Fully automated luxury communism

A mouthful or could the title of fully automated luxury communism be a possible aim for the working class to achieve. The guys over at Novara FM who do some fantastic work and some quality independent critical thinking from the left is where I heard this phrase first and I think it deserves some looking into. “We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living. It is a fact today that one in ten thousand of us can make a technological breakthrough capable of supporting all the rest. The youth of today are absolutely right in recognizing this nonsense of earning a living. We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his right to exist. So we have inspectors of inspectors and people making instruments for inspectors to inspect inspectors. The true business of people should be to go back to school and think about whatever it was they were thinking about before somebody came along and told them they had to earn a living” https://www.tumblr.com/search/fully+automated+luxury+communism http://youtu.be/dmQ-BZ3eWxM Above are links to Novara pieces one is where the quotation above comes from and the one below is a video of Aaron Bastani talking about what a future way of living and work could be like. We all have heard about the idea of the future of robots doing a lot of our work and us having a lot more time of leisure. Well why can’t we actually try and put this into place from now on. We all work far too hard and for far too long to enjoy life as it was meant to be enjoyed. So why not fight for a future where we say do a form of work which could be different to keep us engaged job rotation in affect a maximum of 15 hours a week while keeping same rate of pay as before sounds almost too good to be true. That’s because it is at present under capitalism. But under communism you could put automation of jobs and keeping same rate of pay up and pose it as progress. Today when so many jobs are being lost to automation should we not try and make use of it if it is going to happen anyway. A recent study looking at which jobs may be at risk of automation in the coming years and decades has been carried out of late. This link between lower paid jobs and automation suggests technology risks fueling growing wealth inequalities — unless education and training can be successfully reconfigured to upskill populations with the digital, management and creative skills that are at reduced risk of automation. The study found that lower paid jobs are almost eight times as likely to be replaced than higher paid jobs when looking specifically at London. Overall, though, the rate of tech-fueled destruction drops to 30 per cent of jobs specifically in London — likely owing to higher rates of pay in the capital vs the rest of the U.K. Some 40 per cent of U.K. jobs are rated as low or no risk. In London this figure rises to 51 per cent of jobs. In the high risk corner, the research lists jobs like office and admin support; sales and services; transportation; construction and extraction; and production. While jobs identified as low or no risk jobs include skilled management; financial services; computing, engineering and science; education; legal services; community services; the arts and media; and healthcare. “A new report from Pew Research brings together almost 2,000 experts to comprehensively assess the effect of robots on the workplace Experts are divided over the role of robots over the next decade, with some arguing that they will create more jobs than they displace, and others worrying that they could lead to income inequality and a breakdown in social order. The findings come from a report by Pew Research, which surveyed almost two thousand individuals with expertise in artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and economics, to find out their predictions for the role of automation between today and 2025. The experts were almost perfectly split, with 52% predicting an optimistic path, and 48% worrying about the future. The optimists envisioned “a future in which robots and digital agents do not displace more jobs than they create,” according to Aaron Smith, the report’s co-author. But the pessimistic view was that automation “will displace significant numbers of both blue- and white-collar workers. “A number of the respondents warned that this aspect of technical evolution will lead to vast increases in income inequality, masses of people who are effectively unemployable and the possibility of breakdowns in the social order.” Almost all of the respondents are united on one thing: the displacement of work by robots and AI is going to continue, and accelerate, over the coming decade. Where they split is in the societal response to that displacement. The optimists predict that the economic boom that would result from vastly reduced costs to businesses would lead to the creation of new jobs in huge numbers, and a newfound premium being placed on the value of work that requires “uniquely human capabilities”. In the end, as Lee Rainie, another co-author of the report, puts it, it could result in a “freedom from day-to-day drudger that allows people to define work in a more positive and socially beneficial way”. Microsoft’s Jonathan Grudin told researchers that “Technology will continue to disrupt jobs, but more jobs seem likely to be created. When the world population was a few hundred million people there were hundreds of millions of jobs. Although there have always been unemployed people, when we reached a few billion people there were billions of jobs. There is no shortage of things that need to be done and that will not change.” But the pessimists worry that the benefits of the labor replacement will accrue to those already wealthy enough to own the automatons, be that in the form of patents for algorithmic workers or the physical form of robots. The ranks of the unemployed could swell, as people are laid off from work they are qualified in without the ability to retrain for careers where their humanity is a positive. And since this will happen in every economic sector simultaneously, civil unrest could be the result. “Unlike previous disruptions such as when farming machinery displaced farm workers but created factory jobs making the machines, robotics and AI are different,” says Nasa’s Mark Nall. “Due to their versatility and growing capabilities, not just a few economic sectors will be affected, but whole swaths will be. This is already being seen now in areas from robocalls to lights-out manufacturing. Economic efficiency will be the driver. The social consequence is that good-paying jobs will be increasingly scarce.” One thing many experts agreed on was the need for education to prepare for a post-automation world. ““Only the best-educated humans will compete with machines,” said internet sociologist Howard Rheingold. “And education systems in the US and much of the rest of the world are still sitting students in rows and columns, teaching them to keep quiet and memorise what is told them, preparing them for life in a 20th century factory.” The report is the fourth in a series from Pew Research logging at digital life in 2025. As well as a broad series opener, the reports have examined the internet of things and threats to the open internet.” Instead seeing this as a threat why can’t we not turn this into a benefit to us as human beings. Instead of putting people out of work how about making the need for work void by ending the need for profit and continuous production of needless things jut for profit. Fully automated luxury communism is a vision a dream but one which can be achieved if we so wished. Just imagine how you could spend the newly made free time you’d have in your life. Maybe you can finally learn a new language you always wanted to learn or you could explore our vast planet and see all there is to see. The possibilities are endless but we do need rid of brutal exploitative capitalism first.

