Brad McCormick, Ed.D. wrote:
> Ray E. Harrell wrote:
> >
> > Brad McCormick, Ed.D. wrote:
> >
> > > Ray E. Harrell wrote:
> [snip]
> > I'm reminded of a friend doing research on fish behaviorat the New York
> > Museum of Natural History. He is a
> > psychologist and quit the team because he s
tom abeles wrote:
>Tom Walker wrote, in part:
>
> What has been
>> occuring instead is an INCREASED reliance on increasingly meaningless (to
>> productivity) criteria of hours of work, job tenure and individual
>> performance. What this means in practice is not "reward commensurate with
>> contri
Tom Walker wrote, in part:
What has been
> occuring instead is an INCREASED reliance on increasingly meaningless (to
> productivity) criteria of hours of work, job tenure and individual
> performance. What this means in practice is not "reward commensurate with
> contribution" but a winner take
Michael Gurstein is right to distinguish between the end of work and the end
of jobs as we know them. As a parent, I can say for certain that the work
never ends. Not only may the number of those employed increase, as Mike
suggests. Many of those employed will be employed at more "jobs"
So at the end of the last century we had the "end of the
frontier" and now we have the end of "work", "jobs",
whatever, for the end of this one. I suspect a valid
case could be made for what John Warfield calls
"small information envelope" type of thou
ces close in North America
and Euorpe. Slave labor (which corrupt governments support) threatens real
jobs everywhere.
Michael Gurstein wrote:
> One thing seems to be overlooked in the "end of work" argument--both
> pro and con. While the evidence is still unclear as to whether
&
One thing seems to be overlooked in the "end of work" argument--both
pro and con. While the evidence is still unclear as to whether
there is a net positive or negative impact of technology on the number of
jobs, there seems little doubt that technology is having a significant
imp
rity, and, at a more profound level,
that give life meaning and make life worthwhile.
---end---
-Original Message-
From: Mark Measday <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Victor Milne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Ed Weick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Futurework
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Decemb
A ritual response to Jeremy Rifkin's argument about the end of work was to
accuse him of committing a supposed "lump-of-labor" fallacy that there is
only a given amount of work to be done and that if machines do the work
there will be less for people to do. The Economist magazin
TABLE
> at http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/
>
> -----Original Message-
> From: Ed Weick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Futurework <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: November 22, 1998 4:25 PM
> Subject: Re: The end of work?
>
>
> Of course there would remain work worth doing such as nursing and =
> educating children. The question is who is willing to fund it? As was =
> pointed out in a paper on the CCPA website, under our present distorted =
> system of accounting, the production and sale of a golf ball is counted =
:
You might as well know it --- I'm not a
Rifkin fan. I have two of his books on my shelves, one about the end
of work, the other about beef. I'm not surprise that he is now turning
his considerable ability to pontificate toward biotechnology. He is a
little
BLEat http://www3.sympatico.ca/pat-vic/
-Original Message-From:
Ed Weick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To:
Futurework <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Date:
November 22, 1998 4:25 PMSubject: Re: The end of
work?
Ed
Wrote:
Thomas
Lunde:
Your thesis of growth from
original idea to larger employment is well buttressed by several
historical examples. However, the computer has the potential in
speed and computing power to
Ed Wrote:
All of these? I would suggest there will be no end of work.
Ed Weick
Thomas:
Your thesis of growth from original idea
to larger employment is well buttressed by several historical
examples. However, the computer has the potential in speed and
As several people have pointed out, the idea
that work could end for a large proportion of human society has been around for
a very long time. But might it really? Let’s think about it.
Technological development has probably always
been a two stage process. The first stage involved finding
16 matches
Mail list logo
