It seems to me that both Jones and Jed have pointed out valid perceptions concerning the future of employment and standard of living issues.
I offer a fable of sorts: Simple economics tells us that if you pay one hundred workers (out of a total work force of 200) 100 credits a week to work 40 hours a week, and if those "employed" 100 workers produce 100 All-Purpose-Widgits (APWs) which conveniently retail for 100 credits each then we have 100 reasonably content "full employed" workers who can afford to purchase a single APW. Meanwhile there also exists another 100 able-bodied workers who are just as skilled at manufacturing the same APWs but due to the current "full employment" issue, they are unable to find work. As such, they are unable to purchase their own APWs. The employment situation is not at 100% but actually at 50%. While half the work force can enjoy the benefits of their personal APW, half the work force can't, and are on welfare. Seems to me the obvious simple-economics solution everyone ought to Grok is three-fold: (1) lower over-all energy costs involved in producing APWs, (2) increase over-all efficiency in the manufacturing of APWs, and (3) redistribute employment amongst ALL able-bodied workers. If energy costs are driven to fractional costs (which future energy sources, like CF, might produce) combined with increases in production efficiency the result could turn into a situation where soon it might only take 50 workers each working 40 hours a week at 100 credits to manufacture 400 APWs, and for a cost of only 25 credits each. Now we only need to employ 50 fully-employed workers who are now capable or purchasing 4 APWs all for themselves. Meanwhile, 150 are now on welfare and are incapable of purchasing a single APW. Oh well... election season is just around the corner. Time for another revolution! The welfare masses revolt! They force the 50 fully-employed "haves" to relinquish 3 of their 4 APWs. This comes to a total of 350 confiscated unused APWs. The confiscated APWS are subsequently distributed (more or less evenly) to the remaining 150 unemployed workers. Everyone on welfare gets at least 2 APWs. A lucky few end up with 3! At least now all 200 workers (those working as well as those on welfare) have at least one APW each, and the majority voting bloc has at least 2! Of course, while all 150 unemployed workers currently on welfare are ecstatic about this new arrangement, it stands to reason that the remaining 50 employed workers are not! But who cares about what the 50 fully-employed think! When voting time comes around the majority block of 150 unemployed (on welfare) always seem to get their agenda passed. The wishes of the bloc of the 50 employed are always voted down. Ultimately, a more equitable solution, a solution that would hopefully get everyone back on the same voting track, is to employ the entire workforce, all 200 of them. But to do that each able-bodied worker must only work 10 hours a week. Of course, that means everyone is now only paid 25 credits a week - but who cares! Each APW only costs 25 credits. So, everyone is adequately employed and everyone can adequately afford a least one APW. We still end up with a surplus of 200 APWs. Might as well distribute them evenly amongst everyone. Or... perhaps we can set up a raffle! The winner takes all! Who doesn't luv a long-shot bet, especially if its free! We are now left with a hopefully desirable dilemma of what to do with those extra 30 hours of freed up work time? One would hope the laws of economics can assist in ways to increase the current credit supply such that all 200 able-bodied workers, who want to, can find additional "work" so that they can purchase additional products, as well as creative ways to fritter away their free time. Perhaps 50 of them figure out a way to start manufacturing 200 Enhanced All Purpose Widits (EAPWs) at a cost of 10 credits each, and they only have to work 10 hours a week each to do that. Perhaps another 25 figure out a way to manufacture 200 All Purpose Entertainment Devices (APEDs) also at a cost of 10 credits each, and also at 10 hours a week each. But at present all 200 "employed" workers can't afford a single EAPW or APED because they would have to earn a total 45 credits in order to purchase all three products. And even if 50 of them DO become employed and earn another 10 credits a week, only 50 out of the total 200 EAPWs end up being purchased. That means 150 of the total work force can't afford purchasing any EAPWs. Same issue holds true for APEDs. Only 25 can be employed to manufacture 200 APEDs, meaning 175 workers end up not being able to afford purchasing APEDs. Once again, we end up with a dilemma of huge surpluses of EAPWs and APEDs. Once again, the ugly head of welfare returns! Another round of voting occurs. Surplus EAPWs and APEDs end up getting "confiscated" and evenly distributed amongst all 200 - until one again someone gets the idea of evenly distributing the amount of labor involved amongst all 200 workers. That might increase the over-all work force to 12 - 15 hours a week. Meanwhile, every able-bodied work still possesses 25 hours of free time to fritter away! Oh oh! Now someone has just figured out a way to manufacture 600 APWs employing only 5 individuals and at only 5 hours a week each. Game over! What will we do now!!!! I have a feeling certain constituents, particularly ultra-conservative, right winged, god fearing self-proclaimed Christians who might feel it is their god-given right to work for a living, and as such, "earn" the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor and subsequently be better off than their neighbor are going to have a difficult time adjusting to this brave new world. For example, how will they be able to determine if their god-given right to be better off than their neighbor has any meaning? Yeah, yeah. I know I'm showing extreme prejudice against god-fearing ultra-conservative right-winged Christians. Me bad. Oh, BTW, Frank... I though you also made several valid comments. But alas, my turgid essay is way too long as it is. Maybe all get around to you in a sequel. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
