1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:04,979 Hi! I’m Peter Joseph and welcome to: “3 Questions - What do you propose?” 2 00:00:05,219 --> 00:00:08,409 This thought exercise is intended as both 3 00:00:08,599 --> 00:00:11,530 an address to the average person concerned about global problems 4 00:00:11,670 --> 00:00:13,670 along with those who are confused about 5 00:00:13,810 --> 00:00:16,406 or even in opposition to The Zeitgeist Movement. 6 00:00:16,596 --> 00:00:19,126 I'm going to pose three basic questions here. 7 00:00:19,239 --> 00:00:21,239 If you disagree with the answers I provide 8 00:00:21,342 --> 00:00:24,052 or perhaps even the premise of the questions themselves 9 00:00:24,260 --> 00:00:28,040 I encourage you to respond with an alternative solution or a counterargument. 10 00:00:28,319 --> 00:00:30,397 If you choose to do this, just make sure that you have reviewed 11 00:00:30,500 --> 00:00:32,700 the sources listed and keep focus. 12 00:00:32,810 --> 00:00:35,720 Again this is about the three questions, only. 13 00:00:36,030 --> 00:00:38,855 Now, before I begin, the term 'market economy' 14 00:00:38,955 --> 00:00:40,805 will be used here throughout. 15 00:00:40,921 --> 00:00:43,651 And since people are quick to get lost semantically about what 16 00:00:43,770 --> 00:00:47,170 'capitalism' or a free market supposedly is or isn’t, 17 00:00:47,298 --> 00:00:52,138 I am going to define my context now, bypassing any semantic confusion. 18 00:00:52,385 --> 00:00:55,025 When I use the term 'market economy', I am simply referring 19 00:00:55,126 --> 00:00:59,146 to the core attributes shared by every major market system variation 20 00:00:59,317 --> 00:01:00,817 in the world today. 21 00:01:00,917 --> 00:01:04,007 And only three basic characteristics are needed here. 22 00:01:04,168 --> 00:01:05,668 The 1st is labor for income. 23 00:01:05,789 --> 00:01:08,239 Obviously the whole global economy is based on employment; 24 00:01:08,405 --> 00:01:10,405 this is how people gain money to survive 25 00:01:10,545 --> 00:01:13,114 and spend back into the system, keeping it going. 26 00:01:13,359 --> 00:01:17,659 The 2nd is that all resources, goods and services retain property value 27 00:01:17,859 --> 00:01:19,949 transferred by means of monetary exchange. 28 00:01:20,057 --> 00:01:21,557 Obvious enough. 29 00:01:21,657 --> 00:01:24,288 Everything is bought and sold through the use of money 30 00:01:24,418 --> 00:01:26,378 mediated by the market itself. 31 00:01:27,002 --> 00:01:31,822 And 3rd, the overall incentive strategy is based upon competition for demand 32 00:01:32,068 --> 00:01:35,398 whether person-to-person or institution-to-institution 33 00:01:35,626 --> 00:01:37,466 all oriented around the interest to 34 00:01:37,749 --> 00:01:39,879 (a) save money on production and 35 00:01:39,980 --> 00:01:43,220 (b) maximize profits upon final sales. 36 00:01:43,423 --> 00:01:47,723 Again, this is the most basic gaming logic present in the market. 37 00:01:48,043 --> 00:01:51,701 That’s it: very simple and again these characteristics are universal 38 00:01:51,835 --> 00:01:54,410 to all economies functioning in the world today. 39 00:01:54,900 --> 00:01:56,910 So on to Question 1: 40 00:01:57,332 --> 00:02:00,466 "Given the market economy requires consumption in order to maintain 41 00:02:00,606 --> 00:02:04,356 demand for human employment and further economic growth as needed, 42 00:02:04,519 --> 00:02:08,469 is there a structural incentive to reduce resource use, 43 00:02:08,679 --> 00:02:11,629 biodiversity loss, the global pollution footprint, 44 00:02:11,750 --> 00:02:13,900 and hence assist the ever-increasing need for 45 00:02:14,000 --> 00:02:17,630 improved ecological sustainability in the world today?" 46 00:02:18,517 --> 00:02:22,777 The most basic mechanism of the market is the movement of money. 47 00:02:23,200 --> 00:02:24,800 And like the gas pedal on a car 48 00:02:25,093 --> 00:02:29,363 if monetary circulation slows, it means demand and turnover slows, 49 00:02:29,471 --> 00:02:31,651 and the average effect is a loss of jobs, 50 00:02:31,934 --> 00:02:34,724 loss of income and a loss of economic growth. 51 00:02:34,869 --> 00:02:37,749 Therefore, consumption is the fuel of the market system 52 00:02:37,869 --> 00:02:40,739 and the more we consume, the better the 'health' of the overall economy. 53 00:02:40,872 --> 00:02:43,372 Yet this necessity for constant, cyclical consumption 54 00:02:43,472 --> 00:02:46,332 is in complete contradiction to what is needed for basic, 55 00:02:46,435 --> 00:02:48,645 long-term species survival. 56 00:02:48,872 --> 00:02:51,352 Wouldn’t it seem responsible to conclude that 57 00:02:51,648 --> 00:02:53,378 the goal of any viable economy 58 00:02:53,478 --> 00:02:56,298 is not only to meet the needs of the population, but to do so 59 00:02:56,400 --> 00:02:59,720 in the most strategic, efficient and conservative manner possible? 60 00:02:59,860 --> 00:03:02,859 Yet the market incentivizes the exact opposite behavior 61 00:03:02,999 --> 00:03:05,299 due to this need for constant turnover. 