Is Access to work helping disabled people or not ?

I myself use Access to work for my part time job as a office worker and find it a key part to my working life. I use it mainly for transport costs to get a taxi to work and back due to the bus's being infrequent and unreliable at best. The last time i reapplied for Access to work i was given a really tough line of questioning from one of the advisors really asking quite personal and almost hostile questions to find out if anyway i can reduce the costs for them. I have found it to be a very good service on the whole and am so keen for it to be continued and even extended as it needs to be if the government are really serious about helping disabled people back to work as they claim. Of course the tories are not about helping disabled people in fact they have made it harder for disabled people who do want to work if anything. A brilliant blog post over at DPAC - Disabled people against cuts a group i'm very close to and support wherever i can takes a look at the mess taht is the Access to work scheme. You can read this in full over at http://dpac.uk.net/2014/10/what-the-f-is-going-on-with-access-to-work-join-the-stopchanges2atw-campaign/ For me as a blind worker Access to work is a god sent but alot in this blog post rings true with me too. In this piece which i'm quoting from the author uses's the term deaf in their piece this as the author is deaf but the message being put is much the same for any disabled people who have experience of Access to work. "More and more people are asking what is happening with Access to Work, the programme that supports Deaf and disabled people to get into and stay in employment, as changes are making it harder and harder to use. Despite the government’s well publicised extra investment in the scheme Access to Work’s clear direction of travel is to cut individual packages, with the result that the employability of Deaf and disabled people is being seriously undermined. When the Tories closed the Remploy factories in 2011-2012 they said there was no place for segregated workplaces in modern society and the money used to fund the factories would be better spent supporting Deaf and disabled people to get into and stay in mainstream employment through the Access to Work programme. Over the past year, with the factory closures out of the way, changes introduced to the AtW programme have decreased eligibility, brought considerable distress and uncertainty to customers who had previously and successfully used the programme for many years, pushed Deaf and disabled people out of jobs and left others fearing for their futures. It is difficult to summarise all the changes: AtW is awarded on a discretionary ‘case by case’ basis and the programme has always denied the existence of any blanket rules for particular impairment groups. What we have seen emerging are some clear patterns around the cutting of packages, lack of information and hostility to AtW customers alongside growing inefficiency and cuts to AtW service delivery. The first clear pattern emerged with respect to Deaf customers who suddenly found themselves labelled as ‘fraudsters’. Individuals contacting AtW advisers, in some cases advisers they had had for many years were greeted with a completely different and hostile attitude. They were told ‘there are high levels of Access to Work fraud in the Deaf community’. Changes brought in including the notorious ’30 hour rule’, requiring Deaf customers using more than 30 hours of BSL interpreters per week to employ a salaried interpreter, have literally left Deaf people unable to continue in their jobs. The government has sought to justify what it is doing by pointing the finger at interpreters, blaming them for ‘costing too much’, meanwhile undermining what is a highly skilled and important profession. A particularly nasty move has been the introduction of retrospective decision making experienced by both Deaf and disabled people who have had their packages cut with the cuts being backdated after support costs have already been incurred. This situation has been compounded by the fact that has review notices are no longer