Balance In The Job Market.

[BrettNortje]

When high school kids get out of school, they are faced with a huge market that is underdeveloped to get a job in. you see, most jobs are commercial, as, ninety percent of the market is commercial, and the other ten percent is industrial. how do we bring balance to this market?

 

Well, the obvious answer is that they need more industrial ventures. the money is tied up with the commerce, so, will need them to bring money into industry, of course. this can be done by banks, as, they harbor all the money at any given time. so, the state should make a new law where they give tax breaks to companies that invest in raw materials processing, yes?

[Eclogite]

No.

 

At one time more than 90% of the population were involved in agriculture. Then through improvements in farming techniques, then the introduction of mechanisation and later improved crops, surplus food could readily be produced by a small percentage of the population.

 

An analagous process was at work within industry, with the invention of the assembly line, improved management tehcniques and robotics. The number of workers required to manufacture a given item fell steadily. If the objective of industry is to produce wanted goods efficiently, then we do not need to have more workers engaged in industrial activity.

 

While the majority of people today, in first world countries, are employed in the service industries, it would be interesting to see how that breaks down. I suspect - but do not know - that the sectors showing the increases are health and entertainment.

 

To summarise, the distribution of work between industrial and non-inudstrial activities is balanced: balanced by need, not by numbers.

[BrettNortje]

No.

 

At one time more than 90% of the population were involved in agriculture. Then through improvements in farming techniques, then the introduction of mechanisation and later improved crops, surplus food could readily be produced by a small percentage of the population.

 

An analagous process was at work within industry, with the invention of the assembly line, improved management tehcniques and robotics. The number of workers required to manufacture a given item fell steadily. If the objective of industry is to produce wanted goods efficiently, then we do not need to have more workers engaged in industrial activity.

 

While the majority of people today, in first world countries, are employed in the service industries, it would be interesting to see how that breaks down. I suspect - but do not know - that the sectors showing the increases are health and entertainment.

 

To summarise, the distribution of work between industrial and non-inudstrial activities is balanced: balanced by need, not by numbers.

 

Then, why not create and satisfy new needs - like those that are not there yet due to poverty?- by creating more foundations?

[sanctus]

Needs are created non-stops: it's callled advertising :-). Eg.: suddenly a lot of people felt the need to have an IPhone.

[Eclogite]

Then, why not create and satisfy new needs - like those that are not there yet due to poverty?- by creating more foundations?

It happens all the time. Sanctus has given an example.

[ErlyRisa]

I'm with you...but just to add something to talk about into the pot.

 

by doing more of the industrial - do you not just devalue it even more?

It's a confusing situation the time that is now...

It is possible to dig up the earth pretty darn quick (compared too pre-industrialisation)

 

A good example is solar panels.

 

Humans could have made solar panels for the sake of making a profit all the way back in the 80's: but those panels weren't very good , we could have recycled those 80's panels and made 90's and naughty panels, but in the age of decadence the panels are finally somewhat worthy everywhere.

Panels if everywhere could get depressing...so I think growing trees and starting up a swingers party is a better idea.

 

ie. The jobs: Going into industrial food production - just b/c we can is a safe bet, whereas wasting time on 80's solar panels may have been a bad idea.

I like the idea of 3d printing (means we can sit back and relax) - I am just mad I didn't think of it!!!

[pgrmdave]

Well, the obvious answer is that they need more industrial ventures. the money is tied up with the commerce, so, will need them to bring money into industry, of course. this can be done by banks, as, they harbor all the money at any given time. so, the state should make a new law where they give tax breaks to companies that invest in raw materials processing, yes?

Money does not follow supply - it follows demand.  Adding industries that produce widgets that nobody wants to buy isn't going to improve the economy.

[ErlyRisa]

Money does not follow supply - it follows demand.  Adding industries that produce widgets that nobody wants to buy isn't going to improve the economy.

 

Actually - in many cases no.

