How do we structure society for reduced employment?

Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
21,063
Location
Just to the left of my PC
The number of jobs, especially menial jobs, has been and continues to be decreased by advances in technology. Work that used to require people can now be done more efficiently by machines and that trend continues.

It's a pretty fantasy to pretend that everyone can have work they like and are good at and all they have to do to get it is a try a little, but this is reality, not Star Trek. That's not what happens. There are far fewer jobs like that than there are people and most people don't have the required abilities anyway. Me? I'd like to be a physicist and discover some previously unknown knowledge. But that's not going to happen under any circumstances because I don't have the abilities required.

The trend will move up the employment hierarchy over time, partly due to improvements in technology resulting in cheaper, more versatile machines and partly as social norms change to incorporate more technology. I'll use myself as an example. I work in a bingo club. Almost all the work comes down to cash handling and customer service. It would be possible even with today's technology to replace almost all of it by going cashless. The only staff you'd need would be security and some mobile technicians to service and repair machines. That would remove the need for club managers - an example of the trend moving up the hierarchy. The reason it hasn't been done already is social norms - customers expect to be served by people. That's changing as people grow up increasingly used to computers and other machinery doing increasingly more, e.g. self-service tills in supermarkets.



So how do we structure society to function with a reduced level of employment? What do we do when the number of jobs is only 80% of the number of adults? 50%? 20%?
 
The number of jobs, especially menial jobs, has been and continues to be decreased by advances in technology. Work that used to require people can now be done more efficiently by machines and that trend continues.

It's a pretty fantasy to pretend that everyone can have work they like and are good at and all they have to do to get it is a try a little, but this is reality, not Star Trek. That's not what happens. There are far fewer jobs like that than there are people and most people don't have the required abilities anyway. Me? I'd like to be a physicist and discover some previously unknown knowledge. But that's not going to happen under any circumstances because I don't have the abilities required.

The trend will move up the employment hierarchy over time, partly due to improvements in technology resulting in cheaper, more versatile machines and partly as social norms change to incorporate more technology. I'll use myself as an example. I work in a bingo club. Almost all the work comes down to cash handling and customer service. It would be possible even with today's technology to replace almost all of it by going cashless. The only staff you'd need would be security and some mobile technicians to service and repair machines. That would remove the need for club managers - an example of the trend moving up the hierarchy. The reason it hasn't been done already is social norms - customers expect to be served by people. That's changing as people grow up increasingly used to computers and other machinery doing increasingly more, e.g. self-service tills in supermarkets.



So how do we structure society to function with a reduced level of employment? What do we do when the number of jobs is only 80% of the number of adults? 50%? 20%?
The truth is nobody knows. Pro-capitalists will claim some invisible hand will magically materialise new jobs in emerging markets & that anybody who claims otherwise is a luddite - the greatest irony being the luddite fallacy is infact a fallacy in it's own right - I don't have faith that the market will ensure things keep flowing without intervention.

The reality is the purpose of technology is to free mankind from undesirable labour (most would agree) - otherwise what's the point of advancing?.
For a society to function technology may result in only 20% of the population needing to work & of those jobs 90% of them requiring high skill sets - if it did happen (key point IF).

Many potential ways of getting people to do the work exists,

1. Non material rewards for those who work, popularity/recognition/authority in the given field.
2. Attempt to restructure the populations motivational drive reward system from personal to social, from monetary reward to mastery, contribution or purpose motive (key drivers for motivation aside from money).

(On a side note, I'd have posted this in speakers corner instead)
 
Last edited:
When I was in primary school, many years ago, I can remember my teacher telling us that in the future, most work would be done by robots. We would have to work a 1 day a year to take turns to go in and oil the robots.
 
teachers say the strangest things..

a history teacher told me the two girls i was joking on with were laughing at me, not with me.. i guess he was jealous.

the current government want to tax more and give out less benefit, thats how they want to structure it..

the less people work, less tax coming in, less benefit until in the end everyone will be living in mud huts eating each other.. seems like a good plan
 
So how do we structure society to function with a reduced level of employment? What do we do when the number of jobs is only 80% of the number of adults? 50%? 20%?

I'm not sure we need to structure anything... back in the day 99% of the population worked the land, practiced archery on weekends and built their own houses/mud huts - the fact that only a small percentage are now required to provide the very basics - food, shelter etc.. doesn't necessarily mean there is nothing for the rest to do.

I doubt anyone could have envisaged people having job titles such as 'web designer' and/or 'online media buyer' a few decades ago - and it didn't require any top down structuring for that sector to evolve.

We have a method of exchange, people will create stuff, people will be willing to do stuff - automation/efficiency doesn't prevent people from creating or doing though it can help them create/do more efficiently.
 
See i expect nothing less from you but why a teacher ? It stuck with me that one and gave me low self esteem.. I'm not an ugly bloke but i used to turn away girls in my teens after i left school..
 
No i'm not gay, i have a daughter.

And i guess you have a drink and drug problem, is ginger and fat and speaks french in your spare time, your mams your sister ?
 
Woah dudes, chill out.

Ultimately it comes down to an education system that was built for an age of industrial activity, of which we were almost the only nation monopolising on it, while the system has changed many times, it is still the same old crap and is no longer terribly relevant for the era.

Jobs will eventually return to us, but we need a revolution for it to occur, we need a renewed space age, which we are in fact coming along with, even if mostly private, but that has its advantages, it leaves itself open to transparency not covered in nationalism or "security" issues if anything is going awry.

Space stations, asteroid missions, colonisation and so on all require a work force and it will only get larger.

Unfortunately, that requires an education system geared toward it and quite frankly, i see way too many dispassionate youngsters today, thinking life is all about getting a job, a family and dying, its droll and needs to change.
 
Like dowie I think it will be a natural evolution rather than a structured one. Although there are some potential options like national service etc.
 
Ask your self what would happen before capitalism, before socialism and we were living in a wood stockade and we had just come off the back of a poor harvest going into winter and there wasn't enough food for everyone.
 
Back
Top Bottom