sent out warning AtW customers when their packages are due for renewal which easily leads to people not realising their packages have ended. Deaf and disabled people have been left owing thousands of pounds and has left interpreters and support workers owed thousands of pounds, causing considerable hardship and distress. Successful appeals against changes to packages have been made but many people do not realise they have a right to appeal or how they would go about making a complaint. Others are too worried about losing the rest of their package to make a fuss. This is where the website DeafAtW has been invaluable, providing information and support on how to challenge decisions. There is a growing level of misinformation, confusion and chaos coming from AtW itself as a result of a restructuring that has seen a dramatic reduction in the numbers of contact centres and outsourcing. AtW invoices remain unpaid from months and months ago because the addresses of the payment centres changed but customers weren’t told. Meanwhile application backlogs have amassed. Given that Deaf and disabled people often cannot start a job until their AtW package is in place, yet can only make an application after an employment start date has been confirmed, this has presumably Deaf and disabled people unable to take up job offers. Money pledged by this government for the Access to Work budget has yet to appear. This was highlighted at the Work and Pension Select Committee oral evidence session when Remploy confirmed that the £80million per year “saved” from the closure of the factories hadn’t materialised in AtW support. There was also an additional £17million that hasn’t appeared. These two amounts would mean the AtW budget should have doubled in the past four years, yet cuts are being made. For a government that claims its welfare reform measures are all about supporting more people into employment, the changes to Access to Work appear counter-productive. Moreover, in a time of austerity, changes to the programme represent a cutting back of a scheme that actually makes money for the state: the Sayce report found that for every pound invested in Access to Work, £1.48 is recouped by the Treasury. But for anyone familiar with Tory welfare policies none of this comes as a surprise. Ill-thought through ideologically driven policies are seeking to reduce ‘dependency’ and dismantle the welfare state, removing social security from those that need it and creating situations that will end up costing more. While the Tories describe AtW as a ‘benefit’ and a dependency and fail to understand it as an investment, campaigners have beaten back some of the attacks. AtW eventually conceded that it was not realistic to expect employers to contribute the on costs for salaried interpreters under the 30 hour rule. In May the Minster for Disabled People announced a review into the 30 hour rule and the DWP Select Committee Inquiry agreed not only to take evidence on how changes were impacting on Deaf people but also extended the deadline for submissions whereas originally the inquiry had been intended to focus on employment support for people with mental health support needs and learning difficulties. Individual decisions have also been revised in the face of continued campaigning and challenges. More is needed though. We have yet to hear the outcome of the Minister’s review. Meanwhile we are hearing of cuts to AtW packages impacting ever wider, putting jobs at risk and pushing Deaf and disabled people out of employment. We need to step up our campaign to make sure information is available and accessible and people know what to do if they are impacted by the changes, to fight for the employment rights of Deaf and disabled people and to protect the terms and conditions of BSL interpreters and ensure we are not divided. StopChanges2ATW campaign open meeting – Thursday 23rd October 2014, 6 – 7.30pm, 336 Brixton Road, London, SW9 7AA. For more information read StopChanges2ATW and Inclusion London’s submissions to the DWP select committee inquiry: http://www.inclusionlondon.co.uk/ATW-ILs-%20and%20stop-changes2atw-respond-to-call-for-evidence

