• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

50% of occupations today will no longer exist in 2025: Report

imagep said:
I don't disagree.

But regardless, it's becoming harder and harder to make a living wage in music, unless you have special connections. There are just way too many people pursing a shrinking market of financial opportunity in the music field. Anytime that competition increases without a corresponding increase in sales, profits will tend to fall.
Click to expand...

In a way, but the playing field has just changed. The Internet has made it the Wildwest for generating revenue in music. I collect a royalty every time one of my songs is streamed due to the advertising on that page. You don't have to buy one of my songs, listen to for a bit and I still get paid, A musician has to work a little harder in some areas, play out more but there's still tons of money to be made.
 
Last edited:
imagep said:
Jobs being replaced by technology is a technology issue. Distribution of income is an economic issue. Neither have to be political, unless we just want them to be, but to your point, I do agree that the solutions will largely be guided by politics.
Click to expand...

Then you have misunderstood my position. The solution won't be political. Politics will delay the "solution" for lack of a better word. Businesses adapt. People will have to adapt as well. Politics largely is the false promise that people won't have to adapt if they only vote this way or that way.
 
tres borrachos said:
I would love to get paid to attack her and Reid on the internet for a living.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there are not enough paying jobs like that for every family to have one.
 
Declan said:
Then you have misunderstood my position. The solution won't be political. Politics will delay the "solution" for lack of a better word. Businesses adapt. People will have to adapt as well. Politics largely is the false promise that people won't have to adapt if they only vote this way or that way.
Click to expand...

Can you walk me through a scenario in which our economy would just naturally evolve to create enough living wage jobs so that every family could have at least one? The assumption is that technology is rapidly replacing the need for human labor. go for it. I'd love to have some hope for a viable solution that didn't involve government. I just haven't seen one yet, and I can't develop one in my own mind (of course I'm not the brightest person around either).
 
Last edited:
HenryChinaski said:
In a way, but the playing field has just changed. The Internet has made it the Wildwest for generating revenue in music. I collect a royalty every time one of my songs is streamed due to the advertising on that page. You don't have to buy one of my songs, listen to for a bit and I still get paid, A musician has to work a little harder in some areas, play out more but there's still tons of money to be made.
Click to expand...

And you are able to make a living wage doing this?

I've read a lot about the way that most professional musicians cobble together a living. It doesn't sound that appealing to me...

A $75 gig on Saturday night, $6.53 in royalty fees from recorded music, $90 for giving three kids lessons twice a week, and a job waiting tables for $2.25 plus tips.
 
imagep said:
And you are able to make a living wage doing this?

I've read a lot about the way that most professional musicians cobble together a living. It doesn't sound that appealing to me...

A $75 gig on Saturday night, $6.53 in royalty fees from recorded music, $90 for giving three kids lessons twice a week, and a job waiting tables for $2.25 plus tips.
Click to expand...

I have a regular job. The royalties aren't that much. The publishing company takes a chunk. The point with that is there's people out there that are enjoying my music. I made a pretty good living in my mid 20s to early 30s's playing music live. The other guys in the band didn't want to tour regularly, kids and family stuff. I slowed down got a regular job. Play out semi regularly and do three festivals a year. That's where the good money is. With those festivals I can afford to call in more from my regular job. First and foremost you have to have drive and determination and vision. If musician has those things, they'll have some level of success.
 
HenryChinaski said:
I have a regular job. The royalties aren't that much. The publishing company takes a chunk. The point with that is there's people out there that are enjoying my music. I made a pretty good living in my mid 20s to early 30s's playing music live. The other guys in the band didn't want to tour regularly, kids and family stuff. I slowed down got a regular job. Play out semi regularly and do three festivals a year. That's where the good money is. With those festivals I can afford to call in more from my regular job. First and foremost you have to have drive and determination and vision. If musician has those things, they'll have some level of success.
Click to expand...

Someone once said that the ideal job is the one that the employee would do for free if he couldn't get paid for doing it. Sounds to me that you almost have the perfect job for you. I wish you success with it.

My kid is somewhat of a musician, but he became very discouraged about his chances of ever being able to make a good living as a performer, so he has decided to pursue a career other than music performance, but still in the music field.
 
imagep said:
Can you walk me through a scenario in which our economy would just naturally evolve to create enough living wage jobs so that every family could have at least one? The assumption is that technology is rapidly replacing the need for human labor. go for it. I'd love to have some hope for a viable solution that didn't involve government. I just haven't seen one yet, and I can't develop one in my own mind (of course I'm not the brightest person around either).
Click to expand...

Well since you injected "living wage" nonsense into the conversation, probably not to your satisfaction. We are at peak oil, peak phosphorous, have passed the economic advantage of women in the workplace adding extra labor capacity, are draining our aquifers faster than they replenish themselves, and are facing water shortages. The economies of scale are being lost and the baby boomers are dying off and the per couple child rate is declining below 2 long term The demand for food is ever present. As production shifts away from ADM having the advantages, they will shift back toward local food production. We will need more medical staff to take care of the aging demographic bulge. As wealth trickles out to the masses in China, the US will be able to increase exports to pick up the slack. People will have to train and retrain multiple times in their working years which will create educational jobs geared at supplying them that training. Our infrastructure is falling apart and needs replacing--not just roads and bridges, but our housing stock, sewer lines, gas lines and such. As foreigners gain wealth, they will travel to the US which will create tourism related jobs. As I indicated before, the problem won't be having a job for everyone, but to have someone for every type of job.
 