62 00:03:05,460 --> 00:03:09,557 In fact, the entire basis of the market can be summarized in one paradox: 63 00:03:09,841 --> 00:03:13,221 “The market justifies its existence by the recognition of scarcity 64 00:03:13,410 --> 00:03:15,410 but due to its structural mechanics 65 00:03:15,582 --> 00:03:18,502 actually promotes and rewards infinite consumption." 66 00:03:18,811 --> 00:03:20,811 If this confuses you, it might be because 67 00:03:20,911 --> 00:03:23,711 this contradiction remained rather hidden in the past. 68 00:03:23,871 --> 00:03:26,861 Two hundred years ago, our technical means were primitive 69 00:03:27,266 --> 00:03:30,012 and the idea of being able to produce as rapidly as we do now, 70 00:03:30,262 --> 00:03:33,840 accessing major resources virtually at will, was a pipe dream. 71 00:03:33,974 --> 00:03:36,684 We simply didn’t have the technological efficiency back then. 72 00:03:36,985 --> 00:03:40,045 For example 300 years ago a shoemaker could produce maybe 73 00:03:40,200 --> 00:03:42,200 a few pairs of high quality shoes a day. 74 00:03:42,351 --> 00:03:44,701 Today a common automated shoe factory can produce 75 00:03:44,860 --> 00:03:47,630 a pair every 30 seconds or about 4,000 a day. 76 00:03:48,064 --> 00:03:51,484 So, the level of production efficiency has increased so dramatically 77 00:03:51,624 --> 00:03:55,714 that we are no longer having a problem overcoming any 'scarcity of means'. 78 00:03:55,979 --> 00:03:58,339 The problem now is keeping people consuming. 79 00:03:58,557 --> 00:04:01,834 By the way, if you are wondering why, in the wake of this great productivity, 80 00:04:01,974 --> 00:04:05,424 there are still billions of people who lack the most basic goods 81 00:04:05,624 --> 00:04:08,414 that is the result of a different market mechanism 82 00:04:08,629 --> 00:04:10,999 which will touched upon in question 3: 83 00:04:11,394 --> 00:04:14,336 the inevitability of market generated poverty and inequity. 84 00:04:14,458 --> 00:04:15,958 Anyway, back on point: 85 00:04:16,058 --> 00:04:19,578 The modern economy is no longer scarcity-based on this level, 86 00:04:19,729 --> 00:04:21,299 it is consumption-based 87 00:04:21,428 --> 00:04:26,088 as it needs high levels of turnover to keep people employed and growth going. 88 00:04:26,287 --> 00:04:28,887 And obviously the side effect of all of this is 89 00:04:29,000 --> 00:04:31,000 ever-accelerating resource depletion, 90 00:04:31,102 --> 00:04:34,192 biodiversity loss and destabilizing pollution. 91 00:04:35,027 --> 00:04:38,267 Now, there are now countless corroborating studies that confirm 92 00:04:38,375 --> 00:04:40,754 how the world is increasing in its deficiency to meet the 93 00:04:40,924 --> 00:04:42,853 needs of the future population. 94 00:04:43,113 --> 00:04:45,813 Some estimates find that humanity will need 27 more Earths 95 00:04:45,927 --> 00:04:48,997 by 2050 to meet demand, for example. 96 00:04:49,310 --> 00:04:52,310 The rampant, severe biodiversity loss 97 00:04:52,411 --> 00:04:55,310 is not only disrupting basic biosphere functions 98 00:04:55,457 --> 00:04:58,777 it is now a fact that virtually all life support systems are in decline 99 00:04:58,903 --> 00:05:03,913 with 50% of all wildlife having been destroyed in the past 40 years alone. 100 00:05:04,131 --> 00:05:07,991 As far as pollution, these issues are nothing but accelerating 101 00:05:08,277 --> 00:05:10,077 – both water and atmospheric - 102 00:05:10,252 --> 00:05:14,160 creating tremendous destabilization and ongoing environmental damage 103 00:05:14,300 --> 00:05:18,000 and negative public health outcomes. And keep in mind, 104 00:05:18,176 --> 00:05:20,936 as explained at length in The Zeitgeist Movement's materials, 105 00:05:21,036 --> 00:05:23,036 these problems are not immutable. 106 00:05:23,136 --> 00:05:27,576 They can be fixed, if an economic and industrial reorientation 107 00:05:27,680 --> 00:05:29,820 away from market economics was achieved. 108 00:05:29,939 --> 00:05:33,699 However, those specifics are not the subject of this essay. 109 00:05:33,853 --> 00:05:36,354 For more information on that please read the free online book: 110 00:05:36,494 --> 00:05:38,764 'The Zeitgeist Movement Defined.' 111 00:05:39,330 --> 00:05:43,200 Now, as a final point of evidence, a cursory review of 112 00:05:43,301 --> 00:05:46,591 all recent historical attempts to stop overconsumption, 113 00:05:46,823 --> 00:05:50,123 slow biodiversity loss and reduce pollution, have been met 114 00:05:50,243 --> 00:05:54,043 with virtually a stonewalling mentality by the business community. 115 00:05:54,201 --> 00:05:56,721 Of course, there is no mystery to this tendency 116 00:05:56,872 --> 00:05:59,545 because the fact is: acting in a conservative, 117 00:05:59,685 --> 00:06:02,985 truly efficient and sustainable manner is literally the opposite 118 00:06:03,121 --> 00:06:06,941 of what the market requires to function in the long term 119 00:06:07,100 --> 00:06:09,690 keeping this profit machine going. 120 00:06:09,877 --> 00:06:13,677 For example: America’s Environmental Protection Agency 121 00:06:14,005 --> 00:06:16,485 has constantly been attacked by interests worried about 122 00:06:16,585 --> 00:06:18,085 a loss of income and growth. 