The future of population growth.

[Bletchleyite]

What matters for improving productivity is getting out of low productivity industries and into high productivity industries. The target here should not be people like guards but the vast cohort of university graduates that we have educated in the last 20 years. We need them to be working in high productivity new industries such as biomedical and renewable energy instead of running cute little businesses baking cakes or distilling gin.

I think you're slightly missing the important measure of productivity when it comes to taxing things to pay for non working people. It's essentially "income after costs per worker per hour", i.e. the combination of what you pay them and what profit you make from them. These sort of "premium product" businesses actually rank surprisingly well because they charge a very high price for their product.

We are also in the position at the moment of very near full employment, so unlike in the past it's not going to put people on the streets.

A good example of it is food places like Nandos or McDs taking orders on touch screens or your phone. That means fewer staff needed to run the restaurant but the same number of people are served the same food in the same time (or you serve more people with the same staff), thus it is a productivity improvement.

 

[Magdalia]

I think you're slightly missing the important measure of productivity when it comes to taxing things to pay for non working people. It's essentially "income after costs per worker per hour", i.e. the combination of what you pay them and what profit you make from them. These sort of "premium product" businesses actually rank surprisingly well because they charge a very high price for their product.

They do charge premium prices, but most of them remain small, don't develop into businesses that employ lots of other people at high productivity rates, and are still nowhere near as productive as, for example, the biomedical or renewable energy industries. And especially importantly, they don't do significant exports. We are not going to generate the funds to support all of those non-working people by selling cake and gin to each other.

We are also in the position at the moment of very near full employment, so unlike in the past it's not going to put people on the streets.

We were also at near full employment in the early 1970s, with high inflation, an energy crisis, and tax cuts. That decade ended well, didn't it?

A good example of it is food places like Nandos or McDs taking orders on touch screens or your phone. That means fewer staff needed to run the restaurant but the same number of people are served the same food in the same time (or you serve more people with the same staff), thus it is a productivity improvement.

But it probably means a lower tax take. I think that we can be confident that Nandos or McDs aren't paying a lot more tax as a result.

 

[philosopher]

A good example of it is food places like Nandos or McDs taking orders on touch screens or your phone. That means fewer staff needed to run the restaurant but the same number of people are served the same food in the same time (or you serve more people with the same staff), thus it is a productivity improvement.

The past couple of decades have seen a massive growth of these sorts automated payment systems in places such as supermarkets, railway stations, cinemas, hotels, aviation and fast food restaurants. Even border controls have become automated. All this to me should have led to both a large increase in productivity in these sectors and the need for fewer staff.

For example, in a supermarket with self checkouts, one staff member may handle five self checkouts. If you assume someone takes twice as long at a self checkout than at a traditional staffed checkout, this would make the staff looking after these self checkouts two and half times more productive those at staffed checkouts.

However from what I gather, productivity over the past decade had grown very little and second there is currently a labour shortage. This begs the question why these technical improvements seem to have had little impact on productivity.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But it probably means a lower tax take. I think that we can be confident that Nandos or McDs aren't paying a lot more tax as a result.

That actually leads to an interesting argument I have heard which I have at least some time for, which is that in an age of automation we should stop taxing employment, and start taxing wealth and corporate profit.

Were that the case Nando's wouldn't be making the saving on e.g. employer NI they are by not employing till staff any more.

 

[E27007]

The past couple of decades have seen a massive growth of these sorts automated payment systems in places such as supermarkets, railway stations, cinemas, hotels, aviation and fast food restaurants. Even border controls have become automated. All this to me should have led to both a large increase in productivity in these sectors and the need for fewer staff.

For example, in a supermarket with self checkouts, one staff member may handle five self checkouts. If you assume someone takes twice as long at a self checkout than at a traditional staffed checkout, this would make the staff looking after these self checkouts two and half times more productive those at staffed checkouts.

However from what I gather, productivity over the past decade had grown very little and second there is currently a labour shortage. This begs the question why these technical improvements seem to have had little impact on productivity.

The examples quoted are only modest and not groundbreaking, and are dealing with staff at minimum wage levels, real productivity gains affect those on high wages, there is more value to be gained in replacing or de-skilling a high wage employee, a self-service supermarket checkout facility has some but not a great deal of impact in such a low-wage job market, I'm thinking of the 1980s for major surgery applied to the work environment, root and branch changes, such as the Word Processor replacing the IBM Golf Ball in Offices, WP systems could allow Legal firms to produce/amend / print error-free legal contracts in hours instead of days, and a herald for mass adoption of the universal PC in both work and the home. our jobmarket has seemingly stalled, there is nothing special or new to behold technology or productivity-wise, Until something groundbreaking arises, it is just a race-to-the-bottom, I'm hiring, who will work for the least wage rate?

