Remember the first principles of Capitalism, productivity is not as important as profitability.

@keithcallen2844

5 жыл бұрын

@@kyled1673 Good morning! Now, what can we do with our knowledge. Life is a meritocracy, despite what the .01% would want you to believe.

@keithcallen2844

5 жыл бұрын

@@kyled1673 Yes, I agree that knowledge and awareness are key. The power lies within empathy and vision. The method is irrelevant, the intent is the fulcrum.

@jeromyrutter

5 жыл бұрын

You cannot have a meritocracy while privilege exists. Hence, we had people like Benjamin Tucker talking about the 4 monopolies, and every non-capitalist talking about exploitation.

@keithcallen2844

5 жыл бұрын

@Andrew Hawthorne No Andrew, you have it backwards. Though both fascist and capitalist regimes have exhibited appathy towards the working class, only fascist, communist, and other totalitarian (command economies) care about productivity. Capitalism is by definition concerned with wealth first and everything else..meh! Only when limits on productivity interfere with profits does that become an issue. Note surpluses and waste.

@keithcallen2844

5 жыл бұрын

@@jeromyrutter Privilege and merit are not mutually exclusive. It might seem that wealth drives privilege but there are consistent examples to the contrary.

Automation will bring about more adherents towards Socialist economics. If only Capitalists have ownership of these machines and means of production, the working and underclasses will need new organization. In the hands of democratized or Libertarian socialism it could be wonderful for the progression of democratic institutions. If in the hands of Capitalists there would be great unrest. Chomsky is right.

@phantomcreamer

5 жыл бұрын

Socialism does not innovate, so naturally if will occur in a capitalistic society and thrive in such.

@willpearson

5 жыл бұрын

@@phantomcreamer How does socialism not innovate? Almost all leading research is lead by normal workers, not private business owners. Generally the best research is done by well paid workers, at that. Predominantly heavily state funded.

@phantomcreamer

5 жыл бұрын

@@willpearson I don't know what you mean by normal workers. The way capitalism works is a business owner, sometimes the OG researchers who make a start up company, like many tech giants today, owns a business and pays the employees. Are you implying that the business owners are busy doing menial tasks of operating a business, so a company is somehow not part of capitalism? Those two are not mutually exclusive. Moreover, state funded does not mean socialism. Sorry, but it doesn't. In fact, if a state gives a offers a research grant to a company,then that is the opposite of socialism. Socialism would be where the state actually wholly owns the company. It is state property. You can say "the workers" own it, but they lack the essential rughts associated with owning something. The state owns the means of production and the products, for which they will deal out their meal tickets or whatever. Socialism does not innovate. This is historically accurate. Socialist states have been in a static state or in decay. Long ago, the West discovered that when you protect and ensure people a right to private property, it drives innovation due to the market incentive. That's why almost all countries around the globe now practice capitalism, even the recent rise of China was due to opening up capitalist roads.

@blackflagsnroses6013

5 жыл бұрын

phantomcreamer innovation is done by allowing individuals to pursue their creativity and abilities. By giving resources to those innovators. The computer and phones you use were created from decades of public funding of government-military research and development. After the decades of breakthroughs were individuals able to capitalize off of them. What does the public get? The opportunity to purchase them from big companies. Same is happening with medicine today. I don’t subscribe to Statist Socialism, but it’s a matter of fact that innovation happen throughout every period and system. What matters is allowing the resources and freedom to do so. Profit is not the motivation of innovation, people’s creative inclinations are. All those scientists that created Arpanet and computer tech, never saw close to the rewards of the Jobs’ and Gates’ of the world. It wasn’t profit, it was the pursuit of what they like.

@PristianoPenaldoSUIIII

5 жыл бұрын

@@phantomcreamer It will likely occur in a capitalist society, it most certainly won't thrive in such.

Clearly this guy hasn't ever been near a car factory.

Ponder this dear humanity: According to Dr. Robert Hare (UBC), world renowned expert on PSYCHOPATHY, if corporations were human they would be, for the most part, diagnosed as bonified *PSYCHOPATHS* ✔💡✔

@keithcallen2844

5 жыл бұрын

You mean for profit corporations, right?

When he says productivity is lowers than it was in the 50s and 60s, does he mean per hour worked? Because overall productivity is up, but i dont know what the productivity per hour etc numbers are

@DanDelos

5 жыл бұрын

Noticed that immediately too. Every metric I've seen shows productivity up, and rising consistently in a linear way, while by comparison, real wages (inflation adjusted) have almost flatlined since the mid 70s.

@muserussell2377

5 жыл бұрын

@@DanDelos only thing i can think of is maybe productivity per hour or per person

@DanDelos

5 жыл бұрын

​@@muserussell2377 Well that's how productivity is usually measured. As goods/services per hour or unit time per person. So he probably just misspoke. I'm fairly sure Chomsky himself has mentioned the difference between productivity and wages as one of his major points.

@muserussell2377

5 жыл бұрын

@@DanDelos I dont think he misspoke because ive heard him repeat that several times in regards to automation

@ligemeget3443

5 жыл бұрын

Muse Russell23 it could be a reference to the decline in the annual rate of increase of productivity

you cannot stop what ia coming. stating a news article (no, not rhe post or times but one that explored the short term outcome) the planning according to what I read from that and other aources is that the timeline is for 2025 which until then *women* (yes, you ladies) will mostly be the onea with the most employment opportunities. seeking further, the data collected from all sides of the deployment of automarion will ultimetely help in more autonomous outcome, i.e. more layoffs.