123 00:06:18,262 --> 00:06:20,462 Just last month the Wall Street Journal ran the headline 124 00:06:20,625 --> 00:06:22,905 'The EPA's Latest Threat to Economic Growth.' 125 00:06:23,146 --> 00:06:26,456 attacking the EPA for its interest to improve air quality standards. 126 00:06:26,781 --> 00:06:29,881 And they are right! If the EPA does push forward 127 00:06:30,008 --> 00:06:32,558 many jobs and billions of dollars will be lost. 128 00:06:32,716 --> 00:06:37,006 That is simply what happens when waste reduction and technical efficiency 129 00:06:37,210 --> 00:06:39,630 and conservation is applied to this system. 130 00:06:40,300 --> 00:06:42,070 If you need a more visceral example 131 00:06:42,190 --> 00:06:44,190 look at what the developing nations are doing 132 00:06:44,290 --> 00:06:47,210 as they struggle to gain economic growth and raise their standard of living. 133 00:06:47,465 --> 00:06:50,975 It's all being done at the expense of the environment. 134 00:06:51,344 --> 00:06:54,784 China’s push for massive industrialization and growth has been enabled 135 00:06:54,884 --> 00:06:56,884 by keeping low environmental standards 136 00:06:57,077 --> 00:06:59,717 and now it has 16 of the world’s most polluted cities. 137 00:06:59,887 --> 00:07:03,887 Again if you look carefully, all developing nations are doing the same thing. 138 00:07:04,020 --> 00:07:08,740 They simply can’t afford more 'green' industrial methods at this point. 139 00:07:09,331 --> 00:07:12,321 As far as resource overshoot and biodiversity loss, 140 00:07:12,507 --> 00:07:15,527 perhaps the most clear description of this clash was made 141 00:07:15,667 --> 00:07:19,617 in the 2010 Convention of Biological Diversity report. 142 00:07:19,789 --> 00:07:24,990 In 2002, 192 countries got together and agreed to slow biodiversity loss 143 00:07:25,130 --> 00:07:28,830 only to come back eight years later completely defeated, stating: 144 00:07:29,057 --> 00:07:32,067 “None of the twenty-one sub-targets accompanying the overall target 145 00:07:32,245 --> 00:07:35,575 of significantly reducing the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010 146 00:07:35,835 --> 00:07:38,635 can be said definitively to have been achieved globally. 147 00:07:39,076 --> 00:07:40,816 Actions to promote biodiversity 148 00:07:40,917 --> 00:07:43,693 receive a tiny fraction of 'funding' compared to 149 00:07:43,793 --> 00:07:46,013 infrastructure and industrial developments... 150 00:07:46,169 --> 00:07:49,059 Moreover, biodiversity considerations are often ignored 151 00:07:49,240 --> 00:07:51,240 when such developments are designed... 152 00:07:51,345 --> 00:07:54,105 Most future scenarios project high levels of extinctions 153 00:07:54,247 --> 00:07:56,897 and loss of habitats throughout this century.” 154 00:07:57,149 --> 00:08:00,409 And of course, why would we expect anything else? 155 00:08:00,759 --> 00:08:03,579 Our economy literally has no structural incentive to adjust; 156 00:08:03,773 --> 00:08:06,859 there is no direct market reward to preserve resources, 157 00:08:06,959 --> 00:08:09,399 habitats or reduce consumption in general. 158 00:08:09,544 --> 00:08:12,594 All it knows is that people need to keep buying stuff 159 00:08:12,719 --> 00:08:16,709 and the more they buy, the better everything is supposed to be. 160 00:08:16,809 --> 00:08:18,809 So back to the question, I ask again: 161 00:08:19,036 --> 00:08:22,566 "Given the market economy requires consumption in order to maintain 162 00:08:22,666 --> 00:08:26,226 demand for human employment and further economic growth as needed, 163 00:08:26,413 --> 00:08:30,213 is there a structural incentive to reduce resource use, 164 00:08:30,416 --> 00:08:33,356 biodiversity loss, the global pollution footprint, 165 00:08:33,602 --> 00:08:35,823 and hence assist the ever-increasing need for 166 00:08:35,923 --> 00:08:39,273 improved ecological sustainability in the world today?" 167 00:08:39,507 --> 00:08:41,007 The answer is 'No'. 168 00:08:41,231 --> 00:08:43,980 There is only the external incentive 169 00:08:44,120 --> 00:08:47,170 – meaning the frustrated outcry of concerned citizens, 170 00:08:47,416 --> 00:08:49,639 demanding this or that change – 171 00:08:49,739 --> 00:08:52,412 which, in truth, simply won't do anything in the long run. 172 00:08:52,512 --> 00:08:56,116 Why? Because it goes against the most basic premise 173 00:08:56,271 --> 00:08:58,881 of the market's functionality itself. 174 00:08:59,530 --> 00:09:03,119 The only true solution is to overcome the structural flaw, 175 00:09:03,259 --> 00:09:06,883 not by fighting it with legislation, but by changing the system. 176 00:09:07,164 --> 00:09:09,684 To do that, we must replace the current economic model 177 00:09:09,894 --> 00:09:13,774 with one that structurally incentivizes and rewards conservation, 178 00:09:13,910 --> 00:09:17,190 true technical efficiency and overall sustainability. 179 00:09:19,021 --> 00:09:22,432 And on a final note, right now it is safe to project 180 00:09:22,572 --> 00:09:26,092 that due to this habitat destruction, biodiversity loss, 181 00:09:26,192 --> 00:09:29,062 resource overshoot and CO2 pollution, 182 00:09:29,247 --> 00:09:32,287 we very well could be entering a period of what's called 183 00:09:32,391 --> 00:09:34,721 the '6th Great Extinction' on Earth. 