Worker Jobs in Decline

[Bud Struggle]

http://www.boston.com/jobs/galleries/30fast_declining_occupations/

The Revolution better get going or there won't be anyone left to Revolt.

[Dimentio]

Great. Would love an entirely automated society where everyone is a king :)

www.technocracynet.eu

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Proletariat =/= populist definition of "working class." ;) Cashiers, tellers, telecommunication experts, retail associates, janitors, mechanics, chefs, technicians, programmers - these are all still members of the working class.

If anything, the decline in independent shop owners over the last 100 years signifies that Marx was right on class polarization. I don't have the numbers for America, but small businesses in Britain have declined by about 15% each year since the 1990s. Whereas in 1949 independent business owners accounted for 20% of the wealth, they're now half that - 9%.

http://www.sme-blog.com/small-business/decline-of-small-business-sector-in-the-uk

This Columbian (http://www0.gsb.columbia.edu/ipd/pub/ChinaNewModel031707.pdf) (Uni) article says there is a similar decline in small businesses in Canada, America, and Australia. These (http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html)statistics show that larger firms are employing more and more individuals in the United States. Firms with less than 500 employees make up 99.9% of the business market - but the 17,000 identifiable large businesses hold most of the wealth.

[Bud Struggle]

If anything, the decline in independent shop owners over the last 100 years signifies that Marx was right on class polarization. I don't have the numbers for America, but small businesses in Britain have declined by about 15% each year since the 1990s. Whereas in 1949 independent business owners accounted for 20% of the wealth, they're now half that - 9%.

http://www.sme-blog.com/small-business/decline-of-small-business-sector-in-the-uk


I find that pretty interesting. I wonder what the statistics are in America. I would think they might be similar--the WalMartization of America. Maybe not, though, American small businessmen may have a bit more gumption than their British friends.

(FYI: in all thoses books and books of guesses even Marx was right on something once in a while. :D)

[Phalanx]

Great. Would love an entirely automated society where everyone is a king :)

www.technocracynet.eu (http://www.technocracynet.eu)

Let the earth tremble at a robot revolution!

[Dejavu]

I figured the classical definition for proletariat was he/she that did not own or have stock in capital.

[Plagueround]

The Revolution better get going or there won't be anyone left to Revolt.

All this means is we'll have to change the symbol from a sickle and hammer to a keyboard and cash register.

[Kami]

All this means is we'll have to change the symbol from a sickle and hammer to a keyboard and cash register.
Oh, that rocks. Let me get to work *opens photoshop* ^^

[Bud Struggle]

Oh, that rocks. Let me get to work *opens photoshop* ^^

:thumbup: Great idea!

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I figured the classical definition for proletariat was he/she that did not own or have stock in capital.

Proletariat is a class of people whose subsistence relies on selling labor to another individual. They can own stock. I have my own shares. I'm not going to be living off of it anytime soon.

[Dejavu]

Proletariat is a class of people whose subsistence relies on selling labor to another individual. They can own stock. I have my own shares. I'm not going to be living off of it anytime soon.


So a proletariat cannot go into business for himself? The choice does not exist? Also I think you mean to say the proletariat rents his labor to someone else.

[Dejavu]

That doesn't say much for integrity Gene. You seek benefit in the capitalist system. While denouncing it your actions approve of it through your stock investments.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

So a proletariat cannot go into business for himself? The choice does not exist?

The choice for indentured servants to live a skill-less life of misery also existed at one time.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

That doesn't say much for integrity Gene. You seek benefit in the capitalist system. While denouncing it your actions approve of it through your stock investments.

Nice try. I didn't initiate the purchase. It's just in my name - I only found out about it a few weeks ago. :D

[Bud Struggle]

That doesn't say much for integrity Gene. You seek benefit in the capitalist system. While denouncing it your actions approve of it through your stock investments.

Gene seems to be an awful smart fing guy to be going the proletarian route.

[Dejavu]

The choice for indentured servants to live a skill-less life of misery also existed at one time.


That doesn't really answer the question though...
Are you suggesting its impossible to improve your skills and move up or assume the responsibilities of self employment ( let alone employing others)?

[Dejavu]

Nice try. I didn't initiate the purchase. It's just in my name - I only found out about it a few weeks ago.

Well you can't blame me. lol. You mentioned you owned capital stock without the details so whats one supposed to think? So what do you plan to do with the abomination?

[pusher robot]

Well you can't blame me. lol. You mentioned you owned capital stock without the details so whats one supposed to think? So what do you plan to do with the abomination?

I wish to announce that I, the generous and compassionate person that I am, am willing, in the spirit of comradeship, selflessly and stoically to relieve him of this terrible burden and assume it onto myself. Genecosta, free yourself - simply send me your account information and I will ensure that these capitalist machinations, this stain of exploitation, trouble you no more. No, comrade, your efforts to soldier on alone are noble, but I must insist - I am able to bear the weight, and from each according to our abilities, no?

