Re: The Ecology of Eden
You mean a decent democracy, not the mock-version we have? [snip] Why not *both*? At least the PhD's -- not *all* of them are bad. Conversely, rice farmers and single mothers can have as "selfish" motives as career climbers (*some* of whom might not be as greedy in a more humane society?). If "love" was enough, then the cliche that the road to hell is paved with good intentions would probably never have been coined. E.g., what about the people who love "the planet" (Gaia, etc.) so much that they put the interests of lower life forms *ahead* of the wellbeing of persons? Who talked about "love"? I'm sure I didn't... Eva But I agree about our having only a mock democracy. In a real democracy (irrespective of how good or bad it would be...), the big issues would be decided by the people and not by a few CxOs (be they "capitalist" or post-Soviet or whatever). \brad mccormick -- Mankind is not the master of all the stuff that exists, but Everyman (woman, child) is a judge of the world. Brad McCormick, Ed.D. / [EMAIL PROTECTED] 914.238.0788 / 27 Poillon Rd, Chappaqua, NY 10514-3403 USA --- ![%THINK;[SGML]] Visit my website: http://www.cloud9.net/~bradmcc/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FW: Re: The Ecology of Eden
Well, that would appear to explain the failure of automation to increase unemployment. But it does strike me as rather tautological to argue that "under capitalism we could never arrive at the "reductio ad absurdum" where everyone is put out of work" because it is in the nature of capitalism to employ people, whether producers or superfluous. Anyway, while a new system may be emerging dialectically (thru a clash of diametrically-opposed views), it is probably not something we would want to label "capitalism". Profit is only made out of the employee part of the equasion; the theory of the "tendency of profit to fall" is due to the that fact that the ratio of the "non-employee" capital investment is growing. It is not views but processes that are diametrically and un-balancably (oops) opposed. Any new system that is based on this production mechanism of private ownership of production, marketvalued human effort and profit, is capitalism. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: The Ecology of Eden
-- From: Bob McDaniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thomas Wonders never cease. As I read my newspaper over the last several days, I find the Jubilee Project of forgiving Third World Debt is going ahead in substantive ways - who would have guessed a short year ago that this would happen, it seemed like a pipedream of some of the Church's - no rational government could or would put that hole in their accounting systems that debt forgiveness would require. So to, with concepts like a Basic Income as a response to the problems of automation. In Europe, I read that a number of countries are finally using the tax system to nudge us toward a more sustainable energy future - who would have thought it a year ago. It seems like economies of scale in solar, wind and geothermal power are producing electricity at or below fossil fuel and nuclear rates, who would have thought it a year ago. In the Citizen Paper, a few days ago was a most interesting article on an Aircar, which I mean to download and post when I have a moment. It is run by fans, not wings, using a rotary engine and is posited as easy to drive as an automobile. Final approval is targeted for 2002, a whisper away. Imagine if we can design a "Jetson" type of air transportation system that would eliminate the massive amount of ashphalt, that is used on a road system, to say nothing of potentially destroying the suburbs. Along with all the doom and gloom, I am prone to focus on, there is a possiblity that the futurists and free marketers are right and we will change and evolve with new products to solve old problems. It's a thin line though - a horse race - will a major disaster, financial, ecological, or unknown hit us hard enough and require us to use our resources for survival and repair or will we continue to slip under the wire and have the surplus's we need, along with wisdom to stay ahead of the tidal wave. Bob McDaniel wrote: Never mind just the poor: How will anyone qualify to partake of the fruits of automation? That is one of my favourite areas of speculation. Take it to the reductio ad absurdum - everyone is put out of work! I find it hard to believe that the automated factories will simply continue to churn out stuff when no one can buy it. What kind of allocative system may emerge? Bob may be surprised to learn that by assuming the answer lies in the emergence of a different "allocative system" he places himself squarely in the camp that Moishe Postone characterizes as "traditional Marxism". Actually, no; I'm not surprised. I've been aware for some time that the concept of "emergence" was consistent with Marxian thought and figured it wouldn't be long before someone brought this to my attention. I would view the method of Marxist thought as a useful tool (dialectics) and as such applicable to many situations and producing different results depending on the sociotechnological situation being analyzed. Postone argues that Marx saw the real dilemma of capitalism as not the disjunction between the production system and the allocative system but as occurring