184 00:09:34,967 --> 00:09:37,500 And unless thing change rapidly the next generation 185 00:09:37,640 --> 00:09:40,850 will be one of great suffering and disorder. 186 00:09:41,424 --> 00:09:42,724 Question 2: 187 00:09:42,867 --> 00:09:46,887 "In an economic system where companies seek to limit their production costs 188 00:09:47,077 --> 00:09:50,537 in order to maximize profits and remain competitive against other producers, 189 00:09:50,723 --> 00:09:54,381 what structural incentive exists to keep human beings employed, 190 00:09:54,581 --> 00:09:58,041 in the wake of an emerging technological condition where the majority of jobs 191 00:09:58,152 --> 00:10:02,065 can now be done more cheaply and effectively by machine automation?" 192 00:10:02,967 --> 00:10:05,722 The long standing defense of those who claim there is no problem 193 00:10:05,822 --> 00:10:07,607 with machines replacing human jobs 194 00:10:07,731 --> 00:10:12,001 is that overall technological innovation will simply balance everything out 195 00:10:12,185 --> 00:10:14,462 by eventually creating new human occupations, 196 00:10:14,563 --> 00:10:17,163 absorbing anyone who is displaced prior. 197 00:10:17,308 --> 00:10:20,167 And while this perspective may have seemed viable 198 00:10:20,277 --> 00:10:23,796 given early periods of slow technological change, 199 00:10:24,056 --> 00:10:26,877 the ever-exponential advancement of automation potential 200 00:10:26,977 --> 00:10:31,592 is now far outpacing the creation of new, human-exclusive labor roles. 201 00:10:31,797 --> 00:10:33,299 And as the trends show 202 00:10:33,490 --> 00:10:37,503 it is simply a matter of time before it becomes most cost effective, 203 00:10:37,837 --> 00:10:42,870 reliable and productive, in all major economic fields to automate. 204 00:10:43,280 --> 00:10:46,320 First, let’s consider the potential. Today there are numerous 205 00:10:46,420 --> 00:10:48,970 corroborating studies showing the capacity of automation 206 00:10:49,071 --> 00:10:51,277 including the conclusion that right now 207 00:10:51,378 --> 00:10:53,682 over half of the world’s jobs can be mechanized. 208 00:10:54,135 --> 00:10:55,635 Second, we need to consider 209 00:10:55,736 --> 00:10:59,189 (A) the trends of employment shifts by industry 210 00:10:59,474 --> 00:11:02,904 (B) the staggering rise in productivity related 211 00:11:03,084 --> 00:11:07,593 and (C) how automation costs are undercutting human labor costs. 212 00:11:07,872 --> 00:11:12,229 I’ll be using the United States as a statistical base, a proxy if you will. 213 00:11:12,369 --> 00:11:15,439 For if it applies to the US, given its advanced technological state, 214 00:11:15,540 --> 00:11:17,540 then it applies to the rest of the world 215 00:11:17,640 --> 00:11:20,140 in the context of trends and potential. 216 00:11:20,506 --> 00:11:21,776 Sector Shifts 217 00:11:21,877 --> 00:11:23,977 There are three core economic sectors: 218 00:11:24,078 --> 00:11:26,495 Agriculture, Industrial and Service. 219 00:11:26,923 --> 00:11:30,965 In 1870, about 75% of Americans worked in agriculture 220 00:11:31,219 --> 00:11:33,875 while today it's about 2%. Why? 221 00:11:34,015 --> 00:11:37,505 Well, there certainly hasn’t been a loss of agricultural demand, right? 222 00:11:37,617 --> 00:11:40,445 And while food imports in the US have grown to about 17% 223 00:11:40,585 --> 00:11:43,853 that obviously doesn’t balance the near 98% drop 224 00:11:43,993 --> 00:11:46,961 in its related employment sector since 1870. 225 00:11:47,141 --> 00:11:50,383 And neither do increases in textile fabric imports and the like. 226 00:11:50,523 --> 00:11:54,355 This drop is almost entirely a result of machine automation. 227 00:11:54,671 --> 00:11:58,582 Where did the jobs go? The Industrial sector and the Service sector. 228 00:11:58,695 --> 00:12:03,017 US Industrial labor reached its peak around 1950 229 00:12:03,157 --> 00:12:06,228 dropping from almost 40% to about 20%. 230 00:12:06,624 --> 00:12:10,174 Why? Well, the common assumption is that globalization 231 00:12:10,274 --> 00:12:12,854 and labor outsourcing in manufacturing is the cause. 232 00:12:13,104 --> 00:12:16,331 And while there may be short term and regional relevance to this 233 00:12:16,471 --> 00:12:20,093 on the global scale, in the long term, it is completely irrelevant 234 00:12:20,302 --> 00:12:23,125 as virtually all nations, especially the developed nations, 235 00:12:23,265 --> 00:12:25,555 are experiencing the exact same trends. 236 00:12:26,210 --> 00:12:28,560 The reason hence is the same, as with agriculture: 237 00:12:28,689 --> 00:12:31,508 technological application displacing human labor. 238 00:12:32,148 --> 00:12:33,764 Now we come to the Service sector. 239 00:12:33,904 --> 00:12:37,720 Today over 80% of jobs exist here. It has been the safe zone 240 00:12:37,924 --> 00:12:40,190 given this kind of work is less physical 241 00:12:40,420 --> 00:12:42,604 and more about mental focus and thought. 242 00:12:42,854 --> 00:12:44,528 It is more versatile and difficult. 