 

eg. CPU

At first inception their was no demand for it...and even upto the era of Windows XP thier really was no real demand for computer power: It was niche markets that accelerated the demand (banks, Gaming)

It was actually the demand for communication (internet) that promoted the CPU. It's not the CPU that people are after, its the ability too communicate in the medium being provided (even though the old analog Telephone was the method of communication it is still the most utilised sytem of communication (speech) , or in other words, people really only use their new digital devices as glorified telephones...the fact that a mobile has added functionality is the gift that lures the buyers, and the new buyers into the new medium are somewhat only buying because that is the only system now.)

 

If the internet did not exist: CPU power would still be in the realm of banks and other establishments.

 

The fact that cloud computing is now the new lollie...means that power is going backwards. , ie "dumbie" terminals are the only necessity that have no abilty outside the service provider - to me...a waste of CPU power.

 

a good example is gaming, it used to be you bought a game to play against the computer, you did not need connectivity in any form. Now, most all software is sold as a service, even though it came in a box from the store. ie. You buy an accounting package, but if your not connected to thier server (paying your isp bills) the software AND the device become useless. The wierdest part is, in the case of accounting, that most everything that needs tobe done in a typical micro business (the real suppliers in all economies), is that those people that are competing against entites like WallMart, are losing and have enough time to learn excell to make thier OWN accounting, without having to spend a min of $150 a year for accounting services. It turns out that software developers behave no differently too the music industry - constantly trying too lock the end user in - while depromoting thier product to the point that most everyone can play guitar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5vLa_8Q-ZA (use excel like an university graduate accountant).

 

ie. Via education: Demand for most things go down : eg. Carrot soup.

 

The new style of demand is equality for all humans (the bleeding heart dynamic that is being played out on FBook - the irony is that too is SAS)

[Eclogite]

I tried very hard to find something in your post, Erly Risa, that was accurate, but I was unsuccessful.

 

Let us consider your example of the development of the CPU. Your argument fails on at least three counts:

 

1." thier(sic) really was no real demand for computer power: It was niche markets that accelerated the demand."

Do you realise how silly that sounds? There was no demand for computer power, except by those sectors of the economy that demanded computer power.

 

2. My reintroduction to computers occured in the early 70s, working first with an HP 'programmable calculator' (a very expensive desk top model with basic programming functions) then an HP2100 mini-computer with an incredible (!) 4k of core memory. Trust me - there was demand for a faster, more powerful, more compact, less expensive CPU.

 

3. Implicit demand: you said, "It was actually the demand for communication (internet) that promoted the CPU." So, it's back to your argument that demand has nothing to do with demand. The CPU is the tool with which the demand is met. It is still demand.

 

 

And what aspect of education led to less of a demand for carrot soup. A misplaced sympathy for deprived rabbits?

[ErlyRisa]

I tried very hard to find something in your post, Erly Risa, that was accurate, but I was unsuccessful.

Acuuracy? its Hyperbole. It's not from a source, its a diatribe of a one person. I'm not really interested in selling it, but if it helps Discover Magazine, then hey whatever I can do to jog a different mind set and get the creative juices flowing.

 

I like rabbits, they are cute, they need carrots too.

If you were in a democracy that included the rabbits, and the rabbits had to run treadmills inorder to power CPU's for the humans, then I am sure that the rabbits would not vote for it - the demand that is niche, sometimes requires recruitment of the unwilling in order for the fruition of a niche want.

 

I will go further back, eg. The light Globe: Personally I don't care for it, even though I was born into a world where they are everywhere. I am happy to sleep during the night, and sow seeds during the day: On days of rest, I would write a paper on how carrot texture is defendant on water quality and orientation of growth too magnetic north.

 

Hp calculators and solar panels...there has always been a demand for the populous to do less work, eg. The Wife/Family of a Slave Trader or owner of slaves. But did you ever ask why you were using the calculator in the first place? Would it not be better to teach yourself to be able todo all that yourself without the device? I have asked myself that question, and the answer was supposed tobe evolution. Much like the invention of flight: Maybe if we humans would wait-out a survival of the fittest game, then we would become like Bats.