within production itself. Thus under capitalism we could never arrive at the "reductio ad absurdum" where everyone is put out of work because capitalism requires that people do more and more *superfluous* work as a precondition for the necessary: Thomas: As I mentioned in an earlier post, James Galbraith posited service work at 80% of the labour force. As I recall, we had an agrian work force of over 80% at the turn of the century. However, as JG pointed out, even though the above statements are true, the facts are the capitalistic system sees labour as a cost and has reduced the wages of most people in service work and in some cases lower than the cost of living, giving us the euphenism, "the working poor", which is contractiction to neo con thought which states that everyone must work for their share of societies wealth. The double binds are endless. Well, that would appear to explain the failure of automation to increase unemployment. But it does strike me as rather tautological to argue that "under capitalism we could never arrive at the "reductio ad absurdum" where everyone is put out of work" because it is in the nature of capitalism to employ people, whether producers or superfluous. Anyway, while a new system may be emerging dialectically (thru a clash of diametrically-opposed views), it is probably not something we would want to label "capitalism". I have posted the revelant passages of the Grundrisse at: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/grundris.htm Thanks. Look forward to reading them. It would be useful if all list contributors would post their sources and archive their contributions on Web-accessible servers. A number already do, of course, and their efforts are much appreciated. -- http://publish.uwo.ca/~mcdaniel/
Re: How to we get from here to there when there keeps changing
Thomas: Though the concept of spirituality or beliefs such as; do we have a soul, may seem far from the topic of futurework, I am inclined like Ray Harrell to believe that they are as important or more important than having a job. In fact, it could be that spirituality and the attainment of different experiences may be one of the major growth areas of employment in the near future - it has been in the past, note the growth of monastaries in the dark ages as the major refuge of reading and writing when Rome collasped. Thomas Lunde wrote: RH asks: Does work serve a purpose to the soul? TL: The soul has become a defunct theory in our modern? age. I thank you for bringing it up for I still believe in a "soul", though perhaps I might not use the Christian word as it is very ambigous. Perhaps, in my terms, I might use a word such as entity or psyche in the Sethian sense to refer to that aspect of us the incarnates and reincarnates for purpose. In that sense, "Does work serve a purpose to the soul?", I would answer in a general sense no - though there are no limits and the psyche may use work to set up situations in which the important work which is the learnings of values, choices and the development of talents, may take place. In our less spiritual time, when character has become a value represented by net worth, rather than the wisdom that accumulates to an elder or shaman, work in the sense of "paid work" has become more valuable than personal growth. Our ancestors would surely find this most strange and look at us as if we are deranged - and we are. Bob: Sethian indeed! Shades of the occult, "channeling" and clairvoyance. The soul may be the spirit in each of us and may well be reflected in the feeling we get when we excel at something or are the source of a random act of kindness (for example). It may also be the source of those nagging feelings of conscience some experience when they do what they ought not do, or vice versa. Thomas: To me the discussion of a soul, is not so much an effect thing as it is a structure thing. We have a body, we have a brain, we have (most of us) two arms, two legs, etc. We have a soul - or we don't. It is a piece of our makeup as beings or not. I choose to believe we have one. As one teacher I worked with for several years said, (paraphrased) "What you believe is unimportant for the fact that you are conversing with me is proof." I also don't think a soul is there for the purpose of providing a nice or nasty feeling, rather I see the soul as that part of us that does not incarnate, that is eternal, that exists for purposes that are beyond our ken. In fact I would reframe these statements and state that a soul has us and that we are a temporary part of an eternal being that is providing us with a life to experience in and giving us the individual attributes that it - the soul - finds value in. This does not make us lesser, for in my truth, we are one but have different aspects and different realities to experience in. Bob: Does work serve a purpose to the soul? Is that the same as asking does work make us feel good? For many having work (job - is that the same?), which generates an income, is accompanied by feelings of well-being. But work can also be very trying (testing our patience and adherence to values) and that surely is serving a purpose to the soul. Thomas: Again in the most general of terms, I don't think we in our limited aspect as humans and temporal have any concept of the purposes of the soul. As another teacher put it, "you are the