243 00:12:44,668 --> 00:12:47,424 And up until the late 20th century the idea of 'thinking machines' 244 00:12:47,601 --> 00:12:52,789 and advanced machines that could replace these variant labor roles 245 00:12:52,970 --> 00:12:55,019 was pretty much deemed science fiction. 246 00:12:55,159 --> 00:12:58,200 Yet, this sector is now quickly being threatened due to 247 00:12:58,300 --> 00:13:02,141 the exponential advancement in programmable intelligence and robotics. 248 00:13:02,298 --> 00:13:04,398 Bank machines, automated phone systems, 249 00:13:04,516 --> 00:13:09,613 point-of-sale kiosks, processing programs for general software, 250 00:13:09,753 --> 00:13:12,621 restaurant automation, automated transport of course-... 251 00:13:12,890 --> 00:13:15,610 If you can think of it, someone is working to automate it. 252 00:13:15,750 --> 00:13:18,106 And just like agriculture and the industrial sector 253 00:13:18,246 --> 00:13:22,001 the use of automation is also ensuring: (a) higher productivity 254 00:13:22,141 --> 00:13:24,707 and (b) lower costs for the businesses. 255 00:13:25,101 --> 00:13:27,668 Trend statistics prove this without a doubt. 256 00:13:28,138 --> 00:13:32,205 (a) Productivity: Human employment is now actually inverse 257 00:13:32,334 --> 00:13:33,934 to productivity in most cases 258 00:13:34,042 --> 00:13:36,770 meaning that in all instances of automation 259 00:13:37,560 --> 00:13:41,210 it not only removes jobs, it actually increases output efficiency. 260 00:13:41,376 --> 00:13:44,491 Here is a classic chart example from manufacturing. 261 00:13:44,600 --> 00:13:47,417 The blue line is the increase in production and the red line 262 00:13:47,530 --> 00:13:50,930 is human employment. It's a staggering diversion. 263 00:13:51,062 --> 00:13:53,832 (b) As far as cost reduction, what needs to be understood 264 00:13:53,932 --> 00:13:55,932 is that all technological innovation 265 00:13:56,032 --> 00:13:59,232 is now becoming what’s called 'information-based'. 266 00:13:59,332 --> 00:14:01,332 Whether it is literally the digital programming, 267 00:14:01,433 --> 00:14:03,433 such as the program running a machine, 268 00:14:03,538 --> 00:14:06,757 or the very process of creation of the physical machine itself. 269 00:14:06,913 --> 00:14:09,897 And what is the developmental trend of information-based technology 270 00:14:09,997 --> 00:14:12,377 in the 21st century? Exponential. 271 00:14:12,481 --> 00:14:15,685 And this is not only relating to the advancement of the technology itself 272 00:14:15,807 --> 00:14:17,907 making things smaller, stronger and more powerful, 273 00:14:18,054 --> 00:14:20,223 it also reduces resource needs 274 00:14:20,404 --> 00:14:24,137 and the cost of emerging technology invariably becomes cheaper. 275 00:14:24,360 --> 00:14:25,860 As a classic example 276 00:14:26,130 --> 00:14:29,020 this is why the chip in a common cell phone is thousands of times 277 00:14:29,120 --> 00:14:34,051 more powerful and less expensive than the supercomputer of the 1970s. 278 00:14:34,440 --> 00:14:36,440 Hence it is simply a matter of time 279 00:14:36,576 --> 00:14:39,806 before a great many of currently out-of-reach automation tools, 280 00:14:40,181 --> 00:14:42,700 such as thinking cybernated robotics, 281 00:14:42,801 --> 00:14:45,518 can perform virtually any basic human role 282 00:14:45,694 --> 00:14:49,125 and become so affordable, that not to automate becomes 283 00:14:49,355 --> 00:14:51,396 a detrimental business decision. 284 00:14:51,816 --> 00:14:55,538 And by the way, if you are one of those techno-capitalist apologists 285 00:14:55,679 --> 00:14:58,994 that says this price decrease in cost will simply make consumer goods 286 00:14:59,164 --> 00:15:02,210 that much cheaper as well, and therefore compensate 287 00:15:02,310 --> 00:15:05,000 for the loss of income generated by the use of automation, 288 00:15:05,105 --> 00:15:08,731 you are overlooking one critical function of the market system: 289 00:15:08,871 --> 00:15:11,991 The market needs scarcity to function. 290 00:15:12,245 --> 00:15:14,979 Abundance has no role in market mechanics. 291 00:15:15,173 --> 00:15:18,610 And the profit structure itself does not view reducing costs 292 00:15:18,750 --> 00:15:21,515 as a means to simply increase affordability 293 00:15:21,616 --> 00:15:23,616 of the end product in and of itself. 294 00:15:23,719 --> 00:15:26,652 It does it, first and foremost, to increase profits! 295 00:15:26,757 --> 00:15:29,287 The only reason you see the price reduction 296 00:15:29,427 --> 00:15:32,431 is because of the competition occurring in industry, 297 00:15:32,571 --> 00:15:36,915 as each company works to one-up each other’s cost efficiency basis 298 00:15:37,015 --> 00:15:38,615 via similar methods. 299 00:15:38,715 --> 00:15:41,015 The point being, regardless of how cheap things become 300 00:15:41,207 --> 00:15:44,387 at some point the consumption deficiency resulting 301 00:15:44,616 --> 00:15:47,443 by the number of people unemployed by automation 302 00:15:47,583 --> 00:15:51,095 will override whatever degree of affordability is being generated 303 00:15:51,328 --> 00:15:55,619 by the lower cost products created. It is inevitable. 