19th Ave New York, NY 95822, USA

Stephen Hawking Says We Should Really Be Scared Of Capitalism, Not Robots (Demo)

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed.”

On October 8, 2015, Alexander C. Kaufman writes on The Huffington Post:

Machines won’t bring about the economic robot apocalypse — but greedy humans will, according to physicist Stephen Hawking.

In a Reddit Ask Me Anything session on Thursday, the scientist predicted that economic inequality will skyrocket as more jobs become automated and the rich owners of machines refuse to share their fast-proliferating wealth.

<span class='image-component__caption' itemprop="caption">Stephen Hawking wrote on Thursday that if machine-produced wealth is not shared, technology will drive "ever-increasing inequality."</span>KIRSTY WIGGLESWORTH/ASSOCIATED PRESSStephen Hawking wrote on Thursday that if machine-produced wealth is not shared, technology will drive “ever-increasing inequality.”

“If machines produce everything we need, the outcome will depend on how things are distributed. Everyone can enjoy a life of luxurious leisure if the machine-produced wealth is shared, or most people can end up miserably poor if the machine-owners successfully lobby against wealth redistribution. So far, the trend seems to be toward the second option, with technology driving ever-increasing inequality.”

Essentially, machine owners will become the bourgeoisie of a new era, in which the corporations they own won’t provide jobs to actual human workers.

As it is, the chasm between the super rich and the rest is growing. For starters, capital — such as stocks or property — accrues value at a much faster rate than the actual economy grows, according to the French economist Thomas Piketty. The wealth of the rich multiplies faster than wages increase, and the working class can never even catch up.

But if Hawking is right, the problem won’t be about catching up. It’ll be a struggle to even inch past the starting line.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/stephen-hawking-capitalism-robots_5616c20ce4b0dbb8000d9f15

Gary Reber Comments:

The march of technology is non-stoppable…”one day soon robots will be able to assess and execute complex tasks on the fly and without substantial intervention from human operators.”

Now Stephen Hawkin has joined the countless authors that are looking at a future where there will be  hordes of citizens of zero economic value. That is, unless the system can be reformed to empower EVERY citizen to acquire ownership in the wealth-creating, income-producing capital assets resulting from technological invention and innovation.

Non-human capital, such as robotics, does not “enhance” labor productivity (labor’s ability to produce economic goods). In fact, the opposite is true. It makes many forms of labor unnecessary. The changing, evolving and innovating character of technological change makes tools, machines, structures, and processes ever more productive while leaving human productiveness largely unchanged (our human abilities are limited by physical strength and brain power––and relatively constant).

There is nothing new to the realization that advancing technology has always eliminated jobs. It’s the nature of technology to do so. Technology replaces human labor in the production process, or no rational producer would purchase the technology. It is simply untrue that “technology creates jobs,” but instead advancing technology eliminates jobs.

Because productive capital is increasingly the source of the world’s economic growth it should become the source of added property ownership incomes for all. The reality is if both labor and capital are independent factors of production, and if capital’s proportionate contributions are increasing relative to that of labor, then equality of opportunity and economic justice demands that the right to property (and access to the means of acquiring and possessing property) must in justice be extended to all.

Rather than focus on Job Creation that holds back technological invention and innovation, our economic policies should focus on wealth-creating, income-producing capital Ownership Creation.

Given that there is no question that robotic technology will continue to expand the productivity and in large measure destroy jobs and devalue the value of human labor, the question that SHOULD be urgently addressed is WHO SHOULD OWN THE FUTURE TECHNOLOGY ECONOMY?

Will ownership continue to concentrate among the top 10 percent wealthy ownership class who now OWNS America, or will we reform the system to provide equal opportunity for EVERY child, woman, and man to acquire personal ownership in FUTURE non-human capital assets paid for with the FUTURE earnings of the investments in our technological future?

Today, large streams of data, coupled with statistical analysis and sophisticated algorithms, are rapidly gaining importance in almost every field of science, politics, journalism, and much more. What does this mean for the future of work?

With increasing punditry, scholars such as Stephen Hawkin and others are writing about the impact of the Second Industrial Revolution where tectonic shifts in the technologies of production are destroying and degrading jobs due to the shift from labor worker input to the non-human factor––human-intelligent machines, super-automation, robotics, digital computer operations, etc.

The question that requires an answer is now timely before us. It was first posed by binary economist Louis Kelso in the 1950s but has never been thoroughly discussed on the national stage. Nor has there been the proper education of our citizenry that addresses what economic justice is and what ownership is. Therefore, by ignoring such issues of economic justice and ownership, our leaders are ignoring the concentration of power through ownership of productive capital, with the result of denying the 99 percenters equal opportunity to become capital owners. The question, as posed by Kelso is: “how are all individuals to be adequately productive when a tiny minority (capital workers) produce a major share and the vast majority (labor workers), a minor share of total goods and service,” and thus, “how do we get from a world in which the most productive factor—physical capital—is owned by a handful of people, to a world where the same factor is owned by a majority—and ultimately 100 percent—of the consumers, while respecting all the constitutional rights of present capital owners?”

Solutions based on a policy direction that simultaneously creates new capital owners as the economy expands are to be found in the platform of the Capital Homestead Act. Support the Capital Homestead Act at http://www.cesj.org/learn/capital-homesteading/, http://www.cesj.org/learn/capital-homesteading/capital-homestead-act-a-plan-for-getting-ownership-income-and-power-to-every-citizen/ and http://www.cesj.org/learn/capital-homesteading/capital-homestead-act-summary/. See http://www.cesj.org/learn/capital-homesteading/ch-vehicles/.

Leave a comment