fingertip of your soul". In other words we have a relationship to our soul similar to the fingertip to the whole body. The fingertip can feel and do certain things and it provides information that is used by more complex parts of our body but for the fingertip to understand the liver, the central nervous system, language and belief are not the role it has in the body. That is not to denigrate our role, just as the fingertip, by sensing heat might prevent serious damage to the whole body, so perhaps the human and his experiences may provide valuable information to the soul. Or, perhaps work is simply being gainfully employed (contributing to society), paid or not, and that also is probably a source of good feelings. While it may be true in some circles that "work in the sense of "paid work" has become more valuable than personal growth" it begs the question "Are there circumstances when "paid work" and personal growth are synonomous?" This probably depends on how one defines "personal growth" - growth in professional skills, growth in the range of one's talents, growth in one's world knowledge, etc. But, regardless of that issue, where has soul gone? Thomas: The soul has gone nowhere. It still exists, though perhaps not noticed by our frentic culture
automated supermarkets
I may have made an earlier posting on this subject. Jim Hightower devoted one of his brief audio commentaries to it several months ago. The following article was printed in the Business Section of the Toronto Star on May 25, 1999. * SCAN-IT YOURSELF CHECKOUTS TRIED Tidal wave of automation engulfs groceries by Jennifer Brown, Associated Press RICHBORO, Pa. -- Julie Lawson's two young children love to go grocery shopping since their supermarket installed automatic checkout machines. Bud, 6, and Julia, 4, slide cookies and tomatoes across a scanner, listen fir the computer voice to announce the price, then put the goodies into bags. All without the help of an employee. "When you have to drag these two around on errands, it's great to be able to do your own thing at your own pace," Lawson said at the Superfresh. "They do not let me use the regular line." Self-serve checkouts are the latest in a tidal wave of automation that has already overtaken banking, investing and gasoline retailing. Auto-checkout machines are in about 300 supermarkets around the United States, most installed in the last few months. In addition the machines are being tested in Wal-Mart and other stores. "It allows shoppers to take control of the check-out process," said Michelle Logan, spokesperson for Productivity Solutions Inc. of Jacksonville, Fla., the leading maker of automatic checkers. So far the idea hasn't taken off in Canada, although a few stores are trying out pilot projects. Canada's biggest grocer, Loblaws, has been monitoring the progress of automatic checkouts in the United States but hasn't seen much consumer demand for such a service. "I think customers still want a certain amount of customer service," said Geoff Wilson, vice-president of industry and investor relations for Loblaws Co. Ltd. "If there was a groundswell of interest, we'd certainly look at it more closely." Self-checkout works like regular cashiers with a few anti-theft additions. The customer slides each item over a laser scanner, puts the item on a conveyor belt for weighing and lets each roll under a camera for measuring. The weighing and measuring prevents theft by comparing each item to computer information about everything in the store. The final bagging area also includes a scale, where the total weight must match the sum of the items purchased. Customers then get a receipt and pay a human cashier, though some of the newer auto-checkouts include machines to take cash or use credit cards. The system isn't foolproof. On a recent visit to SuperFresh customers had problems scanning a gallon of milk, a single bread roll, a 12 roll pack of paer towels (too big to fit on conveyor belt) and six ears of corn. "She didn't say there were six ears there, and the computer knows how much an average ear weighs, so it was confused," said Bill Hunter, who rushed to the aid of the customer. Over all, shoppers were pleased. "I always use this. I'm always in a hurry and don't want to waste time waiting in line," said Alex Matthews of Richboro. Marybeth Malloy of Churchville said the self-serve aisles may not be faster since she's a slow scanner, but they feel faster: "I hate standing in the line. This way, it at least feels like I'm doing something." The Richboro store hasn't reduced employee hours because of the new machines, instead is keeping more lanes open, store manager Charles Swartz said. The union representing store workers said they had been notified before the change, but didn't object, saying, the machines make workers' jobs easier. "I find the day goes faster," said Hunter, who preferred supervising four self-checkout aisles to working at a regular cash register. Eventually the machines will be used to make up shifts that are hard to staff or to fill vacancies at understaffed stores said Andy Carrano, spokesperson for the Great Atlantic Pacific Tea Company, SuperFresh's parent company. AP said the self-checkout ideas account for about 30 per cent of the business at the 50 test stores. Customers should get used to dealing with a computer instead of a person, economist Jeremy Rifkin said. "The bottom line here is that the cheapest worker in the world will not be as cheap as the technology coming online to replace them," said Rifkin, who predicts automation will replace a majority of the 3.5 million U.S. supermarket workers by 2020. Still some people aren't ready to give up human cashiers. "I'm a people person. I still enjoy when people check me out and help me," said Susan Wexler of Richboro, but she was using the auto-checkout: "It's faster than waiting in long lines when they have only one cashier open." *** Comment: This is obviously a threat to jobs--and income as long as the job remains the only socially acceptable means of receiving income for ordinary people. There are many ordinary people who are quite willing to work for a living but do not have