304 00:15:55,723 --> 00:16:00,669 And keep in mind - and this is really critical - all it takes is 20-30% 305 00:16:00,909 --> 00:16:05,428 of human unemployment to destabilized society into disorder and outrage. 306 00:16:05,568 --> 00:16:08,746 That’s it. So the question isn’t "will we automate everything?" 307 00:16:08,886 --> 00:16:12,349 The real question is: At what point will the cost efficiency of applied 308 00:16:12,450 --> 00:16:15,735 automation produce 'just enough’ unemployment 309 00:16:15,914 --> 00:16:20,803 to cause social destabilization and a debilitating loss of economic growth? 310 00:16:21,095 --> 00:16:22,333 So I ask again: 311 00:16:22,439 --> 00:16:26,172 "In an economic system where companies seek to limit their production costs 312 00:16:26,272 --> 00:16:28,372 in order to both maximize profits 313 00:16:28,527 --> 00:16:30,727 and remain competitive against other producers, 314 00:16:30,850 --> 00:16:34,850 what structural incentive exists to keep human beings employed, 315 00:16:34,951 --> 00:16:37,649 in the wake of an emerging technological condition 316 00:16:37,789 --> 00:16:40,496 where the majority of jobs can now be done more cheaply 317 00:16:40,636 --> 00:16:43,470 and effectively by machine automation?" 318 00:16:44,002 --> 00:16:47,967 The answer is that there isn't such an incentive, 319 00:16:48,114 --> 00:16:51,811 at least not structurally. Some kind of general incentive may exist 320 00:16:51,951 --> 00:16:54,680 given the common sense awareness that people do need jobs 321 00:16:54,780 --> 00:16:56,280 for the market economy to function. 322 00:16:56,480 --> 00:17:01,314 But that recognition implies that employers would bypass such cost savings 323 00:17:01,454 --> 00:17:07,135 and efficiency and safety-increasing technology just to give people jobs. 324 00:17:07,687 --> 00:17:11,188 The reality is that if a business has the choice between a human and a machine 325 00:17:11,328 --> 00:17:13,494 and the machine is more productive and affordable 326 00:17:13,634 --> 00:17:17,201 they will choose machine, as per market logic, every time. 327 00:17:17,741 --> 00:17:21,160 If they didn’t they would lose a competitive edge 328 00:17:21,300 --> 00:17:24,940 as one of their more ruthless competitors certainly will make that move. 329 00:17:25,080 --> 00:17:28,785 Therefore, the only true, logical and responsible solution in this scenario 330 00:17:28,925 --> 00:17:31,496 is to remove the labor-for-income system itself 331 00:17:31,636 --> 00:17:33,516 hence removing the market 332 00:17:33,747 --> 00:17:37,561 and evolving to a new kind of economic interaction. 333 00:17:38,430 --> 00:17:39,991 Question 3: 334 00:17:40,519 --> 00:17:43,319 "In an economic system which inherently generates 335 00:17:43,419 --> 00:17:45,648 class stratification and overall inequity 336 00:17:45,765 --> 00:17:47,859 how can the effects of 'Structural Violence' 337 00:17:47,999 --> 00:17:51,054 - a phenomenon noted by public health researchers to kill 338 00:17:51,155 --> 00:17:53,308 well over 18 million a year, 339 00:17:53,448 --> 00:17:56,737 generating a vast range of systemic detriments such as behavioral, 340 00:17:56,877 --> 00:17:58,473 emotional and physical disorders - 341 00:17:58,613 --> 00:18:01,848 be minimized or even removed as an effect?" 342 00:18:03,091 --> 00:18:06,795 Many today talk about the horror of unnecessary death and suffering 343 00:18:06,932 --> 00:18:10,935 from dramatic accidents to psychopathic behavioral violence 344 00:18:11,107 --> 00:18:14,659 to historical genocides, wars and other atrocities. 345 00:18:14,825 --> 00:18:17,472 In this, we might notice a kind of moral relativism 346 00:18:17,572 --> 00:18:20,409 in what society prioritizes as most condemnable 347 00:18:20,519 --> 00:18:23,936 most often highlighting visceral, human vs. human behavioral violence 348 00:18:24,295 --> 00:18:26,295 rather than taking a more objective view. 349 00:18:26,424 --> 00:18:29,343 Statistically, if we really wish to be comprehensive 350 00:18:29,443 --> 00:18:33,312 in locating the most prominent, ubiquitous, and unnecessary causes of death 351 00:18:33,412 --> 00:18:37,233 and suffering in the world, we would discover one main catalyst: 352 00:18:37,647 --> 00:18:41,367 class inequality and low socioeconomic status. 353 00:18:41,553 --> 00:18:44,023 Class inequality and low socioeconomic status 354 00:18:44,123 --> 00:18:48,381 trump every other form of violence and public threat, hands down. 355 00:18:48,501 --> 00:18:50,501 The leading cause of death on the planet Earth 356 00:18:50,653 --> 00:18:54,545 is relative and absolute poverty. Period! 357 00:18:54,745 --> 00:18:57,711 Every single year, the near equivalent of two holocausts 358 00:18:57,851 --> 00:19:00,105 - nearly 20 million people - are killed 359 00:19:00,205 --> 00:19:02,425 by the inefficiency inherent to the market economy 360 00:19:02,529 --> 00:19:06,743 and its mathematical inevitability to create large class divisions 361 00:19:07,023 --> 00:19:09,037 and resulting human deprivation. 