 

[Bald Rick]

But increasing productivity through better process and automation is not the panacea that people think it is, and the reason why is tax.

We will have to change the proportion of total tax take that is based on workers’ earnings. It’s rather less than half the total tax take as it is.

That actually leads to an interesting argument I have heard which I have at least some time for, which is that in an age of automation we should stop taxing employment, and start taxing wealth and corporate profit.

Moving in that direction is certainly an option.

However from what I gather, productivity over the past decade had grown very little and second there is currently a labour shortage. This begs the question why these technical improvements seem to have had little impact on productivity.

Because the ‘checkout’ side of retail is a relatively small part of retail employment, and of course not every store does it, and not every person who shops in the automated stores uses them. (I’m sure there’s a thread in this particular subject, but I still don’t understand why people queue for a staffed checkout when there’s automtills free).

And, also, as @Magdalia points out, we also have some low productivity ’industries’ that have grown considerably over the last 2 decades.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because the ‘checkout’ side of retail is a relatively small part of retail employment, and of course not every store does it, and not every person who shops in the automated stores uses them. (I’m sure there’s a thread in this particular subject, but I still don’t understand why people queue for a staffed checkout when there’s automtills free).

There are people with views similar to those in the various eticket threads who won't use them on principle, but more commonly in my observation, at least at local shops like my nearby Co-ops (I have 3 that are roughly equidistant plus 2 Tesco Expresses, a One Stop and a McColls, and other than the latter two that don't have automatic tills it's the same at all of them), it's because they want fags.

 

[Bald Rick]

There are people with views similar to those in the various eticket threads who won't use them on principle, but more commonly in my observation, at least at local shops like my nearby Co-ops (I have 3 that are roughly equidistant plus 2 Tesco Expresses, a One Stop and a McColls, and other than the latter two that don't have automatic tills it's the same at all of them), it's because they want fags.

Well I’m in St Albans and barely anyone smokes here! (Genuinely very rarely see people buying fags).

 

[Magdalia]

We will have to change the proportion of total tax take that is based on workers’ earnings. It’s rather less than half the total tax take as it is.

That actually leads to an interesting argument I have heard which I have at least some time for, which is that in an age of automation we should stop taxing employment, and start taxing wealth and corporate profit.

Looking at the Conservative Party leadership election that will be a piece of cake!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well I’m in St Albans and barely anyone smokes here! (Genuinely very rarely see people buying fags).

Probably more into the form of Coke that isn't sold in a Co-op over there instead!

(I was on a Zoom quiz a while back which included some people who didn't know me well, and I commented about having ordered some Coke to be delivered. I was of course referring to one of those little robots bringing me a bottle of Coca Cola, but I think there was some initial misinterpretation!)

 

[Bald Rick]

Probably more into the form of Coke that isn't sold in a Co-op over there instead!

absolutely not!

 

[Giugiaro]

This same discussion sparked in Portugal.

Pordata published that Portugal is now the country with the oldest population in the EU, with 182 older people over 65 for every 100 kids aged 14 or less.

This has led to two discussions: Either if we should combat the poor fertility rate in Portugal, and if we should, or shouldn't, encourage more people to immigrate to Portugal.

 

[brad465]

There are some very difficult questions to address in care. Further deep debate on the rights and wrongs of it is clearly for another thread, but there are plenty of very ill people who are costing a fortune to keep going but with no quality of life, and who might prefer a visit to Dignitas, but are not afforded that option because they are too ill to arrange it themselves or to fly there, which is the only way to arrange it without someone risking life imprisonment for murder or a related charge. Clearly such a thing would need massive safeguards such as "living wills" to stop people bumping Granny off to get her money ASAP (sadly there are people who would do that) but in my view it really needs looking at.

To me it's bizarre that if I had a seriously ill dog with no quality of life I would have the option to give it a treat day and calmingly stroke it as it breathed its last in controlled circumstances, but that that same dignity cannot be afforded to me if I'm little more than a vegetable. To me it shows in some ways how we love animals more than people sometimes.

I would strongly agree with this, and while it is not a silver bullet to the wider population demographic time bomb, it does highlight that there is only so much progress that can be made in the world of healthcare, and in some cases we've gone backwards.

I do also think the more people there are in care, the more of a negative impact there is on the working population, in turn impacting productivity. I know of colleagues and relatives who have had to regularly visit those in care in the build-up to going into care homes, and then during their care home lives in order to help their health (we saw during covid how dementia patients suffered badly from lack of visits). This costs time and impacts wellbeing, which both impact working lives, assuming the ones supporting those in care are of working age too. I certainly think a public debate around euthanasia is needed, and would support its introduction for those who can consent and are terminally ill/destined for 24/7 dependence on others in order to survive (i.e. not living a natural life IMO). Depending on how many might opt for an earlier death than their terminally ill/long term degenerative illness would normally take to do the same, that may also save money that goes into other parts of the economy, both at healthcare funding level and personal finance level, further easing the financial burden of the current population demographic trajectory.