A citizen’s income

A interesting idea I’ve come across via the green party I’m not sure if it was their idea originally but a citizens income guaranteeing all a basic standard of living seems a really positive interesting idea and worth exploring more. I know there will be the claims of where wills the incentive to work be if we all get paid anyway let me explain. Work dominates our lives at present it forms the basis to much of what we strive for as wage labourers. Let’s not forget that a colossal amount of work is done in society that is not formally regarded as ‘work’. I am talking specifically about parenting, care of the disabled by family members, and voluntary work in the community. At the moment, much of this work goes unremunerated – and is even regarded as inferior to proper, ‘paid’ work in the formal sense. (”What are those mothers doing at home when they should be out looking for a job?” is a question often barked, usually at poor mothers). A CI finally provides the financial space for this socially invaluable work to happen. What sort of a society are we if we don’t recognise the importance of these tasks? There is also the class politics of this – how it affects the relationship between labour and capital. It seems to me that ‘welfare reform’ has a very specific agenda, which is to create a more pliable workforce. If people in work know that there is no longer much of a safety net, then they will hold on more tenaciously to jobs with bad conditions and bad pay. All of that means higher profits. A Citizen’s Income – a new, bolstered welfare state – begins to tip the bargaining power back in favour of labour. This is why a CI should be taken up by the trade union movement or at least explored to its benefits. But for me, personally, the best argument for a Citizen’s Income is to improve public health, through the stress relief that it would bring. I write this as someone who has been on and off benefits in the past few years, and I can personally testify that the stress of it all sometimes made me feel stressed. As the authors of the Spirit Level suggest, what could fill the explanatory gap between economic inequality and poor social outcomes is, simply, stress. Obesity, depression, addiction – all rooted in the intensely stressful society we live in. A Citizen’s Income – as well as being profoundly redistributive – would, in one fell swoop, lift a corrosive level of stress from our society. And what of the cost and the politics of it all? Well, it’s far more politically palatable than it may sound – as a benefit that would be universal, the divide and rule strategies used by the right to pit the working poor against the unemployed would be blunted. It’s possible that some people would simply not accept the principle that you can get something for nothing, but that is merely because people have internalised the twisted principles of capitalism: and that’s something we’ll have to fight against. It’s far more affordable than it sounds as well: as the Citizen’s Income Trust have demonstrated, the cost would work out at roughly the same as the current welfare bill, which – we must not forget, the vast bulk of which is pensions, housing benefit, and working tax credit. These are just initial thoughts. It’s possible there are serious drawbacks I have over-looked. Two spring to mind immediately. First, the definition of citizenship could be open to abuse – excluding those with a criminal record, recent immigrants etc. Second, contrary to my previous point about the class implications of a CI, it could entrench poor working conditions. It would be imperative those industrial battles continued. But for just now at least, I think this is an idea worth fighting for.

Labour party on Workfare, a dirty little secret?

The labour party are nothing but an all out capitalist party nowadays we can be under no illusions if we accept that fact we can begin to move forward. Sadly many deluded left wingers still seem to harbour illusions in a labour party which has long since given up on them. Their reasons? I cannot fathom myself but blind loyalty and insanity must be well up there with reasons why people still support this awful excuse for a political party. It was Tony Blair who introduced the first mass workfare scheme with the flagshipNewDeal back in the late 90s. Much like the Government’s current schemes it was widely derided as a failure that placed billions in the pockets of private sector providers like A4e, but had less than impressive results actually finding young people work. Despite the disastrous results, workfare continued throughout the Labour Government’s period in office, becoming rebranded as the ‘Flexible’ New Deal in later years. When the Tories came to power it was expanded and renamed (at vast cost) as the ‘Work Programme’. Six months unpaid labour, under threat of benefit sanctions, has been at the heart of all these schemes. Labour’s workfare obsession is set to continue although gormless gimp Miliband is claiming that placements will be paid the minimum wage. He promises a million new jobs, all funded by the tax payer. But then he would say that wouldn’t he. In fact he can say pretty much anything he likes, no-one’s really listening after all. He also warns that those who don’t take up his pretend jobs will face the toughest sanctions ever. These jobs would be paid for with a ‘bankers tax’, a fine idea except spending it on subsidising low paid workers for multi-national companies is missing the point somewhat. Almost all of the problems that exist with workfare still exist with Millibands scheme, which in many ways could prove far worse for worker’s pay and conditions. This daft plan would enshrine six months Government subsidised work for private companies as the norm for young people. Whilst a million people currently in minimum wage work would lose their jobs, young people, whether they had other plans or not, would be sent to replace them or forced into poverty. Just like under the current policies, it would be the most vulnerable who faced sanctions. As Miliband’s workfare workers would be paid by the state and face benefit sanctions for non-compliance, they would have few, if any workplace rights. Just like today’s workfare staff, they could potentially be used to undermine industrial action. The Unions should reject outright any plans for a million strong army of scab labour. If private companies want workers they should pay for them. And young people deserve a choice about where they work. Don’t expect any change from Labour though. So desperate are they to show they hate the poor and unemployed just as much as the Eton toffs, they are determined to look tough on benefit claimants. It’s a little bit pathetic really. New Labour was bad enough, now we have Forced Labour. As it was Labour who introduced the brutal Atos testing regime for sick and disabled people it’s unlikely they would plan more enlightened policies for claimants on health related benefits either. The truth is most of them supported much of the recent Welfare Reform Bill. They voted against it purely for political point scoring, not ideological concern for the country’s poorest people. The Labour Party are not the opposition, they are a slightly inept carbon copy of the Tory Party. They will do nothing should they ever claw their way back to power, but continue the attacks on the five million voters on some form of benefit. Just like they have done nothing to support public sector workers or supported the biggest strikes in living memory. They haven’t been the party of the working class for a long time, if they truly ever were. But more than ever they are toadying sycophants to the rich, sucking up to big business in the hope of making lots of money like Tony Blair did when they do the decent thing and retire. The entire fucking lot of them, Labour and Tory alike, need stringing up. The system is broken. It can only be fixed from the bottom up and that means us.