Declan said:
Then you have misunderstood my position. The solution won't be political. Politics will delay the "solution" for lack of a better word. Businesses adapt. People will have to adapt as well. Politics largely is the false promise that people won't have to adapt if they only vote this way or that way.
Click to expand...
People adapt without ever really noticing they are doing so. We have adapted, for example, to the Internet age and it would be much more difficult to adapt back to the way we were. The future is always easier than we expected because it comes just one day at a time.
 
imagep said:
Someone once said that the ideal job is the one that the employee would do for free if he couldn't get paid for doing it. Sounds to me that you almost have the perfect job for you. I wish you success with it.

My kid is somewhat of a musician, but he became very discouraged about his chances of ever being able to make a good living as a performer, so he has decided to pursue a career other than music performance, but still in the music field.
Click to expand...
Advice I have for your son is that it should be about having fun AND drive. If success comes so be it. And if the type of success that he's envisioning does not come, do not let that discourage him from playing music. At the end of the day it's about having something to say.
 
They were predicting this same stuff 20 years ago. Robots were going to put everyone out of business. It might be different now but I don't think so.
 
j-mac said:
This prediction is a frightening one for those of us at the age where we are not old enough to not work, but too old to retrain and start over.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous. People will still stock shelves, drive trucks, pave roads, be doctors and lawyers, do customer service, etc.
 
j-mac said:
This prediction is a frightening one for those of us at the age where we are not old enough to not work, but too old to retrain and start over.
Click to expand...

This prediction seems a little aggressive. 2025 is 11 years from now. I highly doubt that things are going to advance so far in 11 years that 50% of the currently existing jobs will be obsolete. Maybe the technology will exist to make them obsolete, but that's not the same as the technology actually being rolled out and those jobs being gone.

I'm not too worried, since I doubt they'll be able to replace engineers in 11 years.
 
Bodhisattva said:
That is ridiculous. People will still stock shelves, drive trucks, pave roads, be doctors and lawyers, do customer service, etc.
Click to expand...

In 2025, yeah, probably most of that. But shelves and trucks? It's not too long before machines can do that on their own.
 
Deuce said:
Listen, if you can't earn a living it's because you are too lazy and/or stupid to be of sufficient value. Go work at McDonald's for that minimum wage. Oh wait. That job probably wont be there either and even if it was, you couldn't live on it. I'm sure you're so relieved, we wouldn't want you to be able to support yourself on something so menial.
Click to expand...

Do stupid people deserve to live? Or should they just die?
Do lazy people deserve to die? Do people ever deserve to be lazy? If you hate people for not working because you don't get to not work, then could you not work?

I don't blame lazy people. We exist in a world that expects infinite growth, which means we will always work. Wouldn't you rather live a life of less work? Wouldn't it make more sense if we worked hard to not work? I'm sure our quality of life is so good, because there are no depressed and anxious people in the United States.

It's okay to not like lazy people. But don't hate them.
 
rocket88 said:
Thanks Obama
Click to expand...

you got it.... Obama is solely responsible for every economic megatrend.... from innovations of technology to outsourcing to foreign countries. Its nice to have a simple blame point for all of life's ills....
 
j-mac said:
This prediction is a frightening one for those of us at the age where we are not old enough to not work, but too old to retrain and start over.
Click to expand...

Is it sad or funny that my first thought when I read the title was that we were going to reduce our bases in foreign countries by 50%?
 
NonoBadDog said:
They were predicting this same stuff 20 years ago. Robots were going to put everyone out of business. It might be different now but I don't think so.
Click to expand...

And those predictions are coming true. Are you not aware that the labor force participation rate has been dropping for the past 15 years? Or that the average workweek has dropped down to 37 hours?
 
Bodhisattva said:
That is ridiculous. People will still stock shelves, drive trucks, pave roads, be doctors and lawyers, do customer service, etc.
Click to expand...

there will always be a need for human labor, but just not enough to supply everyone with a 40 hour per week job.

All of those jobs that you just mentioned, except for possibly doctors, are being replaced with technology.
 
upsideguy said:
you got it.... Obama is solely responsible for every economic megatrend.... from innovations of technology to outsourcing to foreign countries. Its nice to have a simple blame point for all of life's ills....
Click to expand...

That's the nice thing about being on the far right, you don't have to actually think.
 
Hatuey said:
How many critically acclaimed records has it come out with? Listen, any computer can put a few numbers together and create something. That's not in question. What is in question is whether it will replace a human. Creation doesn't mean it's going to be embraced by a general public and to this day, they haven't been embraced anymore than the invention of animatronic dogs have replaced real dogs in any sense of the word. So yes, a computer can put a few notes out and make it sound like something. It's not going to put emotions behind it and then be able to explain the meaning of that creation any time soon.
Click to expand...

Its a good ways off, but emotions are chemical reactions and can be described mathematically. That means that EVENTUALLY machines will be able to mimic human emotions to the point they can't be distinguished from a human's.
 
imagep said:
That's the nice thing about being on the far right, you don't have to actually think.
Click to expand...

Wow, that's harsh Scott...What makes you think people on the right don't think? I mean, are we really to the point that if someone doesn't automatically agree with us, that we have licence to just chalk them off to stupid?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom