On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 12:53 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Che,
> You have outlined the problems and while you maybe right if the political
> system doesn't change, there are possible solutions. As I wrote last year:
>
> "History shows that when wealth inequality reaches a certain point,
> unless it is redistributed there will be a revolution. There are
> examples of both ways: Rome failed to redistribute and the Western Roman
> Empire collapsed. Athens managed to redistribute wealth and survived
> for a while. Will Durant’s book *The Lessons of History* gives many
> examples. Durant also points out that following redistribution of
> wealth the government must allow its reaccumulation by the few to ensure
> future progress. The failure of Communism in Russia showed what happens
> if you ignore human nature and don’t allow that.
>
> One possible way of avoiding the looming conflict is conversion to a
> welfare system like the Scandinavian countries employ. It does seem to
> be successful for them and surveys show they are considered the best places
> to live. At least it might be a good transitional route.
>
> The other possibility is a guaranteed Universal Basic Income (UBI), high
> enough to live on, given to every adult citizen in the country with no
> strings attached. Many object to the thought of giving money to the idle.
> Free marketers have to face the obvious, which is that the modern American
> economy doesn’t provide enough income distribution to preserve civility in
> our society. Some say it is only sharing society’s accumulated wealth. I
> will leave the moral justification to others. The main objective is to
> avoid a revolution that would cost a lot more than UBI both in blood and
> treasure. "
>
> AA
>
Will and Ariel Durant. lol. I outgrew that 'Readers' Digest' version of
History shite, decades ago.
Property owners always want to avoid a revolution, eh? But they don't mind
massacring the wogs.
There's only one solution to this crisis, eh? Yours is the typical
avoidance mechanism: attempting to put off the inevitable. Wholly
diversionary and pie-in-the-sky (what we're invariably accused of, in
defence). In any case: capitalist AI *will* continue to cast off jobs,
lower the rate of profit -- and the Crisis of Capitalism *will* continue
unabated: until we either all die in a nuclear holocaust, or overthrow it
for Socialism.
There Is No (Third Way) Alternative.
>
>
>
>
> On 10/23/2016 11:54 AM, Che wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 2:47 PM, a.ashfield <a.ashfi...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>> It could have been written more clearly with half the number of words.
>> They seem to think that displaced workers can be retrained for better
>> jobs, something that seems increasingly unlikely with current graduates
>> dead last in the world in math and science.
>>
>
> I'm sure Peter Gluck will get all apoplectic over this, but it needs
> pointing out that the apologists of the Capitalist order *lie*
> (contextually, anyway), when they talk about workers being 're-trained',
> after being replaced by automation. It is *well* understood -- and has been
> for over 150 years -- that automation is the *main* means whereby
> Capitalism replace Labor in the labor process. It is the *main* means by
> which labor costs are reduced (there are other, more immediate, cruder
> ways). This is, however, Capitalism's Achilles Heel: because Labor is in
> fact the *source* of profit ('Surplus-Value', technically. Another lie is
> that bourgeois 'Marginal Utility' theory, et al., is the real way profit is
> realized).
>
> When you automate people out of jobs, not only is there less money racing
> around in the economy (empty pockets), but what you have actually done is
> *increase the ratio of machine processes to Human processes in the
> production cycle* (the 'organic composition of capital'). This will
> actually cheapen the price of goods, because fewer inputs -- and less Human
> labor -- are involved in the production cycle (economies-of-scale are
> another aspect of this factor); however, since Labor *is* the source of
> Surplus-Value -- and there is less of it per unit in increasingly automated
> processes -- *the rate of profit per unit declines, as well*. This is an
> 'iron law' of capitalism which the capitalists will absolutely NEVER
> overcome -- their lies and beliefs and pious wishes notwithstanding.
>
> So our present teknologikal society really *is* heading into a dead-end
> under Capitalism. Thus WWIII (because of the pressing need of various
> cabals of capitalists being 'forced' to invade other groups' turf, in order
> to steal resources and markets, to make up for the decline in the rate of
> profit overall). Building out of the ruins of war also yields temporary
> profits... but this next war will likely have far fewer survivors than the
> last 3 (I consider the '7 Years' War' to be the actual first World war).
>
> If you're honest (intellectually or otherwise), you can see that this is a
> vicious circle with 'only one' ending -- assuming you have the usual
> ideological tunnel-vision.
>
>
>
>
>
>> In the section on LAWS - lethal autonomous weapons - they miss the point
>> that an unscrupulous enemy like ISIS could develop or modify a Western
>> development, to kill any human. If they don't have to worry about moral
>> values.
>> I can imagine a small anomalous, lethal drone that could be made in large
>> numbers and once LENR becomes available have an indefinite flight time.
>> At least they are thinking about it.
>>
>> AA
>>
>
> Capitalism has no future -- other than death for all Humanity.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> Frank Znidarsic wrote:
>>
>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_
>> files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf
>>
>>
>>
>
>
