N. Thornton wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...


That is a very moot point. We are in an age where most of teh real work
is, and can only be, done by a small minority of people.

Example: its provbably true to say that 99% of all industrial production
could be and should be done by robots.

That way goods would be cheap, and we could all sit there whilst
machines do everything and not work, and have free goods delivered to
our doors. Rifght?

Problem is, you need top quality robost, designed by very skillful and
well educated peple, ou need top quality deigns for them, and so on. So
that model leads to a very few very skilled people doing ALL the work
whiost te rest sit around on the dole.


Youre missing something, which is that we do already have most of the
work done by machines, and the change from hand manufacture to todays
mechanised methods is an exact parallel to the change youre
discussing. And the results are not as you say, the real results a

1. much better standard of living for everyone


Except those too dumb to take part in this modern revolution in work.
Nui Laber has solved that by recruiting them all as NHS managers and
Sochul wurkahs though,..


2. many more hands available to do important speculative work, ie
research.


Unfortunately, that work needs brains, and education, both in very short
supply.


3. a rise in the level of skill required of all workers


Yes, but not a rise in teh level ofskill displayed buy all wurkahs.


4. this being met by improved education


*looks around longingly* "I see no ships...."


5. Shorter working week


Its got longer.


6. More resources for other important matters such as health care etc
etc etc


It's got less.


7. Enough surplus to be able to set up a welfare system so no-one need
starve or do desperate things to survive.


Except Jeffrey Archer, but let's not go there...

This is teh same argument that says that with mechanisaton and
fertiliser we can feed the world...but misses out teh political reality
of e.g. Zimbabwe in the calculations.

In theory, you should be right. In practice the world is full of IMM
clones, who have the vote, and would feel slighted at being told 'look
mate, there is simply nothing you can do to help in the kitchen, so go
and take a shot of state provided heroin, and watch britney spears on
the box and have a good wank' when for years they hgave been courted and
flattered into thinking they have somethng to offer, and given that vote.

In short, democracy exists to pander to the selfishness of the majority
who think or are conned into believeing that they are in some way
important to anything.

Until and unless someone does a PR job to tell them that their natural
rights are to stay at home and do nothing, just keep out of teh way and
watch Big Brother and Trisha, we will be wasting huge amounts of GNP in
delivering them education that is meaningless, make believe jobs, and
having them rush around like lemmings cluttering up the country in some
vain effort to alleviate the boredom.

In short, we have voted for and are creating a society of Ricky
Gervaises and Alan Partridges.





Quite simply, everyone wins in the end. Just see the parallel, and see
where your predictions are amiss.



No whilst I persnonally think that is not unreasonable, and in fact a
country full of state sponsored couch potatoes on heroin would at least
keep the stupid *******s off the roads,


there is loads that needs doing but we cant to afford to right now.
Today our society is too busy spending its time money and materials on
stupid stuff. Couch potatoes will not be the way forward.


some silly socialists have
slammed the idea into peoples heads that there is some 'dignity' in
work,


there is I know that from experience.


and that peepul have a 'right to work' and that the Only True
Measure of a Mans Worth is the Labour That He Does.


dunno about that.


So to perpetuate the myth, its necessary for the system to make pretend
work for wurkahs,


no, this is right off. The system needs more resources, including
human work resources. Many die today due to lack of said resources, by
the million.


so complete morons like IMM can bleat about 'low
unemployment rates' as if this was something to be applauded,


it is, wasting our valuable resources is not sensible. But employment
can also be a waste, so its not employment rate as such that matters
most, but useful employment rate.


when in
fact the natural evolution of post industrial society ought to be to
everyone out of work, but getting paid for it as it were..


If we ever reach the point where all our needs are met, then maybe.
But we are a very long way from that. There is a huge reservoir of
suffering and death, even in wealthy countries, due to our present
limitations of resources in all areas.


companies
ought to offer 15 year guarantees on everything, so that enegy isn't
wasted making and distributing the stuff.


not computers, or other obsolescent items. Someone else proposed
mandatory product marking with average life expectancy, which sounds
interesting. How one could practically do it is another question.

