1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Is technological advancement ultimately compatible with capitalism?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Mark1031, Aug 2, 2018.

?

Is technological advancement ultimately compatible with capitalism?

  1. Yes

    8 vote(s)
    61.5%
  2. No

    5 vote(s)
    38.5%
  1. Ozbenno

    Ozbenno Fly Fly Away Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2006
    Messages:
    11,406
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    To divert the discussion back to the OP :mischief:

    Interesting article in The Guardian today addressing this issue.

    I actually work in the automation sphere. There is a balance between traditional jobs being made obsolete and new jobs being created (although usually less of the later). I'm not sure we'd ever get to the stage that all jobs are able to be done by AI but you never know. I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
     
  2. Mark1031

    Mark1031 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2001
    Messages:
    5,220
    Location:
    San Diego
  3. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,254
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Almost half of you voted no but none of you have justified that answer.
     
  4. Lexicus

    Lexicus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    21,238
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    Do I really need to say it? Increasing productivity = more capital in society = rule of capitalists turns into a fetter on further development = end of capitalism
     
  5. Traitorfish

    Traitorfish The Tighnahulish Kid

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2005
    Messages:
    31,662
    Location:
    Scotland
    Technological progress has allowed me to spent eight hours a day doing a job with negative social utility, but which greases the wheels of rent-extraction. I've earned my theoretically-undersupported pessimism.
     
  6. Takhisis

    Takhisis yarr

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    43,405
    Location:
    up yours!
    Theoretically undersupported but empirically oversupported, at least?
     
  7. innonimatu

    innonimatu Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2006
    Messages:
    10,929
    Automation has been around since the 18th century. It's greatest period of acceleration were the post-WW2 decades years, as measured by both capital investment and increases in productivity. Since the late 1980s it has noticeably slumped. Sure we have the internet and computers everywhere, but we don't seem to be doing as much with them as we did with the assembly line and the earlier mechanized agriculture to increase productivity by worker. The automation social revolution (recall Keynes's prediction about work hours...) failed to materialize. Probably explainable also by what @Traitorfish mentioned above.

    I do not take any more seriously the predictions made now. In fact I suspect that the low-hanging fruit has all been picked and technological progress is going through an enduring slowdown.
     
  8. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,254
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    So your disagreement comes from the hypothesis that capitalism concludes itself ergo its ultimate point is behind the ultimate of technology ergo the word ultimate drives your vote.

    Sounds technologically advanced to me. Do you feel you are answering the question rather than voting nay on capitalism?
     
  9. Berzerker

    Berzerker Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    16,871
    Location:
    the golf course
    I wouldn't want to be caught foraging food from the local hunter gatherers' land
     
  10. Lexicus

    Lexicus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    21,238
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    "No human being, no system, no age is impervious to this law; everything beneath the stars will perish; the hardest rock will be worn away. Nothing endures but words."
     
  11. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,254
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    I just read it differently, the question:
    "Is technological advancement ultimately compatible with capitalism?"

    To me, a no vote is stating that you believe that you think capitalism veers us away from technological advancement on the whole, whereas a yes vote is stating you believe that technological advancement goes with capitalism and its nature. I think the former is undefended and the latter is true with both the evidence and theory.

    Voting no because there's heat death and anything before it makes the no vote meaningless. Also, words don't endure. :eekdance:
     
  12. Lexicus

    Lexicus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    21,238
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    This is a false dichotomy though. I think both of these things at once.
     
  13. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,254
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    The disagreement hinges on the intent of the word "ultimately". If you take it to mean the end point in time of technology, well then this system should but one part of the relay race. But I would argue we're asking if this part of the relay race is ultimately compatible with the baton getting through the race at all or not. Is this leg the one that crosses the finish line? Probably not, so it isn't the ultimate leg. But this leg definitely moves up the baton, further, faster. straighter, and with fewer setbacks than any before it, and will pass it one way or another.
     
  14. Lexicus

    Lexicus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    21,238
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    I don't know if technology is best thought of as a line segment. More like some kind of weird spiral shell that repeatedly pulls itself out of its own butt.
     
    yung.carl.jung likes this.
  15. Hygro

    Hygro soundcloud.com/hygro/

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2002
    Messages:
    22,254
    Location:
    San Antonio, Texas
    Everything fractals.
     
  16. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    4,473
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, it could.

    But more like, would it matter?

    If all your basic needs are fulfilled, that you could just work to get the other stuff in life. It would just come without the threat of starvation, and that's not a bad thing. You could take that time to pick stuff you actually want to do.
     
  17. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    42,497
    Location:
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    It would matter, because all of the crop land is owned.

    Where's the mechanism by which you'd get food? You have nothing the crop owners want.

    Historically, charity tends to be about 2% of income. Maybe there will become a time when 2% of the income will be able to support the lifestyles of 11 billion charity cases, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.
     
  18. timtofly

    timtofly One Day

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Messages:
    9,429
    Is it not that technology is assumed to make economy obsolete? It does not matter the system of economics. If a person thinks capitalism will never work or has never worked, having technology or not is a mute point. Unless revolution is the machines themselves taking over, would humans ever out smart and keep machines in tow?

    Economy has always been about the fair distribution of goods. But economy does not make perfect humans. Neither would the lack of economy, if technology solved all our needs. Technology is not going make things fair either, if there are still humans around to mess things up.
     

Share This Page