The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investment Analysis Clubs / Macro Economic Trends and Risks
|Subject: Re: Proposal to end public pensions||Date: 7/12/2013 12:05 PM|
|Author: Dwdonhoff||Number: 428594 of 463366|
Why "last resort"?
Because the govt is trying to end it
Mmm... that's a nonsensical answer... You're saying that because the government is trying to end it, THAT is why you claim is is the last resort for spending? The logic doesn't flow.
Do you have a logical reason for claiming that printing money is the last resort for paying government's bills?
Flip that quandary upside down; Too much work, not enough humans.
Because there exists no such quandary.
It doesn't exist now, but it has before... and if you apply logic and remember your history and anthropology lessons, you can recall that when resources are great populations grow. (There is always as much functional work available as humans care to do... the availablility of work is not the limited variable, it is the availability of resources. The limits of resources are what determine the incentives for working.)
There is insufficient work available for the number of people who are able to work--otherwise, they would be able to find jobs. The jobs do not exist--period.
'Jobs' is not equal to 'work' (at least not by the definition you seem to be using.) there is *ALL KINDS* of *WORK* available, if you are willing to do it for what the market will actually pay, and you are willing to take the risks and initiatives yourself rather than hoping to have some boss take it in advance for you.
Again, its not a question of available work... it is a question of resources (and the efficient distribution of them.)
Let's revisit your prior complaint;
The real problem is basing pay on productivity. Extremely high productivity means far less need for labor to do paid work. So more and more people are not needed in the workforce.
Herein lies your confusion. Let me correct the sentence to create clarity;
So more and more people are not needed in the traditional workforce, working in legacy labor positions. People *ARE* needed in the areas where humans outdeliver automation; *THINKING* jobs.
So, what do they do to earn money? There are no jobs--literally.
They have to be more valuable than merely their muscles, plain & simple. Those who are not sufficiently more valuable to society than equivalently producing technology will perish. If they don't perish before they breed, their kids most likely will.
(I know that referring to humans the same as a jar full of flies sounds cold... but we are talking about reality here...)
The economy as a whole has to change.
If you're hoping society will regress, and manually toil in jobs that machines can do without sweat nor complaint... don't hold your breath.
Technology is liberating humanity to higher levels of intellect, creativity, and productivity. Those who are able to create great value to society with their intellect will flourish (far more than in any prior age.) Those who cannot will dwindle into poverty and perish.
That much is a very *VERY* beautiful thing for our progeny (though they're going to be looking back on an economic revolution that has been required to wipe out & recover from the spendthrift insanity of their forebears.)
|Copyright 1996-2014 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|