Small Obscure Political Party Loses its Leader

[Nick]

I explained how any costs borne by increased pay for the low paid would be shared by everybody. So the low paid earn much more than their share of additional costs because those costs are being shared much more widely.

It is mathematically obvious. In effect the low paid would gain substantially at the cost of everyone perhaps paying slightly more for the products of their labour.

That is just a theory, you haven't put any numbers to it. IE how much the rate goes up, what product, price before and after.

[Borchester]

It is to avoid such a dystopian future that some form of radical intervention like a universal basic income will be necessary. If it doesn't happen, your future is what awaits and since the necessary consumer spending could never be maintained, a massive and devastating economic contraction would be inherent to that future, a future which is therefore in the interests of no one.

Oh bless, Pappy is back 

[srb7677]

Having spent some time studying reality occurring around me ...


What will ACTUALLY happen is that more and more ever more lowly paid work will go to those desperate enough to pursue it across globalised industries while the rest just die off, not through starvation as happens in places like India where they don't give a flying f**k about the poor, but through diseases brought on by rough sleeping as fewer and fewer have jobs and basic housing....

It is to avoid such a dystopian future that some form of radical intervention like a universal basic income will be necessary. If it doesn't happen, your future is what awaits and since the necessary consumer spending could never be maintained, a massive and devastating economic contraction would be inherent to that future, a future which is therefore in the interests of no one.

[johnofgwent]

Quite true, Steve. It won't happen in my lifetime but something like this will occur but how it will evolve could be a subject of a science fiction book. Continued automation and AI developments have already changed societies hugely and will continue to do so. More people will have to be supported without necessarily contributing to anything physically produced. It has already happened to some extent with the development of a "service" economy but I can't see this expanding to completely fill the void produced by ever growing automation. However this works out, the transition and, specifically, how people are to be rewarded (or simply awarded) to have the means to live, and in a fair way, remains to be seen. A gradually lengthening weekend perhaps.

It will be a situation where more people have to be supported without them contributing to society in any tangible way. The disparities between the rich and poor have moved to a large extent from inherited wealth (though far from completely as wealth buys better education and life chances) and more towards a meritocracy plus a good deal of luck. Hopefully it will be better!

Having spent some time studying reality occurring around me ...


What will ACTUALLY happen is that more and more ever more lowly paid work will go to those desperate enough to pursue it across globalised industries while the rest just die off, not through starvation as happens in places like India where they don't give a flying F@@@ about the poor, but through diseases brought on by rough sleeping as fewer and fewer have jobs and basic housing....

[srb7677]

You haven't explained anything, you just make a statement and then don't back it up.

I explained how any costs borne by increased pay for the low paid would be shared by everybody. So the low paid earn much more than their share of additional costs because those costs are being shared much more widely.

It is mathematically obvious. In effect the low paid would gain substantially at the cost of everyone perhaps paying slightly more for the products of their labour.

[Nick]

I explained it simply enough. You just failed to understand it. Ican't understand it for you

You haven't explained anything, you just make a statement and then don't back it up.

[srb7677]

Just as I thought, you can't back up a word you said.

I explained it simply enough. You just failed to understand it. Ican't understand it for you

[grumzed]

Two well thought out posts, by the way technology has become something that is feared because of the way it has been used to restrict more and more freedoms, it should have made lives better, instead it has been used to make lives worse and those left behind feeling confused and angry, it is no longer a thing of wonder, but a thing of control, probably because the wrong people got hold of it in the first place.

Thanks Sheepy. I appreciate that. I doubt it will all be bad though. The main thing is to be aware of the impacts of new developments, of which technology is a huge part. Humans are nothing if not adaptable and it's up to humans to use the technology and then muddle through to, at least, end up in a better situation, even if only slightly better.

[Nick]

Ah, so it's all about you not wanting to pay your staff a decent wage, I get it. Me, me, me in action again.

Just as I thought, you can't back up a word you said.

[Sheepy]

Quite true, Steve. It won't happen in my lifetime but something like this will occur but how it will evolve could be a subject of a science fiction book. Continued automation and AI developments have already changed societies hugely and will continue to do so. More people will have to be supported without necessarily contributing to anything physically produced. It has already happened to some extent with the development of a "service" economy but I can't see this expanding to completely fill the void produced by ever growing automation. However this works out, the transition and, specifically, how people are to be rewarded (or simply awarded) to have the means to live, and in a fair way, remains to be seen. A gradually lengthening weekend perhaps.

It will be a situation where more people have to be supported without them contributing to society in any tangible way. The disparities between the rich and poor have moved to a large extent from inherited wealth (though far from completely as wealth buys better education and life chances) and more towards a meritocracy plus a good deal of luck. Hopefully it will be better!

Two well thought out posts, by the way technology has become something that is feared because of the way it has been used to restrict more and more freedoms, it should have made lives better, instead it has been used to make lives worse and those left behind feeling confused and angry, it is no longer a thing of wonder, but a thing of control, probably because the wrong people got hold of it in the first place.

