Slashdot Mirror
As Robots Eat Our Jobs, Fed Should 'Drop the Money From Helicopters,' Says Bill Gross (janus.com)
As technology continues to change the world -- and kill many jobs -- it may soon change the very nature of what is considered work, said Bill Gross, a renowned American financial manager in his recently released investment outlook. Gross says that in a year or so we will need to start guaranteeing income for everyone. Gross, added that the current crop of national leaders is hopelessly behind the curve, leaving it to central bankers to fix the mess. "Our economy has changed, but voters and their elected representatives don't seem to know what's really wrong," he writes. "They shout: (1) build a wall, (2) balance the budget, (3) foot the bill for college, or (4) make free trade less free. "That will fix it" they discordantly proclaim, and after November's election some unlucky soul may do one or more of the above in an effort to make things better. Similar battles are being fought everywhere." The Sydney Morning Herald reports: Central bank "helicopter money" will avoid a long recession that looms as millions of millennials face losing their jobs to robot technology, Gross says. In news that is sure to depress anyone under the age of 30, Gross says that while presidential hopefuls in the US spout mantras about how they are going to spur growth, none are addressing the reality of the future: that robots and technology are going to render "millions" of jobs redundant. "Virtually every industry in existence is likely to become less labour-intensive in future years as new technology is assimilated into existing business models," Gross writes. Transport is a visible example of this transition and millions of truck and taxi drivers will be out of a job in the next 10 to 15 years due to driverless vehicles, he says. "We should spend money where it's needed most -- our collapsing infrastructure for instance, health care for an aging generation and perhaps on a revolutionary new idea called UBI -- Universal Basic Income."
True enough -- if you think of it as welfare. But if you think of it as a transition to an economy of plenty, then it makes sense. But who wants to think, anyway? Fear is easier.
I'm constantly amazed by the fact that americans are all pretty happy to acknowledge that their status quo rather bad, yet they are not willing to look for the reasons nor even talk about changing any aspect of the system.
It must be quite a feat of mental gymnastics to demand that everything somehow change for the better while everything remains the same. A three year old might find this idea reasonable, but grown men and women? Come on, this is a textbook definition of an idiot - someone who does the same thing over and over again expecting the results to differ.
As an outsider, it seems to me that most of what americans believe about politics, society and the human nature is rather a twisted picture indeed. Accepting the problem is the first step towards a solution, and luckily, usually the hardest. Yet the steps must be taken, otherwise things will only get worse.
FCKGW 09F9 42
But everyone is missing the bigger problem.
Once there are no jobs, because everything is being done by robots and/or artificial intelligence, all of these companies who have no employees will have no one to sell their products to because no one will have any money to buy them.
they are not willing to look for the reasons
The reasons are obvious, and generally acknowledged. They are:
1. Technology
2. Globalisation
3. Regressive taxes
nor even talk about changing any aspect of the system.
Everybody talks about changing the system. The problem is that they disagree on the solution.
The Fed helicopters don't fly over normal people. They only have the ability to dump money on banks via mechanisms such as rates so low that the banks can arbitrage. None of that money goes where it's needed to stimulate the economy.
AFAIK, only Congressional helicopters could deliver money to you and I, like they did with the stimulus checks a few years ago. It's almost certainly a fool's errand anyway, since it would screw up the dollar economy via runaway inflation if you did it too much.
IMHO, it would be better to simply extend services like food stamps and housing subsidies to people who would usually be in higher income brackets. Particular sectors of the economy might be weakened, but you wouldn't destroy the monetary system wholesale. People who wanted something better than government cheese would still be encouraged to innovate, strive, and keep progress and productivity humming.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Me, I'd already be happy if they sit on their ass in front of the TV stuffing their fat gut with more potatoe chips instead of ramming a knife into my belly for the 20 bucks in my wallet.
It may not be productive that they waste their life in front of the TV, but at least they're wasting their life and not mine, and let me be productive.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
You point to regressive taxes as the reason for Globalization being "abused" but you are overlooking the much larger problem of wage shopping. If you can have a product made for 1/10th the wages and shipped to your country through a plethora of trade agreements that make the shipping as fast and cheap as possible then that's what is going to happen. There is also the differences in labor laws. Steve Jobs once said one of the reasons Apple manufactures in China is they can make a change in their product lines and overnight Foxconn will have every one of their million or so employees working 12 hour shifts servicing that change.
Foxconn's employees live in barracks and they can pull in prisoners and students if they need to and work them as many hours as they want. There's no way that would ever happen in a modern Western nation unless our economy went seriously downhill.
How about dropping Boomers into the volcanoes? That'd at least open up a lot of management positions from old farts who can't let go and spread some of that stockpiled wealth around. Boomers generally caused all of the problems we're dealing with now as it is. Greediest most self centered generation the US has ever created.
Capitalism's amorality is why we need a strong mediator (such as an uncorrupted democratic government) to mediate between the capitalist and the people.
It will, as a plus, create a bit of inflation that would actually reward folks who save money.
Uh, what? That's not what inflation does. In fact, it does the exact opposite. Inflation decreases the value of hoarded cash. It punishes people who save money. That's OK, because we really need them to invest that money, so a steady, fixed and predictable rate of inflation is actually desirable. The problem with inflation, of course, is that the minimum wage hasn't kept up with inflation in over twenty years. Without a congress willing to increase the minimum wage regularly to match inflation, the poor are punished for existing.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Better to spend $50,000/yr/person to keep people in PRISON than $30,000 for education. (or just to keep 'em out of trouble)
Of course, you'd have to stop putting people in cages for things that aren't crimes, like smoking dope.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff