertile, the fact remains
that all West European countries are now about to tip into steep
population decline (barring attempts by politicians to encourage more
immigration -- no matter how unskilled or uneducated the immigrants
may be) and there's every indication that America will follow.
I'm surprised that you (or anybody else on FW) have not taken up the
corollary which I left dangling in my previous posting. If the mass
consumer base is declining then so will mass profits and thus so will
the overgrown banking class of the last 30 years or so. Well . . .
that's an interesting talking point, isn't it? Mankind has always had
the rich (an inevitable product of our instinctive tendency to
rank-ordering, of course). So who will constitute the new rich class
once the politicians have placed the existing crop of irresponsible
bankers safely under wraps? What other new high-profit specialization
will arise and start to be given privileges by the ever-corruptible
politicians?
Keith
At 16:33 10/11/2012, you wrote:
That's funny Keith, My fundamentalist Christian sister had four
kids and each of those kids have had four kids and now she has great
grand children. Her church of radical Republicans are rabid about
stopping abortions and they are trying to make up the
difference. My relatives from Slovenia living in Ohio all have at
least two kids. Family reunions are sixty to hundred
people. The people with only one child like myself work in the
sectors where work is hard and demands many hours of unpaid labor
leaving little time for children. The wealthy however are a
different matter. They play at work and don't replace themselves
because of the battles when people die. Maybe it's different in
England but it isn't in Scotland or Ireland according to the ones
still immigrating to America to wait tables and work in the
theater. The model of value is still the issue. The current
economic system is bankrupt but I've said this so much even I'm
bored with saying it.
REH
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 3:46 AM
To: [email protected]; Ed Weick
Subject: Re: [Futurework] AlterNet: Is Our Future Going to Be
Keeping Rich People Happy in a Servant Economy?
At 00:44 10/11/2012, Ed wrote:
Keith, I can't figure out whether you're being an optimist or a
pessimist. Why do you see the 99% becoming the 10%? Will it be
because they have risen into a state of contentment or because we've
gotten rid of them in some punitive way?
I'm actually trying to be realistic. Assuming that, by the "99%" you
meant the average guy/family, I meant that, for the last 30 years,
parents have been unable to afford to raise enough children (2.1 per
woman) to maintain their numbers. There's no evidence that this is
likely to change in the next 30 years.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:[email protected]>Keith Hudson
To: <mailto:[email protected]>RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME
DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION ; <mailto:[email protected]>Ed Weick
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] AlterNet: Is Our Future Going to Be
Keeping Rich People Happy in a Servant Economy?
At 10:48 09/11/2012, Ed wrote:
Decline of unions; technological displacement of skilled workers;
jobs sent off to where they can be done more cheaply; rise of the
financial sector; political power of the 1% and subservient
governments; universities and colleges crammed with young people who
have nothing else to do = growth of the servant class. But
wait! What about the growing anger of the 99%, revolution & chaos?
Because they (the 99% -- more exactly, about 80% of present
populations) have no economic firepower against other power-holders,
Furthermore, the "99%" will become no more than 10% well within a
couple of generations.
Keith
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:[email protected]>Keith Hudson
To: <mailto:[email protected]>RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME
DISTRIBUTION,EDUCATION
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Futurework] AlterNet: Is Our Future Going to Be
Keeping Rich People Happy in a Servant Economy?
Sally's right. The rise of temporary workers fits with a possible
recreation of a personal servant class. (As in the 19th century?)
But this was only possible in a world of the new industrialist rich
and a new professional middle class who were living off the profits
of mass produced goods and a large consumer market which was
building upwards from classes at the lowest levels of poverty.
Today, we're in an entirely new situation with a declining consumer
population, Most parents can't afford to buy both the requisite
number of status goods (in and around their house) and also to raise
and educate enough replacement children. The previous "growth"
economy of America, Japan and Western Europe started slowing down
seriously 30 years ago, Mean wages in all these countries started
declining in the late '80s and the only way governments kept their
GDPs growing (that is, notionally) was by unleashing credit and
allowing the banks to run riot.
Keith
At 21:01 08/11/2012, you wrote:
Is Our Future Going to Be Keeping Rich People Happy in a Servant Economy?
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