 

The survival of the fittest game that is the establishment of governing bodies...usually requires input from the drone classes, these people did not vote, and most of them have no idea what they are buying into.

 

a good example is taking out loans.

another good example is fighting for the status quo (Slave Trade)

and Yet another, is tobe apart of a waring clan for the sake of protecting the Royal.

 

This has nothing todo with demand, and has everything todo with having a degree in pyschopathy. , and I would take a good long deep introverted look at just how well the i devices sold and WHY!

 

Reminds of trying too sell pickled cabbage to the sailors.

 

The worst part is: Our generation got used so that there are now only a handful of conglomerates left. - and THEY OWN ALL THE CPU POWER.

What are they using it for? - MORE brainwashing exercises....to keep pensioners on the golf course.

 

PS. I got sucked in too - I finally did buy a bundled package ipod and MacBook. - I felt soooo pretty. I even put stickers on my Mac and pranced around Starbucks showing it off, and staying silent, and sipping on me coffee, while I did the 'work' that would change the world!!

Edited January 28, 2015 by ErlyRisa

[pgrmdave]

Actually - in many cases no.

 

eg. CPU

At first inception their was no demand for it...and even upto the era of Windows XP thier really was no real demand for computer power: It was niche markets that accelerated the demand (banks, Gaming)

To sum up this sentence: "There was no demand for it, except for where there was not only demand, but an increasing amount of demand.

 

 

It was actually the demand for communication (internet) that promoted the CPU.

"It wasn't demand that drove the CPU! It was demand!"

 

It's not the CPU that people are after, its the ability too communicate in the medium being provided (even though the old analog Telephone was the method of communication it is still the most utilised sytem of communication (speech) , or in other words, people really only use their new digital devices as glorified telephones...the fact that a mobile has added functionality is the gift that lures the buyers, and the new buyers into the new medium are somewhat only buying because that is the only system now.)

Nobody - *nobody* - buys a phillips head screwdriver because they need a phillips head screwdriver. They buy it because they need to screw/unscrew phillips head screws. Nobody buys any widget because they need that widget - they buy it because they need to do things that widget allows them to do (or lets them do it faster/better/easier/etc.) Nobody buys a CPU because they want a CPU. They buy a CPU because they want to do things that CPU allows them to do. In other words - there's demand for the effects of CPUs so there's demand for CPUs.

 

If the internet did not exist: CPU power would still be in the realm of banks and other establishments.

If roads didn't exist we wouldn't be driving cars. If powerlines didn't exist electrical outlets wouldn't be standard in homes. Not sure what this has to do with demand vs. supply, but it's a pretty tautological thought experiment. "If the infrastructure for a thing didn't exist, that thing would be less useful! (so there'd be less demand, so money wouldn't flow to it as freely - supporting my statement that money follows demand, not supply)."

 

The fact that cloud computing is now the new lollie...means that power is going backwards. , ie "dumbie" terminals are the only necessity that have no abilty outside the service provider - to me...a waste of CPU power.

I agree! Maybe I'll start a post about this, how dumb terminals could make a strong comeback if cloud computing truly takes off.

 

a good example is gaming, it used to be you bought a game to play against the computer, you did not need connectivity in any form. Now, most all software is sold as a service, even though it came in a box from the store. ie. You buy an accounting package, but if your not connected to thier server (paying your isp bills) the software AND the device become useless. The wierdest part is, in the case of accounting, that most everything that needs tobe done in a typical micro business (the real suppliers in all economies), is that those people that are competing against entites like WallMart, are losing and have enough time to learn excell to make thier OWN accounting, without having to spend a min of $150 a year for accounting services. It turns out that software developers behave no differently too the music industry - constantly trying too lock the end user in - while depromoting thier product to the point that most everyone can play guitar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h5vLa_8Q-ZA (use excel like an university graduate accountant).