The Japanese made great strides forward in this area by passing a law
for all faulty goods to be repaired on site, thus driving up repair
costs greatly, and thus encouraging higher reliability goods. Given
the great advances this has made, laws in this general vein may well
be a way forward. This reduction in breakdowns of course is a major
asset all round.


In teh industrial revolution, this is precisely what happened - there
was no agricltrural work left to do, and thousands were out of work,


no no no, thousands were out of one job and into another. Or millions.


but
instead of paying teh *******s to saty where they were and drink
scrumpy, they let them breed like rabbits,m and of course teh factories
were ready with the need for labour, and so the stupid sods ended up as
productin wurkahs


in just a s ****ty houses as they had in teh country,
but now even more prone to the diseases of overcrowding and poverty, and
then of course some bright spark dreamt up unions, and the rest is
history, culminating in wet socialism as we see today.


so that cycle of change resulted in us all being better off. Not
perfect, but better off.



As ususal th esoltin is totally obvious, but completely unacceptable to
the brainwashed population,


Do tell what your vision is.


so intead of visoon and action, it will be a
fumbling bloody mess for the next 60 years whilst the inevitable happens
with far more human misery than needs be...but thats people for you.
Dumb as dip****.


been that way a fair while now. And its partly due to shortage of one
of our resources, intelligence. Few seem to understand that that is a
key issue for society today, and few are working on it. At some point
enough of society will become intelligent and informed enough to
realise that this is a core issue, and one of the most important
research areas to concentrate on. Then we will start to see much
faster progress. I'm assuming you know of the Flynn effect.



You know, I was in south africa a little befoire Apartheid cracked up.


Well, they had their revoulution, and now they all have AIDS,


no, only a minority do


because
AIDS and HIV is an inventin of the White Mans Propaganda Machine,


I thought that idea had been debunked now. If not, what is it that
those diagnosed with aids die from? And why?

And I thought it was because of sharing medical needles, lack of
resources, poorer nutrition, and lack of information. AFAIK propaganda
doesnt give people aids.




Re the scrapping of decent kit, its a crazy system. A significant
percentage of the stuff doesnt have anything at all wrong with it.
Maybe local authorities could have a warehousing area where folks can
come along and buy stuff for say 2 weeks before it gets landfilled.


They do. At our council dump you can take what you want if you tip the
staff...


This needs to happen across the board and openly, and be publicised,
so anyone can go wander round and buy. Result: far more re-use. It is
very much in society's interests that most sound equipment is reused.



Theyd need to emlpoy a safety tester. I gather some tips do this to
some extent, but all should, its just silly to bury such stuff. We
live in a society where most folk are victims to advertising, and
believe they should buy things, throw them away and buy them again. A
bit of education wouldnt go amiss.


Indeed. But we gets lots of edcation. We get educated into believing in
a consumer lifetstyle and socialist principles. The fact that its a
crock of ****, doesn't mean its not education.

Its just not education as we know it, Jim.


Its misinformation through advertising. We need genuine education so
they dont believe anything they see, which currently too many do.


Regards, NT

Niall wrote:

On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 02:06:02 +0000, geoff wrote:




Except that we're running out of places to bury it



This is not true.



Indeed. In fact its alarming how easy it is to e.g. create an artificial
mountain out of rubbish. 'Stuff' is a zero sum game. We don't as a
planet realy acquire any more of it than we stared with. It all came out
of teh ground, or grew on trees in teh first place,. Burn it and send it
back to let Nature recycle it, or stuff it back underground.

Ther are HUGE gravel pits full of water and fish just waiting to have
crap tipped in them, the citozens of Bangladesh NEED lots of stuff to
make dykes out of...

...anyne else remeber 'Bill, the galactic hero' who solved the Earyhs
waste problem by pavakaging up waste and, using free government
deparmnet postage, sending it to far flung planets of the Empire, where
it was greedily recycled into luxury items...empty coke cans are the
drinking cups of half of africa...