[Dejavu]

^^ LOL. We'll I'd expect him to perhaps give away the stock shares to workers in the various industries he owns stock in. Everyday he holds the stock he's benefiting from the exploitation of workers. Of course, if he did give the stock to workers then they would probably just turn around and sell it ( maybe buy a nice large screen TV like Gene says he has) therefore just feeding the system of exploitation further. Tough decisions. Push, I think you're selfless attitude to help Gene is virtuous.

[Robert]

Nice try. I didn't initiate the purchase. It's just in my name

And when it was discovered, he immediately sold the res and ordered the fund manager to burn the cash proceeds. I hope the new owner has as much integrity as he.

I only wonder how it was possible for the fund manager to buy the awful beast without his authorization. He should sue.

[Unicorn]

[FONT=Arial]Proletariat is a class of people whose subsistence relies on selling labor to another individual. They can own stock. I have my own shares. I'm not going to be living off of it anytime soon.
People who have a substantial amount of capital income are petty bourgeois.

[Robert]

People who have a substantial amount of capital income are petty bourgeois.

And a maddening number who do not have it would like to get it. What shall we do with them all?

Don't answer that. Please.

[Plagueround]

And a maddening number who do not have it would like to get it. What shall we do with them all?

Don't answer that. Please.

Without sounding like I'm parroting some sort of party line: Educate them and help them. Most people don't understand the class struggle or even think it exists.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

And a maddening number who do not have it would like to get it. What shall we do with them all?

Don't answer that. Please.

A maddening number also desired to become knights and aristocrats.

Give up your pointless tirade. :rolleyes:

[Kami]

And a maddening number who do not have it would like to get it. What shall we do with them all?

Don't answer that. Please.
So, in a heirarchical society, people prefer to be at the top than the bottom? Y'don't say.

[Robert]

Educate them and help them.

Help them understand how much better off they'll be under communism?

No.

[Plagueround]

Help them understand how much better off they'll be under communism?

No.

Not so much.

I've never been one for exploiting desperation by feeding a person my views and ONLY my views in an attempt to convince them my way of thinking is correct.
I meant it in a much broader sense. Educate the people, make them aware of what is actually going on around them, let them draw their own conclusions. As for helping people, well...I certainly hope you would know what I meant by helping people.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Robert The Great is a fitting username for someone who upholds a class system where 90% of society is thrown beneath the bus. :laugh:

[RGacky3]

People who have a substantial amount of capital income are petty bourgeois.

Its not what you have that chooses your class, its how you make a living.

[Bud Struggle]

Its not what you have that chooses your class, its how you make a living.

But that's only in the Marxist religion. In the real world it's what you have that counts.;)

[Robert]

In the real world it's what you have that counts.Eh? Let's get some internecine debate going, Tom. I suspect you're kidding, as that is far too materialistic a position for a man of your philosophy. But if you're not kidding, I disagree. Anything you have beyond what you need to be comfortable and happy is mostly for showing off. You can only drive one car at a time, you can only be in room at a time. If you take your surplus and create jobs, wealth and opportunity for others thru job creation, then boogie on.

(Not that it hurts anybody if you own two cars, but it doesn't really "count" for much, does it?)

[Bud Struggle]

Eh? Let's get some internecine debate going, Tom. I suspect you're kidding, as that is far too materialistic a position for a man of your philosophy. But if you're not kidding, I disagree. Anything you have beyond what you need to be comfortable and happy is mostly for showing off. You can only drive one car at a time, you can only be in room at a time. If you take your surplus and create jobs, wealth and opportunity for others thru job creation, then boogie on.

(Not that it hurts anybody if you own two cars, but it doesn't really "count" for much, does it?)

I was half kidding, Robert. I see all of these Marxist rules about what is one class and what makes up another class and what is class conciousness and all of that as artificial claptrap designed to sound important and give some substance to the philosophy in much the same way as Scietologists go on and on about clearing and thetan and Xenu.

On the other hand I agree with you about wealth. Beyond the simple needs of daily life wealth is ultimately an embarassment. It is seductive and a lure and a weakness that is hard to break once it's aquired. One of the reasons I really like these Commie kids is that they aren't bothered by it (at least for themselves--they do seem to be bothered by other people having money.)

In the end there is really nothing one can do with money other than give it all away.

[RGacky3]

But that's only in the Marxist religion. In the real world it's what you have that counts.http://www.revleft.com/vb/worker-jobs-decline-t77840/revleft/smilies/wink.gif

Thats true, but I guarantee you, your not going to become a millionaire with a wage workers job as your main source of income. I also guarantee you that millionaries arn't doing 9-5s in a factory, field or cubicle.

[Robert]

You guys apparently have the impression that all millionaries do is sit behind a desk smoking cigars and planning to take over the world. Some do. Others, golfer Tiger Woods comes to mind, work their asses off. I think he has maybe one employee (his caddie?) who, trust me, doesn't feel "exploited." His fans should be free to reward his superior talent and work ethic if they want to.