[grumzed]

We have an economy utterly dependent upon consumer spending yet which requires ever fewer man hours of labour. This is not sustainable in the long run. Ultimately we all need to be working less yet our incomes need to be maintained to continue the necessary level of consumer spending. So unless somehow we are all going to be able to work fewer hours for the same money - probably not economically feasible - we will need to work less for correspondingly less money and have our incomes topped up by some form of universal basic income, which can be introduced gradually at a very low level to start with.

We need to think boldly to avoid total economic collapse at some point. An economy providing ever fewer paid hours of work yet as dependent as ever upon a high level of consumer spending is going to implode at some point without radical intervention of some kind.

Quite true, Steve. It won't happen in my lifetime but something like this will occur but how it will evolve could be a subject of a science fiction book. Continued automation and AI developments have already changed societies hugely and will continue to do so. More people will have to be supported without necessarily contributing to anything physically produced. It has already happened to some extent with the development of a "service" economy but I can't see this expanding to completely fill the void produced by ever growing automation. However this works out, the transition and, specifically, how people are to be rewarded (or simply awarded) to have the means to live, and in a fair way, remains to be seen. A gradually lengthening weekend perhaps.

It will be a situation where more people have to be supported without them contributing to society in any tangible way. The disparities between the rich and poor have moved to a large extent from inherited wealth (though far from completely as wealth buys better education and life chances) and more towards a meritocracy plus a good deal of luck. Hopefully it will be better!

[srb7677]

I can see that my cack handed attempts at wit are not always seen as being as witty as I had hoped.

So, ok, here I am in full dreary bastard mode.

I started out nearly 60 years ago as a marine engineer and my first ship was an ocean going giant of 13,500 tons and with a crew of 43. We worked a minimum of 8 hours a day, 7 days a week and I saw men come out of the engine room crying, not because they had hurt themselves but because they were so bloody tired.

A while back a friend retired and at his piss up told me about his last ship. It was an average sized boat of 100,000 tons with a crew of 27 and if anything went wrong they limped into port and as often as not had the engine or whatever was replaced.

When I joined HMRC a quarter of the staff were typists and once a week we would settle in and hand write the numbers into the tax demands. Nowadays computers have replaced the typists and issue demands automatically.

I could find a zillion other examples but the bottom line is that we need less and less people and yet the streets are not full of the bodies of ex seamen and typists who have died of want. What has happened is that we can afford more and more Mickey Mouse jobs that will continue to get softer and softer until folk only turn up for work because they are so bloody bored sitting on their arses.

We have an economy utterly dependent upon consumer spending yet which requires ever fewer man hours of labour. This is not sustainable in the long run. Ultimately we all need to be working less yet our incomes need to be maintained to continue the necessary level of consumer spending. So unless somehow we are all going to be able to work fewer hours for the same money - probably not economically feasible - we will need to work less for correspondingly less money and have our incomes topped up by some form of universal basic income, which can be introduced gradually at a very low level to start with.

We need to think boldly to avoid total economic collapse at some point. An economy providing ever fewer paid hours of work yet as dependent as ever upon a high level of consumer spending is going to implode at some point without radical intervention of some kind.

[Borchester]

∆∆∆   
Was that the period when they were wearing colourful blazers, starting work at 4 am, being paid funny money, and downing magnums of champagne on Friday nights...?

No, that was in the days when they all had silver straws and snorted a few lines of coke on Monday morning. We were quite sympathetic to their plight until we got a very brisk Gujarati manager who would ignore their pleas that their bonuses had gone up their noses and tell them

(a) to get a cheaper dealer

(b) they had three months to pay 

[cromwell]

[highlight]I can see that my cack handed attempts at wit are not always seen as being as witty as I had hoped.[/highlight]

So, ok, here I am in full dreary bastard mode.

I started out nearly 60 years ago as a marine engineer and my first ship was an ocean going giant of 13,500 tons and with a crew of 43. We worked a minimum of 8 hours a day, 7 days a week and I saw men come out of the engine room crying, not because they had hurt themselves but because they were so bloody tired.

A while back a friend retired and at his piss up told me about his last ship. It was an average sized boat of 100,000 tons with a crew of 27 and if anything went wrong they limped into port and as often as not had the engine or whatever was replaced.

When I joined HMRC a quarter of the staff were typists and once a week we would settle in and hand write the numbers into the tax demands. Nowadays computers have replaced the typists and issue demands automatically.

I could find a zillion other examples but the bottom line is that we need less and less people and yet the streets are not full of the bodies of ex seamen and typists who have died of want. What has happened is that we can afford more and more Mickey Mouse jobs that will continue to get softer and softer until folk only turn up for work because they are so bloody bored sitting on their arses.

Oh I dunno Borky your wit does not escape me (or I suspect many others)

[patman post]

∆∆∆   
Was that the period when they were wearing colourful blazers, starting work at 4 am, being paid funny money, and downing magnums of champagne on Friday nights...?