It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Fast food is an easy job everyone can do...

page: 14
55
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: defcon25

"just work" does give an improvement to the quality of life. For example, someone who "just works" still will generally have food, shelter, clothing, and most likely a phone and internet.

When i compare that to Mazlow's Hierarchy, it looks to me like a human who "just works" at least gets an automatic placement in the top 2 levels of the pyramid.

I think a big issue is what people call 'quality of life'




posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: defcon25

"just work" does give an improvement to the quality of life. For example, someone who "just works" still will generally have food, shelter, clothing, and most likely a phone and internet.

When i compare that to Mazlow's Hierarchy, it looks to me like a human who "just works" at least gets an automatic placement in the top 2 levels of the pyramid.

I think a big issue is what people call 'quality of life'


I don't think it is simply quality of life. It is the decreasing quality of life while technology increases that is the issue.

The quality of life for the minimum wage worker was better in the 80's then today.

Technological advancements should improve the quality of life for all, but currently the only thing technology creates are unemployment and an increase in wealth disparity.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If you work you can buy your own food have a place to sleep and the basics not to complicated.

Why the hell do we have a society where millions of people can't even put a roof over their heads and tens of millions need food assistance.

Not working, broke system, needs to change.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Isurrender73

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: defcon25

"just work" does give an improvement to the quality of life. For example, someone who "just works" still will generally have food, shelter, clothing, and most likely a phone and internet.

When i compare that to Mazlow's Hierarchy, it looks to me like a human who "just works" at least gets an automatic placement in the top 2 levels of the pyramid.

I think a big issue is what people call 'quality of life'



I don't think it is simply quality of life. It is the decreasing quality of life while technology increases that is the issue.

The quality of life for the minimum wage worker was better in the 80's then today.

Technological advancements should improve the quality of life for all, but currently the only thing technology creates are unemployment and an increase in wealth disparity.


That is exactly what I was going to say, that is the real big issue. What we need is for the people to have access to those technologies. People have no idea how easy, with the right technologies, it has become to produce stuff. That should be the role of the government, because theoretically a government is the highest level of the manifestation of the will of a given community to cooperate. But influential private interests(banks, big corps etc) have completely hijacked governments.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If you work you can buy your own food have a place to sleep and the basics not to complicated.

Why the hell do we have a society where millions of people can't even put a roof over their heads and tens of millions need food assistance.

Not working, broke system, needs to change.


I think you mention the "welfare system" as an issue. Thats part of it.

But there have always been poor people. So long as there has been society. Thousands of years of class division....it may suck, but its what being human is.

I am kind of torn on this issue. I mean, i watch/observe people every day make terrible decisions, then fail to even recognize the impact those terrible decisions have on their lives. "I can't pay my rent", but on facebook they are showing off some new, expensive bauble.

THen there are people like my uncle who don't run their air conditioners just so they can afford their electric bill in the summer.

The first group, those are the ones that drive negative sentiment. The latter group, they are getting screwed because of it.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I think almost all occupations on the planet except for the very specialized and even then rare occasions where schooling is required.


I forgot to finish my thought process....

Can be taught with an apprenticeship. I think a major part of the problem is we now have to rely on an overpriced school system that requires four or more years of education in order to gain entry level status into a position that can be taught through apprenticing.

edit on 7/4/2015 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Isurrender73

Fully Agree....I remember as a kid seeing videos in school about how our future would be fully automated and everyone was in the park on a sunny day having a picnic whilst robots in factories built everything and no one worked.
It hasn't quite turned out like that though.
As Technology keeps improving more and more jobs will be lost to robots and computers,where is the population going to get the money to buy all the stuff that the robots make?
Are we all gonna be living off welfare in the future or starving in the streets because we can't get hold of the paper vouchers or get any digits added to the electronic bank account?



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan


"just work" does give an improvement to the quality of life. For example, someone who "just works" still will generally have food, shelter, clothing, and most likely a phone and internet.

When i compare that to Mazlow's Hierarchy, it looks to me like a human who "just works" at least gets an automatic placement in the top 2 levels of the pyramid.

I think a big issue is what people call 'quality of life'


Hey Big,

Are you willing to pay me 200 to mow your lawn?



