Hmmm...I may not understand the economic theory well enough, but I can look around and see...
~Persistent homelessness of those with mental challenges and no effective initiatives from government or private sources to ameliorate the problem in a meaningful way;
~Ongoing battles over minimum wage, where the taxpayers are subsidizing big business through the earned income tax rather than forcing businesses (think the Walmarts of life) to pay a living wage rather than having more and more of the profits going to those who need it the least;
~Ongoing reduction of health care, food, child care resources for the working poor among us, with minimum impact by private charity.
If the focus is always on "once you've got it government (or someone else) can't take it away from you by force, and we have no corresponding way for people to actually get the resources, then we will forever have the gap.
Or am I missing something (which is always a possibility)?
Catharyn
Catharyn Baird
Founder/CEO
720-599-3825 Direct Dial
303-927-8466 Cell
888-248-6974 Office
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kurt Schulzke
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 10:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: A World Without Work
Interesting. But does anyone actually believe "people shouldn't get anything if they haven't worked for it?" Sounds vaguely like the labor theory of value.*
Certainly, welfare-state advocates don't believe it. And neither do the free-market/property-rights folks, many if not most of whom freely give (some very generously) to others. I think the philosophy is more along the lines of "Property accrues to one through hard work, others' generosity, and luck of the draw. Once acquired it should generally not be taken by government force."** The question isn't so much how you got it; it's how it can or can't be taken away.
This leaves plenty of room for just about anyone to acquire "things" without "working" for them though, admittedly, those who already have lots of things are in a better position to accumulate more things unless/until they squander them all through "meaningless debauchery" in Oregon, California, or Colorado.
* About which, Steven Horwitz has a great piece at https://fee.org/articles/were-still-haunted-by-the-labor-theory-of-value/.
** Except for "economic development" in small towns in Connecticut or large cities in Michigan.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Catharyn Baird" <[log in to unmask]>
To: "Academy of Legal Studies in Business" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 9:58:45 AM
Subject: Re: A World Without Work
Dear Richard:
Thank you! The questions you posed have been running around my head for some time: what do we do when robots replace us all. The question was heightened by an article I read praising the new research technology that would replace paralegals and entry-level attorneys.
Every time I ask one of my thoughtful friends on either side of the political aisle the question, no-one wants to even entertain the question.
Add to the mix the notion that a deep human need is the need to contribute-to make a difference. Some of the most unhappy people I know are those who have a silver spoon and haven't figured out what to do with their inherited wealth other than live a life of meaningless debauchery-in Colorado that often means a marijuana induced haze.
And then the question you raise about the redistribution of wealth is daunting. When a deep value is that people shouldn't get anything if they haven't worked for it, any conversation about redistribution will have to address changing that core belief. As we all know, changing core beliefs is more than a notion.
However, if we keep raising the question, thinking about possible answers, and getting the ideas out into the general political conversation, we may be able to start to engage the conversation in a meaningful way.
I'd love to hear what others think about how best to address caring for all citizens in a post-work/robot enhanced economy.
Catharyn
Catharyn Baird
Founder/CEO
720-599-3825 Direct Dial
303-927-8466 Cell
888-248-6974 Office
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
[cid:image001.jpg@01D2423A.C065A930]
From: Academy of Legal Studies in Business (ALSB) Talk [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kunkel, Richard G.
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 7:23 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: A World Without Work
Dear ALSBTalk Friends,
I am writing to share some thoughts on one of the principal forces thought to have influenced the recent election results. No comments will be made about any candidate and no ad hominems about anyone! It is safe to keep reading, I think.
