Crisis Incoming (Normal English)

[sirogo 3,624]

Overproduction Crisis

 

Yet since years, humans are losing their job in favor of intelligent machines because of their good efficiency. The production rate is rising quickly but the number of buyers is going down. The overproduction crisis is about to happen…

 

   First of all, let’s define the term “intelligent machines”. The first one was created during World War II to find the Enigma code, invented by Alan Turing. It was a kind of computer, but without any interface. Now it evolved and we have other kinds of computers, personal and ‘professional’ ones. Everyone can have a Mac or Windows computer, but getting a much more intelligent one like Watson (smartest intelligent machine in the world) can only be done by huge societies and companies. So while you are trying to afford a PC as cheap as possible, other powerful companies are spending the entirety of their wealth in buying the most sophisticated and intelligent machines. They are buying intelligence! It’s like buying as many ‘brains’ as possible, but with a discount! Because, yes, instead of having 100 human brains in 100 m^2, they can have the equivalent of 200 human brains in 1 m^2! So… What would you do if there was a 50% sale on you favourite Mac book pro?

 

   Now let’s take a look at their use.

They can have plenty of tasks, but many companies’ computers are used to program machines or kind of ‘robots’ that will have a mechanical influence on the company’s production system, and by that, production rate. SO now you can guess what will happen next: The rise of companies’ production rate! That’s why they’re buying intelligent machines after all…

 

   So, companies buy intelligent machines in order to increase their production rate, and by these computers, people lose their job, and there are less jobs available. But if a person is unemployed, he’s obviously not earning anything. And if people don’t earn money anymore, as a matter of fact they don’t have any more money to spend on buying these companies’ product. So while industries are having the highest production rate they ever had, civilians can’t buy anything. We are about to arrive to the biggest overproduction crisis ever, and humanity is definitely not ready for it.

[VaudeVille 1,428]

Um.. You're a little wrong over here. What you have mentioned above is called creative destruction in economic terms.

 

Creative destruction will basically destroy something old and outdated to replace it with something newer and more sophisticated. In the short run, creative destruction affects people but it has a much better effect in the long run.

 

Let me give you a simple example :-

Before telephones existed, people communicated through letters. This postal system also employed a large no. of people. This included people working at the post office, the mail man who went from house to house delivering letters, and wood cutters who cut wood for papers, etc.

Now when telephones came along, the value of wood went down since their demand decreased due to fewer people writing letters, many mail men lost their jobs due to far fewer letters having to be delivered etc. On the contrary, telephones made life a lot easier with quick communication being made possible when there is an urgent need and various other advantages.

 

Now I will also try to give you an understanding of how politicians benefit when creative destruction takes place.

In an ideal setup, the government should support creative destruction while providing a blanket over people who are affected/ lose jobs. For eg.

When people get kicked out of their job due to machines taking over, a norm can be created that while an employee loses her/his job, s/he is given a decent enough compensation which will help her/him sustain for 6-8 months while s/he looks for other work. This is just one example of how this issue can be partly resolved. It's likely that there would be better solutions we brainstorm this problem.

 

Now what a politician will do in order to gain support or votes is that he will condemn the newer better technology, show how it affects people, and promise to get back to things the way the were instead of proposing a solution an alternative for those affected.

Let me also give you an insight as to why petrol wouldn't run out before at least 90-100 years.

Alternative technologies in cars have come up which don't require any petrol or electrical charging. There exists the technology of Fuel-cell cars that run on hydrogen. F-cell cars need hydrogen stations to refuel and hydrogen stations only need need water supply and sunlight to be able to produce hydrogen since hydrogen for these cars is prepared through passing electricity through water (electrolysis [decomposition reaction]).

 

Now you would be wondering that why don't we have F-cell cars and hydrogen stations everywhere already?

The answer is simple:

The petrol lobby is extremely rich, powerful and influential in politics and geopolitics. If such a technology and such vehicles and hydrogen stations become common, it will throw the petrol lobby out of business. Therefore it's evident that the fossil fuel lobby pays the politicians handsomely so that they never talk to much about alternative sources of energy or take any big initiative towards it since even the politicians are under a constant threat of being assassinated/eliminated if they speak to openly against fossil fuels and try to give a big push to alternative/renewable energy. Also the petrol lobby is known to have invested money in newer technology which allows them to pump out more oil and oil fields that had been closed down earlier have been reopened since they are able to extract more oil than they could with previous technology. This also partly explains the reason why petroleum prices have plummeted worldwide

 

I know that I may have gone off topic and I may have disscused politics here but I do not intend to break game rules.

 

Finally I would conclude by suggesting you to read a book called 'Naked Economics' by Charles Wheelan, since you seem to be indirectly( or directly) interested in economics. It's a lovely book which will give you a decent understanding and I can guarantee that it won't bore you :) ;)

Edited May 1, 2016 by VaudeVille

[sirogo 3,624]

 

Hi! Thank you for your point but I don't see how Creative Destruction shows that I'm wrong…

 

Moreover, thank you for the book suggestion but I really am not interested in economics. :)

Edited May 2, 2016 by sirogo

[VaudeVille 1,428]

Hi! Thank you for your point but I don't see how Creative Destruction shows that I'm wrong…

 

Moreover, thank you for the book suggestion but I really am not interested in economics. :)

I can't really explain it here how creative destruction causes short term problems but long term solutions. Also economics isn't just about stats and graphs etc. ( ofc they are a vital part).

Also I wasn't really interested in economics earlier

but that book is what has given me a fantastic insight and got me very interested in the subject. I can assure you that you wouldn't feel bored at any point of time when you read that book

[NERF836 202]

Hmm might happen but a lot of things need to fall into place before it does but overall good read.

[Guest]

I am in complete agreement with gentlemen_uberstrike. Overproduction is no excuse to turn back the wheel of progress. During the middle ages, most jobs were labour intensive and hence by age of 14-15, a child had to start working, usually in whatever profession their patent worked in. Now because those jobs are being done by machine, we have more time to educate ourselves and progress even further. Whilst machines take away some jobs, they also create new ones. The society just needs to accept that and try to work with it rather than try to prevent it.

We will actually face a bigger problem with AI. We are all aware of the ethical and philosophical issues surrounding the topic. Most people tend to imagine a dystopian future as far as machines are concerned. The rich happily enjoying life of comfort while the poor starve on the outskirts of future cities. That's not our future. That's our present. Just because we live inside a concrete box and can afford much of latest technology, we think that we aren't poor. I might write an article about this..... Anyway, the future with machines can also be utopian. Machines doing all the labour intensive tasks and assisting humans in their jobs. Humans, on the other hand, will be able to focus on social and scientific problems.

[HAPPSHOT 2,029]

Hey nicely written! +1!!! But umm i think you should be writing on a Interesting topic rather than this :P

[VaudeVille 1,428]

Hey nicely written! +1!!! But umm i think you should be writing on a Interesting topic rather than this :P

You think this isn't interesting? It's something that's very relevant, analytical and thought provoking.