Socialism will be accessible for all

As a disabled person a person who has been registered blind now for a number of years I know how difficult life can be. Life is not accessible to us and is a constant struggle. This post isn’t meant as a blind person rant or an I cant cope an I need help kind of post but I would like to say that we as disabled people face incredible challenges day in day out. Many disabled people do not work as either they can’t or work is simply not practical for them. It’s not as the right wing media would have you believe we can live an easier life on benefits as I can tell you right now living on benefits is no life at all. Even as a disabled person with incapacity benefit as it used to be known its no walk in the park ok I used to get £210 every two weeks but that for me just got me by the price of living now would mean that would just about cover my expenses to get to the shops, buy my weekly shop, pay for taxi’s, pay for any doctors or hospital appointments which disabled people often have to attend to receive treatment or medicine and your looking at the bulk of that money being spent. Not just spent but reinvested into the wider economy we use taxi’s we are contributing to a hard working taxi drivers living, we attend a hospital we are providing in a round about way a doctor or nurse a job and a living if not a great one. So in a way life is not a breeze for us I work 2 days a week part time but many do not and this is through no fault of their own it can be for many many different reasons which I cant go into here but each person has their own difficulties and challenges they overcome everyday. Just getting out of bed each day is an achievement for some and that should be recognised. I think personally and many socialists share this view that capitalism has no time for disabled people as the reemploy factory situation showed if disabled members of society can’t work like other workers, i.e. for awful wages with poor conditions being driven into the ground they are no good to them. They have no problem with throwing disabled workers on to the scrap heap if it means their profit margins are looking healthy. You may think I’m giving the rich, the capitalists a hard time and in a way you’d be right, but it’s not without reason. Pushing disabled people and the poorest in society some of the most vunerable people in society into harsh conditions and poverty type conditions is not something to be proud of. If this is all in the name of the pursuit for profit I wish to be counted out. I feel under capitalism we will never achieve equality why do we still have to fight for a living wage, why do we have to fight for our dignity as disabled people? Under socialism there will be choice, more choice but not for the price of exploitation but of the bettering of society, Choice under capitalism means the driving down of workers wages and conditions and the choice of the gutter under socialism people will be free to decide if they wish to work and help better society or help in other ways. Apples I phone is a big step forward under capitalism for the first time blind people can buy a phone with a screen reader which helps us use a mainstream phone with no extra cost or software for the first time. This is ground breaking but this is all too rare under capitalism and the price is huge. In a socialist society this will be standard when products for society are produced the thought that blind or disabled people may be using them will not be a after thought but fundamental in the production process of all products, transportation, housing, living conditions and everything you can possibly think of. The fact that the drive for profit will be gone for good will allow society to plan production and the economy to meet the true needs of the people not just the few but for everyone, disabled or not.