362 00:19:09,177 --> 00:19:12,263 In this, there are two types of deprivation to note: 363 00:19:12,411 --> 00:19:14,222 Absolute and Relative. 364 00:19:14,362 --> 00:19:16,986 Absolute deprivation is what the billion people currently 365 00:19:17,126 --> 00:19:19,679 not getting their basic nutritional needs are experiencing. 366 00:19:19,819 --> 00:19:23,372 This kind of deprivation is about basic physical needs not being met 367 00:19:23,512 --> 00:19:27,028 and hence the manifestation of sickness and premature mortality 368 00:19:27,228 --> 00:19:29,844 due to a lack of resources and options. 369 00:19:30,304 --> 00:19:32,864 Relative deprivation has to do with the mental, emotional 370 00:19:33,074 --> 00:19:38,146 and physical disorders that result from the stress of simply existing 371 00:19:38,336 --> 00:19:41,074 in the lower tiers of a wealth imbalanced society. 372 00:19:41,314 --> 00:19:43,544 For example: Numerous studies 373 00:19:43,644 --> 00:19:46,513 that compare public health outcomes from one country to another, 374 00:19:46,613 --> 00:19:49,255 based on the level of inequality in that country, 375 00:19:49,393 --> 00:19:52,208 have found that those with the least amount of behavioral violence, 376 00:19:52,348 --> 00:19:54,664 the least amount of general crime, infant deaths, 377 00:19:54,804 --> 00:19:57,883 drug addictions, heart disease, many cancers, obesity, 378 00:19:58,023 --> 00:20:00,665 high blood pressure, low-life expectancy, depression, 379 00:20:00,805 --> 00:20:03,962 general mental illness and other reduced problems, 380 00:20:04,122 --> 00:20:07,433 also have lower wealth inequality by comparison. 381 00:20:08,013 --> 00:20:12,336 Put together, these two forms of deprivation, Absolute and Relative, 382 00:20:12,484 --> 00:20:15,012 constitute what is called 'Structural Violence' 383 00:20:15,152 --> 00:20:17,539 which is a systemic form of violence, 384 00:20:17,689 --> 00:20:19,926 that is typically not what many think of when we consider 385 00:20:20,096 --> 00:20:22,315 the idea of violence in general. 386 00:20:22,885 --> 00:20:26,214 I’ll put it this way: If I put a gun to your head and kill you 387 00:20:26,354 --> 00:20:30,631 we would all agree it is a direct act of mortality producing violence. 388 00:20:31,171 --> 00:20:34,391 If I run a company that decides to save money by covertly 389 00:20:34,500 --> 00:20:37,103 dumping toxic waste into your town’s water supply 390 00:20:37,227 --> 00:20:39,845 and then three years later a group of you in town get cancer 391 00:20:39,965 --> 00:20:43,322 and die from that pollution, I think we would all agree 392 00:20:43,501 --> 00:20:46,639 that it is also an act of mortality producing violence 393 00:20:46,799 --> 00:20:50,937 but more indirect and less obvious in intent. Likewise, 394 00:20:51,067 --> 00:20:54,642 it is now well established that people with low socioeconomic status 395 00:20:54,752 --> 00:20:58,313 are much more likely to die of heart disease than those in upper classes. 396 00:20:58,537 --> 00:21:02,086 It is a known fact that the toxic condition of simply being poor 397 00:21:02,264 --> 00:21:04,264 both in absolute and relative terms, 398 00:21:04,401 --> 00:21:07,189 manifests this disease, amongst many others. 399 00:21:07,467 --> 00:21:09,494 And yet, when people do die as such, 400 00:21:09,634 --> 00:21:12,318 rarely does someone bring up the idea of indirect violence 401 00:21:12,498 --> 00:21:15,642 or more accurately: Structural Violence. Why? 402 00:21:15,800 --> 00:21:19,186 Because the outcome can only be measured by statistics across a population 403 00:21:19,373 --> 00:21:21,821 and not deduced from any singular case. 404 00:21:22,141 --> 00:21:24,589 So it is counterintuitive to our education. 405 00:21:24,909 --> 00:21:27,168 But yet, there is no principled difference 406 00:21:27,268 --> 00:21:29,627 between being killed by a gun shot to the head 407 00:21:29,847 --> 00:21:31,972 being poisoned by a company's pollution 408 00:21:32,112 --> 00:21:36,019 or dying of heart disease because of the causal chain reaction 409 00:21:36,192 --> 00:21:38,361 set in motion by the economic system: 410 00:21:38,763 --> 00:21:43,648 a system that artificially generates economic inequality and poverty 411 00:21:43,916 --> 00:21:46,353 invariably forcing some people to exist 412 00:21:46,503 --> 00:21:49,230 in the toxic condition of low socioeconomic status. 413 00:21:49,390 --> 00:21:52,105 Now you will notice... I said the word 'artificial' 414 00:21:52,345 --> 00:21:54,445 because this poverty is not inevitable 415 00:21:54,548 --> 00:21:57,361 or some immutable natural law of human society 416 00:21:57,581 --> 00:21:59,681 just as shooting you with a gun is not inevitable 417 00:21:59,821 --> 00:22:02,010 and just as polluting your water supply is not inevitable. 418 00:22:02,422 --> 00:22:06,265 The class system we endure today is a product of the market system 419 00:22:06,394 --> 00:22:08,094 and it can be removed 420 00:22:08,224 --> 00:22:11,674 along with the two holocausts occurring every year because of it. 421 00:22:11,814 --> 00:22:14,060 This may not have been the case in the past 422 00:22:14,200 --> 00:22:15,922 but it is definitely true today 423 00:22:16,122 --> 00:22:19,604 given modern technological capacity to create a global abundance. 