1) The Ripple. Much ink has been spilled about the impact of globalization, the recession, and free trade deals on a large number of jobs for people without the education and skills to work in the jobs of the New Economy, especially in the areas outside cities. Well-paid productive work is necessary for people to provide for their families, their health care, their retirement. We also derive a great deal of pride and self-fulfillment and identity from our work. Our culture respects and rewards productive work. Even if we accept as a fact of economic truth that globalization produces the overall best results for society, those left behind will not be comforted much. When one is unemployed or underemployed, and one envisions little hope of things improving, they will vote their pocketbooks, and their pride, for change. As the winning candidate for President in 1992 said, "it's the economy, stupid". That part seems rational enough, it has been occurring in elections for decades. Some might even revert to their most base instincts by placing blame on unrelated forces. That would not be rational, they would be acting out of anger or other negative emotion, and this must be rejected. They might also select a form of change that may be unlikely to be successful or even counter-productive. Change for the sake of change. That would not be rational either, and the results of the current electoral change remain to be seen. I thought this article did a good job of discussing the forces that influenced the election results.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/14/one-of-hillary-clintons-top-aides-nailed-exactly-why-she-lost/
2) The Wave. Globalization has had a big impact on the current distribution of economic benefits through paid productive work. Technology will provide an even bigger shock in coming years. If you want income to support your family and secure your future, you provide labor and skills that are needed in the economy in order to be compensated. Technology and artificial intelligence will very soon begin to replace even more human workers in the economy. If a big part of the economic distribution system is based on compensation for productive work done by human workers, and that productive work is transferred to even-more-productive and efficient machines run by highly intelligent computers, then on what basis to we fairly distribute the economic gains of society when many will not have the skills to do the work demanded of the Techno-Economy?? Do we distribute the benefits of this highly efficient New Economy only to the highly skilled, creating a two-tiered society?? Or do the gains go primarily to investors who finance the machines, rather than human laborers? Even if all workers could be trained in those new skills (doubtful), we would not need all of them to produce what the economy needs. Technology will be an even greater force of disruption than globalization, and/or will multiply the effects of globalization. How do we move human workers to jobs that cannot be replaced by intelligent machines, and ensure that they are paid well enough to support our families? This article discusses the need for our public policy to anticipate the economy disruption that new technologies will cause, and be prepared to deal with the human consequences.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2016/11/03/the-government-failed-u-s-workers-on-global-trade-it-must-do-better-on-technology/?tid=hybrid_content_2_na
3) The Tsunami. I saw this article a while back and thought it was very thought provoking. I think the predictions in the article will come true, at least to some degree. I have sent the article to my kids and asked them to think about it. I doubt they are thinking about it very much right now, but the nature of their work, careers and families will undergo tremendous changes, for sure. Wouldn't it be great to be freed from the demands of work? Many of us on the list are nearing retirement age and may be thinking about how nice that would be! What if we were freed from work when we had young families?? THAT would have been really great! Maybe it can happen for our kids. But we will need to find ways of distributing economic gains fairly, that place less emphasis on human productive work, and/or shift humans to activities that cannot be done by machines (and perhaps pay them to do the things that are crowded-out by today's demand for work -comfort the elderly, read to a child, play with a child, walk in nature, etc. to name a few). This will be a big social upheaval for sure. Our public policies need to be prepared for it. Bringing back 1950s-style high-paid manufacturing jobs will be a short term fix that may alleviate some current worker angst, but it is not a long term solution.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/07/world-without-work/395294/
So there it is - just something I have been thinking about for a while that seems to connect to the current electoral situation. Changes wrought by globalization ripple through the current economy, the wave of technology and automation will hit the economic shore soon enough, and the tsunami of a world without work will swamp our economic and social order. As educators, we can play an important role by recognizing the coming changes and talking with our students about them.
Best wishes to all ALSBTalkers for a Happy Thanksgiving with friends and family. Whether one is disappointed, elated, confused, or indifferent to the recent elections, I think we can agree that those reading this list serve have been incredibly blessed and have much indeed to be thankful for. I certainly do. And even though we have many, many big problems to solve in our country, every U.S citizen and/or resident has much to be thankful for in comparison with others suffering around the world.
Also best wishes to all for a joyous holiday season.
Rick Kunkel
[http://static.stthomas.edu/email/disclaimer-logo.png]<http://www.stthomas.edu/e>
|