N. Thornton wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...

Michael Chare wrote:


Even with a car the cost of relatively minor repairs can equal the 2nd hand
value.


Precisely. That is because labour rates are far too high, and robots
make the things. Thats skews production - repair labour costs.


Yes at present. In principle it should be possible to come up with
robots smart enough to tackle repair job analysis, one day. They'll
stick their tentacles on a board, figure out what it does, where its
going wrong, analyse the schematic, do the tests, and tell you what
bit to replace.

If you think thats far ferthched, it'll happen. Look how far computers
have come already.



Sadly, I think it far more likley they wil be employed in 1984 type
scenartios to record who does what and where, so that any citoizen who
does 30.001 mph gets flung into room 101 for re-education.



And
marketing does not want to sell parts, but new machines.


Once we see repair robots, they can work at the landfill tips where
there is no need for parts suppliers. They will use whatever parts are
to hand, (chosen by the robot that logs what comes in, by itself) and
any item with no suitable part will just be buried. Same way car
scrapyards work.



No money in it. Money makes the world go round. We should just buy the
stuff until the 22nd century robots are around to dig it up and recycle
it. Meanwhile we can create artificial ski slopes out of it complete
with avalanche hazards ;-)




The move to make manufacturers responsible for DISPOSAL of their broken
kit, may not work either. Loads will go bust.


Presumably some will intentionally operate, close down, restart under
another name, close down...

But even when the mfr is responsible for disposal, it would still
rather sell 2 than 1, in many cases.




yup.



What is probably teh ay of teh future is leased kit. You sign up for a
'guaranteed washing machine service of quality X' and if it breaks, they
take it, fix it and re-lease it. Just like we used to do with tellies.


I hope not, thats a real ripoff strategy. Only folks unable to do
basic maths go that route. I think all we really need do is stop being
stupid. Landfilling working equipment is stupid.



Actually leasing is good if there is enough competition. What it doesn't
do is gove you the incentive to look after things tho.



Regards, NT

The Natural Philosopher wrote in message ...
N. Thornton wrote:
Michael Chare wrote:

Even with a car the cost of relatively minor repairs can equal the 2nd hand
value.

Precisely. That is because labour rates are far too high, and robots
make the things. Thats skews production - repair labour costs.

Yes at present. In principle it should be possible to come up with
robots smart enough to tackle repair job analysis, one day. They'll
stick their tentacles on a board, figure out what it does, where its
going wrong, analyse the schematic, do the tests, and tell you what
bit to replace.

If you think thats far ferthched, it'll happen. Look how far computers
have come already.

Sadly, I think it far more likley they wil be employed in 1984 type
scenartios to record who does what and where, so that any citoizen who
does 30.001 mph gets flung into room 101 for re-education.

They already are. And they have other apps too, and will have more.


And
marketing does not want to sell parts, but new machines.

Once we see repair robots, they can work at the landfill tips where
there is no need for parts suppliers. They will use whatever parts are
to hand, (chosen by the robot that logs what comes in, by itself) and
any item with no suitable part will just be buried. Same way car
scrapyards work.

No money in it.

sure there is, theres a busy second hand market. It doesnt make as
much as new goods, but its still a market opening that many make use
of.


What is probably teh ay of teh future is leased kit. You sign up for a
'guaranteed washing machine service of quality X' and if it breaks, they
take it, fix it and re-lease it. Just like we used to do with tellies.

I hope not, thats a real ripoff strategy. Only folks unable to do
basic maths go that route. I think all we really need do is stop being
stupid. Landfilling working equipment is stupid.

Actually leasing is good if there is enough competition. What it doesn't
do is gove you the incentive to look after things tho.

nor to pick wisely in the first place, nor to keep things going long
term. If you were leasing a 1980s whatever it would have been returned
and scrapped long ago, but if you own one it is far more likely to be
kept as long as it continues to give good service.

I still think leasing is fundamentally a problem myself.


Regards, NT