|
Termyn8or -> RE: Chinese Manufacturers Looking to Replace Workers with Machines (6/23/2010 8:29:26 AM)
|
Hunky I am almost sururpised you ask that. They care very much what China wants and China cares very much what they want.
Now this is just another time we get bitten in the ass, but it's actually not anyone's fault. This reminds me of an old episode of Twilight Zone or something. But who's fault is it ? And where does it lead society ?
First of all I think it is a natural thing, so the first thing to consider is that there is nothing wrong. The ramifications for mankind are no different than any other change. People used to have to walk everywhere, and later built machines to do that. Now someone invents a machine to make machines. No surprise here, but the problem is who gets the benefit.
Sociologically there are only so many possible fair ways, and they all amount to communism/socialism. Say we have machines to build machines. But then we have no jobs. To make society work then all of us need to own a stake in that machine and derive profits therefrom. This is one of the things that is screwing the world up right now, so the management must be changed.
See if one guy owns the machine that makes all the other machines and he gets all the money, who will be able to afford to buy the machines that his machine made ? If the same type of thinking is applied as it was to moving production overseas, it is a setup for an even bigger failure than the one we now face, if that is even possible. While it is necessary to appease the proletarians to some extent, you can't just give them a check for nothing. That has a deleterious effect on society as a whole.
So other than those who count the beans we could all get jobs building or maintaining the machines that build machines. But to support this population of course then the machines will build so many machines that many of them will sit in warehouses unsold. Now what do we do ?
Sell the machines to other countries ? WOW there's an idea eh ? But the problem is they might already have those machine building machines and simply don't need nor want our's. So then we end up stopping the machine. Now there is no production and even those who own a stake in the machine aren't making any money.
It comes clear now that even our distorted form of capitalism will not work under those circumstances. I have long advocated harsh penalties for companies that move their plants to other countries, but then should we similarly penalize companies who go to full, or near full automation ? I think no, not if they keep the machine in the US. But now would China like to buy some of those machine making machines ? That will show their true motives. If they don't want it they really want their people to have jobs. If they do it just shows to go ya, they are in it for the money like everyone else. (just looked back at the title)
Maybe this is a chance for the US to lead actually. We've already lost most of our manufacturing base. If we can manage to survive, then others can as well. But we aren't doing so well.
But on a more esoteric level, perhaps it is a sign of the end of a society. When people are no longer needed, what does that mean ? For now we will have bean counters and truck drivers at the very least, but that can be automated as well. What happens when it is all automated and there is literally nothing to do ?
If you watch ny TV at all you might figure that we will create enough issues and bullshit to fret about, and keep the lawyers rich. Keep the court dockets full every time someone's feelings get hurt. They could put Jerry Springer on six times a day for training.
Of course there will be classes of jobs yet uneliminated. Others with no stake in the machine can service them. There will still be restaurants and all that, to service those who can afford it. Those people will be those with a stake in the machine, bean counters, lawyers and government workers. OK doctors, there will be a few others I can't think of right now. But the ramifications are quite stark.
At this point in time the US has the distinction as a leader in job loss. We have found ways to look busy and push the same pile of money around. This experience may actually come in handy.
Perhap some insight can come from Germany. I hear the forty hour work week is history there. Understandable. Just one way to deal with it I guess. Put it this way, you surely don't think that some guy with a mustache is cranking the feed manually on a 1920 lathe to make almost every fuel injector in the world right ? Uniformity is crucial, the best way to get it is by automation. Therefore people who work at Bosch do not make fuel injectors. They maintain the machine that makes fuel injectors.
They probably have about 50% of the market, and it averages six per car. (maybe a bit less, but at least four) To make them all manually would require a massive, labor intensive effort that would dwarf what happened in the late 1930s. Women and children working sixty hour weeks. I don't think they want that.
So what is the question then ? Do the Chinese buy all the machine building machines ? Perhaps we could build them and sell them. Or we could just have it done. It might make some difference now, but in the end it really doesn't matter. The time will come when there is literally nothing left to do.
There could come a time that everything we buy is literally untouched by human hands. OK fine, but from where does the money come with which to buy it ? A public dole or stipend ? I think that will be about as effective as passing out LSD at a mental ward. People will go nuts.
Once in a while I speak of my AQ at work - aggravation quotient. We all need a certain amount of that, but not too much. Let's say that in time, we don't need to work at all. All of our needs are met so cheaply that it simply doesn't matter. It seems quite attractive but really if it goes on for a while it will create a whole new set of problems. Ones that we haven't dealt with before.
A society that doesn't need people. Indeed.
T
|
|
|
|