Not sure what you're trying to say here, but you're pretty much wrong. A lot of software to businesses is sold as a service because it either needs to be customized or it's cheaper and more nimble for the business. It also allows for updates to be pushed out if any bugfixes or new features are implemented. For home users, most software is not purchased through a box from the store. Yes, a lot of software requires an internet connection because it allows for greater functionality. Accounting software typically lets you download your financial information directly rather than having to enter it manually (thus saving you time and reducing errors). If you're trying to build an entire accounting system for a reasonably complex business then excel isn't going to cut it.

 

Still - *none of this has anything to do with demand vs. supply and where the money goes*. The reason money goes to those software companies is because they provide value and there is *demand* for their software. The reason money doesn't go to software that doesn't connect online is because there is *less demand* for that software.

[ErlyRisa]

 

 

Adobe girls, desktop publishing, printing and the Macintosh....demand, yeah right.

The demand was driven by a sector that couldn't use more than one button.

The demand was SOLD by a clever few.

 

Alot of girls score copies of Adobe photoshop for...for?, for? Toouching up thier booty before upload too facebook?

 

PS: GIMP is still for free. , its not demanded though: I can install it onto an unwitting end users computer and it will never get used.

I can talk to a college taught 3d artist and they would not have even heard of Blender3D.

 

Demand - yeah, wrought more like it.

 

If you ask any webpublishing house what they think of facebook and the iPad after a couple years of living with it they will tell you that I am about too go bust.

 

_______________________________________

 

Flat head, Phillips Head (star crew driver please), Torx bit (Nextstep)?

I personally think torx head is great - it's easier to automate assembly, and a flat head screw driver still works if it hasn't been done up too tight.

I tell you what though -- the end user is NOT demanding the evolution. and, can you think of anything better than the Allen head? Square drive was interesting (for about 2 minutes). Talks Bit is pretty good -- better than watching everyone named Phill or Alan jump off bridges. :vava: You got to love it when girls of trend quote why adobe is named adobe. - I like too add, yes honey it's all about the abode.

 

_______________________________________

Supply/Demand ... there is a psychological experiment (forgot who or what) where it has been tested what a concumer does when presented with multiple items that achieve the same purpose. eg. Shampoo. It was done without any reading material or any desktop publishing artistry, they were just 6 differently named shampoos. Discounting a preference for bottles branded with more vowels or the letter X in them, it was found that once a 7th bottle was introduce the time to choose a bottle trebled, and in some cases decisions took so long people foregoed the purchase altogether. ie They investigated the products trying too choose and just gave up, and did not buy. From memory I think the experiment was called the Noahs Flood sales pitch. When the market is flooded, and no matter how hard you are a knower of the product, when choice is too large the person just forgoes ever having to listened to the sales pitch in the first place. The ones selling the ark to the populous know this, so the sales pitch is now utilising emotional context for a product (environment/xdollars go too)

 

What next? The psychologists are out of ideas. Turns out the the children of the hippies aren't so dumb, and these methods of pushing demand for hat pins is not working anymore. ie. Barbie ain't selling. and Ken has turned to crystal meth. The journalism that procures advertising for the product doesn't sell either: It's a green wedge, no-one cares for the flood.

 

________________________________________

Cars: There is less demand for them today. Electricity: again there NEEDS to be less demand per person for this (if you want more people).

Demand and the endless bowl of fish: and then?

We have seen what happens, we just end up getting fat...then the demand for Barbie goes up.

 

________________________________________

Demand, humans and safety in numbers: No longer necessary in a connected world. We can all go hermit style.

 

________________________________________

If a CPU dropped out of the sky and landed in Da Vinci's time. (Some of us are happy to be still using octopus ink and the chess board) and,

the way I see the evolution of the digital realm, is that it HAS TO go in a manner that is our lineage...making it a pointless evolution that only procures power into the hands of the one person. The profit.