 

[Gostav]

This same discussion sparked in Portugal.

Pordata published that Portugal is now the country with the oldest population in the EU, with 182 older people over 65 for every 100 kids aged 14 or less.

This has led to two discussions: Either if we should combat the poor fertility rate in Portugal, and if we should, or shouldn't, encourage more people to immigrate to Portugal.

It depends on is there are sufficient employment opportunities and better income than in the hometown, Portugal is almost at the bottom of developed countries in Europe as I know which hard to attract high-quality immigrants.

Try asking Chinese or Japanese about whether they would like to immigrate to the US or a developed Western European country (UK, France, Germany, Belgium, etc ), or to a typical "Eastern European" country. The number of people who yearn for the former must greatly exceed the latter. Ageing and youth attrition in Eastern Europe are also high, but there is no solution.

 

[E27007]

It depends on is there are sufficient employment opportunities and better income than in the hometown, Portugal is almost at the bottom of developed countries in Europe as I know which hard to attract high-quality immigrants.

I have a book by John Redwood, former Conservative Minister and Euro-sceptic, in the book Mr Redwood states Britain has made better provision for the funding of future generations of pensioners than the rest of the key countries in the Eu,
He and other Euro-sceptics have expressed the view that the UK would have been required to make good the funding shortfall for the pensions of those other countries.

 

[najaB]

This has led to two discussions: Either if we should combat the poor fertility rate in Portugal, and if we should, or shouldn't, encourage more people to immigrate to Portugal.

Where do I sign up?

 

[brad465]

The UN currently estimate the 15th November 2022, two months from now, to be the date the world population reaches 8 billion:

https://twitter.com/UN/status/1568902671049711616

In a matter of months, the Earth's total population will reach 8 billion. Amid this historic milestone for humanity,
@UNFPA
explains what it will mean for people, our planet & the #GlobalGoals. http://unf.pa/wp8

 

[johncrossley]

There are some very difficult questions to address in care. Further deep debate on the rights and wrongs of it is clearly for another thread, but there are plenty of very ill people who are costing a fortune to keep going but with no quality of life, and who might prefer a visit to Dignitas, but are not afforded that option because they are too ill to arrange it themselves or to fly there, which is the only way to arrange it without someone risking life imprisonment for murder or a related charge. Clearly such a thing would need massive safeguards such as "living wills" to stop people bumping Granny off to get her money ASAP (sadly there are people who would do that) but in my view it really needs looking at.

To me it's bizarre that if I had a seriously ill dog with no quality of life I would have the option to give it a treat day and calmingly stroke it as it breathed its last in controlled circumstances, but that that same dignity cannot be afforded to me if I'm little more than a vegetable. To me it shows in some ways how we love animals more than people sometimes.

It is probably worth mentioning that many people in the developed world already have access to euthanasia, and that proportion is bound to increase over time. There is a global market for immigrants. If most of the rest of the developed world use euthanasia there will be less need for immigrants in those regions. That means that the remaining developed countries will have less competition for immigrants.

The ultimate aim is for elderly care to be automated. Eventually, robots will be clever enough that they can repair and build themselves. That would mean that human employment would no longer be necessary, but that won't cause hardship as robots don't need to be paid.

As an aside, why can't I see this thread other than through Alerts?

 

[TwoYellas]

It is probably worth mentioning that many people in the developed world already have access to euthanasia, and that proportion is bound to increase over time. There is a global market for immigrants. If most of the rest of the developed world use euthanasia there will be less need for immigrants in those regions. That means that the remaining developed countries will have less competition for immigrants.

The ultimate aim is for elderly care to be automated. Eventually, robots will be clever enough that they can repair and build themselves. That would mean that human employment would no longer be necessary, but that won't cause hardship as robots don't need to be paid.

As an aside, why can't I see this thread other than through Alerts?

Sounds like an absolute nightmare.

 

[Magdalia]

It is probably worth mentioning that many people in the developed world already have access to euthanasia, and that proportion is bound to increase over time.

But probably not very rapidly. Euthanasia is legal in some countries, but, in the context of population trends, not many take up the option.

Eventually, robots will be clever enough that they can repair and build themselves.

But, even if that's the case, the raw materials for manufacture still have to be sourced, and robots don't run on fresh air. That still has to be paid for. Care is never going to be free.

 

[johncrossley]

But, even if that's the case, the raw materials for manufacture still have to be sourced, and robots don't run on fresh air. That still has to be paid for. Care is never going to be free.

If they are clever enough to repair and build themselves, then they can build the necessary machines to extract the relevant raw materials.