Re: FW: Re: The Ecology of Eden
Durant wrote: Anyway, while a new system may be emerging dialectically (thru a clash of diametrically-opposed views), it is probably not something we would want to label "capitalism". snip It is not views but processes that are diametrically and un-balancably (oops) opposed. snip I guess I slipped into meta-mode, (i.e. "views" refers to how one might perceive or, perhaps more accurately, conceive of "processes") hence is part of the meta-language in which one might talk _about_ processes. Yet it may be that how people _conceive_ processes may be more important than the actual processes in explaining human behaviour. This lapse raises another issue pertaining to creativity which is a key requirement when one attempts to devise new strategies of wealth allocation. It concerns the virtue of imprecise language. E. Carpenter in his book "They Became What They Beheld" made the following observation: "I recently came across the following rules of communication, posted in a School of Journalism: Know your audience and address yourself directly to it. Know what you want to say and say it clearly and fully. Reach the maximum audience by utilizing existing channels. "Whatever sense this may have made in a world of print, it makes no sense today. In fact, the reverse of each rule applies. "If you address yourself to an audience, you accept at the outset the basic premlses that unite the audience ... But artists don't address themselves to audiences; they create audiences. The artist talks to himself out loud. If what he has to say is significant, others hear and are affected. "The trouble with knowing what to say and saying it clearly and fully, is that clear speaking is generally obsolete thinking. Clear statement is like an art object: it is the after-life of the process which called it into being. The process itself is the significant step and, especially at the beginning, is often incomplete and uncertain. Columbus' maps were vague and sketchy, but showed the right continent. "The problem with full statement is that it doesn't involve: it leaves no room for participation; it's addressed to consumer, not co-producer." -- http://publish.uwo.ca/~mcdaniel/
Re: The Ecology of Eden
Thomas: Excellent quotes: I enjoyed reading them. I have often found in my reading that the roots of many current things had their origins in that time period of 1866 to 1900. There were many interesting and intelligent writers and activists. In fact, I believe that is where the Horiatio Algers myth came from that started as a story and finally became an American archtype. Thanks Chris, Thomas Lunde -- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christoph Reuss) To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: FW: The Ecology of Eden Date: Wed, Jun 16, 1999, 11:21 PM Thomas Lunde quoted: Sooner or later, you run out of room. [...] In parts of the world where peoples were confined by geographical barriers or by the pressure of other peoples, it was reached some time ago. An illustration of this is the following text (from a Canadian) on how U$ imperialism had to sweep around the Globe after the "civilisation" had reached the West coast: Globalisation aka opening the world's markets for U$ products after the cancer ran out of room on the own continent. (Not that the EU imperialists were any better some centuries before..) Greetings, Chris "The [Kosovo] war is the culmination of a century's determined foreign/economic policy by the U.S. Before 1890, surplus industrial production could always be sold in the territories and the emerging states of the union as the tide of immigration swept west, ethnically cleansing the indigenes that got in the way. After 1890 the problem of surplus production became rapidly acute, crystallizing in the 'Open Door Notes' of 1899 and 1890. 'American factories are making more than the American people can use; American soil is producing more than they can consume. Fate has written our policy for us; thwe trade of the world must and will be ours.' -- Albert J. Beveridge, April 1897. In brief, the 'open door' means that U.S. citizens, and more importantly U.S. corporations, are free to go anywhere in the world they please, take anything they like, and leave without paying for it. Of course, this is wrapped up in hypocrisy, as: 'We want a reciprocity that will give us foreign markets for our surplus products, and in turn will open our markets to foreigners for those products [read raw materials] which they produce and which we do not.' -- William McKinley, January 1895."