424 00:22:19,894 --> 00:22:21,933 The fact is, low socioeconomic status 425 00:22:22,040 --> 00:22:24,040 is the leading cause of death on the planet Earth. 426 00:22:24,155 --> 00:22:26,155 And what does that mean by extension? 427 00:22:26,277 --> 00:22:30,623 If economic inequality and inevitable poverty is technically unnecessary 428 00:22:30,763 --> 00:22:33,307 and merely a structural outcome of the market economy itself 429 00:22:33,447 --> 00:22:38,402 then it means the market is the leading cause of death on the planet today. 430 00:22:38,632 --> 00:22:40,132 So back to the question: 431 00:22:40,232 --> 00:22:43,790 "In an economic system which inherently generates class stratification 432 00:22:44,001 --> 00:22:46,791 and overall inequity, how can the effects of 'Structural Violence' 433 00:22:46,931 --> 00:22:49,008 - a phenomenon noted by public health researchers 434 00:22:49,148 --> 00:22:51,461 to kill well over 18 million a year, 435 00:22:51,681 --> 00:22:54,681 generating a vast range of systemic detriments such as 436 00:22:54,781 --> 00:22:56,906 behavioral, emotional and physical disorders, 437 00:22:57,059 --> 00:22:59,954 be minimized or even removed as an effect?" 438 00:23:00,204 --> 00:23:02,549 The answer, of course, is it can't be removed. 439 00:23:02,880 --> 00:23:06,939 It’s built-in system effect, and the longer we have the market 440 00:23:07,079 --> 00:23:08,713 the more holocausts will occur. 441 00:23:08,853 --> 00:23:11,887 And we will see three and four holocausts a year as time goes forward 442 00:23:12,027 --> 00:23:14,308 given the extreme rise in economic inequity 443 00:23:14,468 --> 00:23:17,568 and this statistic shows no sign of slowing. 444 00:23:17,768 --> 00:23:19,268 As far as being minimized, 445 00:23:19,368 --> 00:23:23,422 yes, I guess some kind of wealth reallocation could emerge 446 00:23:23,607 --> 00:23:26,721 but the effect would be minimal as it still does little to address 447 00:23:26,861 --> 00:23:28,969 the true structural source of the problem. 448 00:23:29,178 --> 00:23:30,458 It would be just a patch. 449 00:23:30,786 --> 00:23:34,186 Not to mention, the odds of that occurring at all is deeply improbable 450 00:23:34,315 --> 00:23:38,147 as any such direct action would inherently be a violation 451 00:23:38,287 --> 00:23:40,488 of the very nature of free market theory, right? 452 00:23:40,628 --> 00:23:43,882 which assumes market action itself is self-regulating 453 00:23:44,124 --> 00:23:46,184 and any type of state imposition is wrong. 454 00:23:46,324 --> 00:23:48,324 And by the way, if you are one of those people who says 455 00:23:48,424 --> 00:23:50,550 that we don’t have a free market today 456 00:23:50,656 --> 00:23:52,924 and we have state coercion or crony capitalism 457 00:23:53,209 --> 00:23:54,751 please watch my lecture 458 00:23:54,851 --> 00:24:00,851 “Origins and Adaptations Part II” from the University of Toronto in 2014 459 00:24:01,093 --> 00:24:07,093 along with my Berlin lecture "Economic Calculation in a NLRBE" in 2013 460 00:24:07,319 --> 00:24:09,502 where I counter this nonsense specifically. 461 00:24:09,642 --> 00:24:13,484 We have only a pure free market in the exact sense of those terms 462 00:24:13,834 --> 00:24:15,414 meaning the freedom to compete 463 00:24:15,525 --> 00:24:18,216 and restrict the freedom of others in that process. 464 00:24:18,316 --> 00:24:20,018 Now I'm going to stop here. 465 00:24:20,213 --> 00:24:22,587 These three questions are my challenge to you. 466 00:24:22,727 --> 00:24:26,588 Each question poses a challenge to the very basis of the market system itself 467 00:24:26,728 --> 00:24:29,038 and if any of you out there can answer these questions 468 00:24:29,178 --> 00:24:31,376 and explain long-term resolutions, 469 00:24:31,516 --> 00:24:35,351 without the removal of the market economy, I certainly want to hear it! 470 00:24:35,491 --> 00:24:39,375 Simply make a video response, post it, and send it to the link below. 471 00:24:39,515 --> 00:24:42,445 And please everyone, share this video. 472 00:24:42,585 --> 00:24:45,219 These are the questions that every news show and 473 00:24:45,430 --> 00:24:48,778 every socially conscious media outlet or activist personality 474 00:24:48,948 --> 00:24:50,448 should be addressing. 475 00:24:50,576 --> 00:24:52,829 Again, if you support The Zeitgeist Movement 476 00:24:52,969 --> 00:24:55,068 take the time to post this via social networks, 477 00:24:55,208 --> 00:24:57,208 forums, blogs, email lists, whatever. 478 00:24:57,318 --> 00:25:00,458 I especially would like to hear from the anti-zeitgeist movement 479 00:25:00,561 --> 00:25:03,418 community as well. What do you propose? 480 00:25:03,598 --> 00:25:04,908 One way or another 481 00:25:05,048 --> 00:25:08,160 until these questions are answered and the problems resolved 482 00:25:08,300 --> 00:25:12,120 the world is on pace to increasing disorder and breakdown. 483 00:25:12,316 --> 00:25:14,437 I appreciate your time. Thank you. 484 00:25:14,637 --> 00:25:19,337 See full transcript link with sources in text below.