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

The system is totally broke....like you say it has to be changed.
The only people the system is working for is the one percent.
The Status Quo are not interested in trying to fix it,the only way for it to be fixed is when the majority decide enough is enough.
The problem is that we live in a heirarchy if we let it continue it will destroy humanity as we will just continue to drain the planets resources so that a few can have a party at the expense of the majority.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: defcon25
As Technology keeps improving more and more jobs will be lost to robots and computers,where is the population going to get the money to buy all the stuff that the robots make?
Are we all gonna be living off welfare in the future or starving in the streets because we can't get hold of the paper vouchers or get any digits added to the electronic bank account?


Some jobs lost, some jobs created...

We are entering into a realm of pure technology and anyone who can not get on that bus will most likely not have a job in the future. Just because a person in past manufacturing jobs, as example, were paid really good money to put a nut on a bolt over and over doesn't make that some kind of successful job blue print.

I think pure success is when you no longer need to work at all and you only follow your desires....so maybe welfare is the future, just called something different.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: defcon25

The system is totally broke....like you say it has to be changed.
The only people the system is working for is the one percent.


I'm far from the 1% and I'm doing well, so I keep looking back at the person, and not the system in many ways. Should the system blend to the person or should the person blend to the system? As example should the system make a job out of nothing to match a person's skills, or lack of? Or should a person work on skills that the system needs?



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

Have you seen the size of my lawn?


I usually pay $100 to just mow, no weed eating. Its a 3 hour job if you walk fast. My son gets $80 for it, though. I tell him its "a family discount".



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

But there have always been poor people. So long as there has been society. Thousands of years of class division....it may suck, but its what being human is.


Actually, human beings have lived for +-90% of their existence in human societies without class division, hunter-gatherers groups in which levels of inequality were very small. The advent of agriculture changed all that. What you talk about is very new.

Agriculture is knowledge, is science, and science is once again changing the world.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Xtrozero

Have you seen the size of my lawn?


I usually pay $100 to just mow, no weed eating. Its a 3 hour job if you walk fast. My son gets $80 for it, though. I tell him its "a family discount".


Ok ok you win...
I had a feeling that wasn't a good example with someone with Texan in their name...lol

My point is at what point do we just eliminate the job completely instead of paying a "living wage" for the job. For me, I have a small lawn and so I would pay 20 bucks, but 40 I would just do it myself.

In Seattle we will see how higher minimum wage affects the number of jobs available as some businesses move and others cut their staff. In the end it should at some point equal out as companies are forced to be more efficient, but we all know reducing employees is a big way to get more efficient.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: defcon25
As Technology keeps improving more and more jobs will be lost to robots and computers,where is the population going to get the money to buy all the stuff that the robots make?
Are we all gonna be living off welfare in the future or starving in the streets because we can't get hold of the paper vouchers or get any digits added to the electronic bank account?


Some jobs lost, some jobs created...


Actually, the speed of technological unemployment growth is faster than the speed at which new sectors of employment are created. And the bulk of the jobs are the easiest to automate (transportation is the best example).

This video tells everything in short 15min.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: gosseyn

Actually, human beings have lived for +-90% of their existence in human societies without class division, hunter-gatherers groups in which levels of inequality were very small. The advent of agriculture changed all that. What you talk about is very new.

Agriculture is knowledge, is science, and science is once again changing the world.



Since farming is about 10,000 years old one would think that we could now suggest our system is not really that new.


Humans are pack animals, so I would bet we always had hierarchies within groups (chief anyone?) and we sure have had class divisions for millions of years most likely as we compare how one group interacted with another.


edit on 4-7-2015 by Xtrozero because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: gosseyn

Actually, the speed of technological unemployment growth is faster than the speed at which new sectors of employment are created. And the bulk of the jobs are the easiest to automate (transportation is the best example).


I see a point in our future where everyone's reproductive systems are turned off at birth and they need to apply for a birth license that would have strict requirements to attain. Then our population shrinks down to a manageable level where we do not need to find work for 7 billion people.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Xtrozero

We don't need to find work for 7 billion people.

Doesn't mean we need to do anything but change that expectation.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 04:07 PM
link   
a reply to: gosseyn

Given what I see from Ancient India, and how deeply divided their caste system is, I can only assume that it indicates the presence of a class system long before we would have records for it.

And it is common sense. Humans are naturally inclined towards those like them, and averse to those who aren't.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Doesn't mean it HAS to be that way and or should.



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join