TED Conversations


This conversation is closed.

Should "Jobs" be artificially created, since most people seem to need them?

The whole idea of the Industrial Revolution is replacing physical labor by mechancal power, computers, robots, electricity, etc. Summed up by saying : to eliminate jobs. (for humans) This process seems to be accelerating, not slowiing down. We very well might face an economy with lots of "Productivity" , but few consumers,or "jobs". Analogous to what wealthy families have always been like. Except that they usually " take care of their own," i.e. create jobs for those who need them, however useless and inefficient. So, are we willing to face the consequences of doing that for everybody?! We would have to drop the idea of efficiency , or "merit"Just as in the Army; they pay you and feed you regrardless. Call it Radical, or Nepotism, which?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Jan 6 2013: I think artificially created jobs are fine on a temporary basis for those scraping by to meet their basic needs of food shelter clothing - but rarely lead to meeting an individual's higher level need for self actualization. An exception is volunteer work if it in fact meets real societal needs.

    The presumption here is that more productivity is the main cause of this - but another major factor is the "baby boom"
    which will soon enough pass into perhaps a "baby bust".

    I think a more relevant solution to "not enough jobs" is "spreading the existing jobs around". In the US a major obstacle to this is medical care which is primarily tied to full time employment. The cost to an employer for providing medical care is the same for part time employees as it is for full time employees - so "career" part time work and "job sharing" are not done. I think if we had government provided health care not tied to employment and policies that encouraged less than full time work for those that desired it we would have all kinds of "jobs to spread around'. This would be particularly beneficial for young parents that want to "cut back" to better care for their young children and older workers that want to ease into retirement.
    With government provided, single payer, healthcare we also address the US problem of global business competitiveness. The US spends about twice the level of GDP that other developed countries with government provided health do - yet health outcomes are no better. If we bring our health care cost differential more in line we are more competitive and fewer jobs will be exported over seas.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.