The hands on the levers will belong to those who own the levers and that is not the people who stand by the machines and sit at the desks. The outcome will be very good if a universal guaranteed income, for example, ensures that those thrown out of work are not left to starve or work at part-time, temporary menial jobs. No prizes, however, for guessing what will actually happen.

@christianp.9074

5 жыл бұрын

deadsparrow28 Why have a universal income? I don’t get why some leftists are in favor of such a thing. In theory this is a good idea but it kills worker incentive. Why work for even 5 hours a day and receive a salary based on what you produce (which may or may not be good, depends on your contribution) if you could just not work at all and receive a universal income, which would need to be paid somehow, and I think we both know who would pay that bill. Even in a society where the workers control the means of production, a universal income would destroy the need to work. Let’s hope the hands of the levers will be the workers not the employers.

@HuntforMusic

5 жыл бұрын

A universal income gives more power to the workers - especially those doing mundane, unfulfilling jobs. If a universal income is in place, then those jobs that provide little to no satisfaction to people, but are necessary, will have to offer a much better wage to incentivize people to do them. This is exactly what is needed - better wages to offset the lack of satisfaction inherent in the job. In regards to whether people will just sit at home and not do anything, some people might, but most people become depressed if they're not able to feel like they're contributing to society in a meaningful way. Money isn't the only incentive for putting our time & effort into things - in fact, it's one of the worst incentives because it can detract from self-respect/satisfaction and respect from others, which are two of the major and more meaningful drivers for us. In a world with universal basic income, we can forgo the lesser incentive of money in exchange for the more virtuous incentives of self-respect and respect from others gained through achieving meaningful goals, subsequently driving up our quality of life and lifespan through increased contentment & self-satisfaction.

@jamesscott6813

5 жыл бұрын

I think ubi is a dangerous idea and it will be used as a tool to concentrate the last bits of capitol and (by extension) power, into fewer and fewer hands.

@HuntforMusic

5 жыл бұрын

How so?

@jamesscott6813

5 жыл бұрын

@@HuntforMusic because nothing is free in *this* society.

CC--------------- out of context but, KGNU was well distributed for the greater good all around. perhaps some were edited amd reposted, but I 'trust' channels that don't monetize community content thanks for your ethics.

I believe and have a hope it will free the workers from boring and mind destroying jobs and allow human to be more creative and free. Technology is not evil.

Actually productivity has increased, it's wage which don't follow that so i don't know what he's talking about..

The addition of autonomous robots in the workplace would be detrimental to the working class. The addition of robots would effectively faze out millions of workers and would be a repetition of what happened in the 1970s when businesses worldwide fled to 3rd world counties to increase profitability by having to pay workers pennies per day compared to $7.25 an hour. The working class must be vigilant of the implementation of robots in the workplace, and wait until a syndicalist revolution transforms the workplace, then you can implement robots, because the benefits will be directly given to the workers. Don’t let the workers take another financial blow!

0:45 "productivity is extremely low. its well below what it was in the 50s or 60s" he is only talking of usa, mind you.

Job growth rate vs GDP growth now compared to a decade back is better measure than productivity

@robertpirsig5011

5 жыл бұрын

Not the same thing at all in this context. The point is that compensation i.e wages of workers has declined considerably compared with higher productive output of these same workers.

Productivity as an economic measure is not the same as robots able to replace human jobs. People have much lower quality jobs now because of the machines automating manufacturing and other such non minimum wage blue collar jobs. Go to any farm, or manufacturing plant, or even any office, you’ll see machines and software doing much more sophisticated jobs than 20 years ago. When Deep learning is adapted into the work force you’ll eliminate so much more complex jobs like driving, anything with image/object detection, generating text (parts off writing), and sorting through text based on a goal (reading), audio and video detection & generation, and more.

Isn't productivity low because we have low engagement?

it could be very good or bad thing, depends on how the technology is handled. if that hand is private concentration of power then its gonna be different and very ugly... i got it.. 🙏🏼

короче говоря по русски: все станут художниками, фотографами музыкантами- а значит нищими)))

Compare Henry Ford's assembly line to an automated one. What's Chomsky smoking?

@TerrenceLeeReed

5 жыл бұрын

Chomsky is referring to the "golden age of economic growth" after World War II and the subsequent slowdown in 'productivity growth' since 1973. www.reed.edu/economics/parker/f10/201/cases/it_productivity.html See Also: “The Rise and Fall of American Growth,” by Robert Gordon

Productivity wage graph ? Productivity low?

@thomaschadman1632

5 жыл бұрын

What he means is that we would see an exponential increase in productivity if workers were losing jobs because of automation.

@mynameis9389

5 жыл бұрын

Thomas Chadman yea kinda assumed that but that raised a question then what productivity does the wage/productivity chart state because according to it productivity is higher than the 50s ? Or.....

@AkataTribune

5 жыл бұрын

@@mynameis9389 I think he was talking about purely industrial output like steel, consumer goods, tech in relation to the population isn't as high that it should be due to the level of automation capabilities.

Under Democratic Socialism or Libertarian Socialism, Automation will improve our lives and free us to do great things and have unlimited wealth and ability. Under capitalism (and authoritarian forms of government that result from it), the tech will simply cause the rich to become even richer without the people and eventually the people will not be part of the equation at all.

There's very few actually creative people, to me this is a useless line of thinking.