no subject
Re: automated supermarkets
Title: Re: automated supermarkets Thomas: This is a very interesting article in not only what it tells and what it implies for FW but the thing that struck me was the speed at which it is happening. I think consumers will like it, I find I like the Teller machine for 80% of my banking. But whether we like it or not, between E Commerce and automation of retailing, the jobless ranks are going to soar. The only human jobs for the semi- to unskilled will be as a Courier driver delivering parcels or pizza delivry guy/girl and even both of those jobs could be automated. It's time to own up that we need a new way to distribute income other than working - the production of goods and services are still there and need consumers to exist so I suggest a significant tax be added to each machine or group of machines that eliminate work. Prices will stay the same because automation is cheaper than labour but the government will have signicantly more resources to distribute to those who have been marginalized. Thanks for the posting Victor, Respectfully, Thomas Lunde -- From: Victor Milne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: automated supermarkets Date: Sun, Jun 20, 1999, 6:23 PM I may have made an earlier posting on this subject. Jim Hightower devoted one of his brief audio commentaries to it several months ago. The following article was printed in the Business Section of the Toronto Star on May 25, 1999. * SCAN-IT YOURSELF CHECKOUTS TRIED Tidal wave of automation engulfs groceries by Jennifer Brown, Associated Press RICHBORO, Pa. -- Julie Lawson's two young children love to go grocery shopping since their supermarket installed automatic checkout machines. Bud, 6, and Julia, 4, slide cookies and tomatoes across a scanner, listen fir the computer voice to announce the price, then put the goodies into bags. All without the help of an employee. When you have to drag these two around on errands, it's great to be able to do your own thing at your own pace, Lawson said at the Superfresh. They do not let me use the regular line. Self-serve checkouts are the latest in a tidal wave of automation that has already overtaken banking, investing and gasoline retailing. Auto-checkout machines are in about 300 supermarkets around the United States, most installed in the last few months. In addition the machines are being tested in Wal-Mart and other stores. It allows shoppers to take control of the check-out process, said Michelle Logan, spokesperson for Productivity Solutions Inc. of Jacksonville, Fla., the leading maker of automatic checkers. So far the idea hasn't taken off in Canada, although a few stores are trying out pilot projects. Canada's biggest grocer, Loblaws, has been monitoring the progress of automatic checkouts in the United States but hasn't seen much consumer demand for such a service. I think customers still want a certain amount of customer service, said Geoff Wilson, vice-president of industry and investor relations for Loblaws Co. Ltd. If there was a groundswell of interest, we'd certainly look at it more closely. Self-checkout works like regular cashiers with a few anti-theft additions. The customer slides each item over a laser scanner, puts the item on a conveyor belt for weighing and lets each roll under a camera for measuring. The weighing and measuring prevents theft by comparing each item to computer information about everything in the store. The final bagging area also includes a scale, where the total weight must match the sum of the items purchased. Customers then get a receipt and pay a human cashier, though some of the newer auto-checkouts include machines to take cash or use credit cards. The system isn't foolproof. On a recent visit to SuperFresh customers had problems scanning a gallon of milk, a single bread roll, a 12 roll pack of paer towels (too big to fit on conveyor belt) and six ears of corn. She didn't say there were six ears there, and the computer knows how much an average ear weighs, so it was confused, said Bill Hunter, who rushed to the aid of the customer. Over all, shoppers were pleased. I always use this. I'm always in a hurry and don't want to waste time waiting in line, said Alex Matthews of Richboro. Marybeth Malloy of Churchville said the self-serve aisles may not be faster since she's a slow scanner, but they feel faster: I hate standing in the line. This way, it at least feels like I'm doing something. The Richboro store hasn't reduced employee hours because of the new machines, instead is keeping more lanes open, store manager Charles Swartz said. The union representing store workers said they had been notified before the change, but didn't object, saying, the machines make workers' jobs easier. I find the day goes faster, said Hunter, who preferred supervising four self-checkout aisles to working at a regular cash register. Eventually the machines will be used to make up shifts that are hard to staff or to fill
Re: automated supermarkets
Title: Re: automated supermarkets I don't think I'll like it very much. I've never much liked the No Frills supermarkets where there is a cashier, but the customer bags his/her own order. As you say, however, whether we like it or not, it's likely to come about. I believe taxing technology which puts people out of work is part of the platform of the Green Party of Ontario. I have mixed feelings on the subject. I am a technophile and thus am dubious about arresting real technical progress. However, as I indicated, I do make a distinction between technology which really reduces labor and technology which simply offloads the same amount of work from a paid employee to an unpaid consumer. Sort of adding insult to injury as I see it. I would happily tax any technology which merely transfers work to the consumer. However, it is not always too easy to make the distinction. For instance, internet banking probably takes at least as much time as the actual transaction with a teller, but it saves my total time since I don't have to drive into town, and since the transactions are easily downloaded into my cheque book manager program. Regards, Victor - Original Message - From: Thomas Lunde To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: June 20, 1999 5:48 PM Subject: Re: automated supermarkets Thomas:This is a very interesting article in not only what it tells and what it implies for FW but the thing that struck me was the speed at which it is happening. I think consumers will like it, I find I like the Teller machine for 80% of my banking. But whether we like it or not, between E Commerce and automation of retailing, the jobless ranks are going to soar. The only human jobs for the semi- to unskilled will be as a Courier driver delivering parcels or pizza delivry guy/girl and even both of those "jobs" could be automated. It's time to own up that we need a new way to distribute income other than working - the production of goods and services are still there and need consumers to exist so I suggest a significant tax be added to each machine or group of machines that eliminate work. Prices will stay the same because automation is cheaper than labour but the government will have signicantly more resources to distribute to those who have been marginalized.Thanks for the posting Victor,Respectfully,Thomas Lunde
