unlimited unskilled labor

if there was a way to turn unskilled labor into a useful valuable product our problems of unemployment and classism would be over. furthermore we could easilyu seperate the 'lazy' and 'unwilling' from those the system has merely forgotten.

i propose voluntary use of electricity generating manual devices. for example, exercise bikes equipped with magnets and copper wire, or kinetic devices implanted in shoes or armbands.

even if this amount of electricity is not enough to become a real paycheck, those who participate in the program are trying to help and are exerting themselves to assist society. by that merit these people could be rewarded in some way to offset their poverty and reward their ambition, perhaps by giving them favorable kilowatt rates. at least enough to keep them fed.

no lazy person would ever go to one of these places. it could be a good way for employers to find people who really want to have jobs of any kind. plus they would be exercising and in good shape, something america could stand to improve a little on.

[Jet]

i propose voluntary use of electricity generating manual devices. for example, exercise bikes equipped with magnets and copper wire, or kinetic devices implanted in shoes or armbands.

Just how useful will that be? I wager that the cost of doing it mechanically is a fraction of the cost of generating an equal amount of electricity with people who need to be paid a minimum wage.

people who need to be paid a minimum wage."
this is not a 'job'. it's like recycling cans. 5 cents a can, no employment involved. 5 cents a watt, no employment involved, or whatever the right price is.

this is not a for-profit company. it's a service to the community that is marginally involved with money and electricity. it'll give unemployed people something to do that won't cost them money they don't have.

it probably isn't as cost-effective as cranking up the power plant a little more or even building a new one, but it will address social problems and assist in employment, whcih are difficult problems that are worth addressing.

it'd hardly break the bank to borrow a few dozen exercise bikes from junkyards or the museum of science and rig them with magnets and wire them up to a central battery and sell that electricity on the grid. fuck, you could sell refreshments at the door if you want to turn some extra profit from this.

for the politicians, it will marginally decrease our dependance on foreign oil. lol!

[Jet]

Hmmm... I have a better idea to increase employment. There're bound to be excess steel, concrete, and other building materials. We'll make half the unemployed build a building using them, and the other half tear it down, ensuring that the two groups work at the same speed, so the work never finishes.

if you are seriously suggesting that, allow me to critique. it requires skill in architecture which most unemployed do not have, it is dangerous work, it uses valuable raw materials and destroys them, and produces absolutely nothing in the end.

the 'unemployment center' is a better choice because it will produce electricity to a certain capacity, and anyone can do it, unless they are on disability in which case they need no such help.

both concepts would provide some kind of paid-activity for the unemployed to perform, both could potentially seperate the lazy from the downtrodden if the employment policies were incorporated.

the point is that you're trying, even if there are problems. both in your post and in the work world this should be respected in some way.

[Jet]

No, I'm not seriously suggesting that; I'm saying that there's no point in pointless labor. Since the actual increase in supply under your plan is close to zero, it's better to keep welfare in its current form rather than have a welfare-for-pointless-work scheme; the monetary costs are almost the same, except that one plan reduces the quality of life of welfare recipients by reducign the amount of free time they have whereas the other doesn't.

[Gorgo]

There is plenty of production. The problem isn't there isn't enough production, or enough stuff, the problem is that the wealth gravitates to a few.

Would we put wealthy people who do nothing on bikes as well? I don't think so.

No, there is plenty to go around.

free time can be an expensive burden for many welfare recipients. imagine an idle tuesday with nothing to do. no job, nothing. you could go spend some money on some entertainment, use drugs, write some graffiti, or go to the unemployment center and earn a few bucks cycling on the machine for a few hours. it'll be useful for you coz you'll get a few bucks and better health and mood and attitude from exercising.

'pointless' labor can have significant positive impacts which you are overlooking. and what makes you think that the electrical contribution will be almost nil? if we had even 1/3 of the unemployed/underemployed in america doing this for even 4 hours a day we could produce significant energy, at least on local levels.

gorgo, i quite agree with your sentiment, but i am unable to overpower the fundamental tendency for wealth to gravitate to the few without changing the way we do business, so i am proposing this as a secondary option to dramatic economic and social change.

[Jet]

The unemployed can jog in the street or go to a public library if they're looking for something to do.

[dismal]

Seriously, I'm not sure people can generate enough electricity to pay for the bikes, but there's a good questions here:

- What obligation do those who live off society have to society?
- Can we harness this obligation in a way that produces something useful for society and increases people's incentives to get back to work?

"The unemployed can jog in the street or go to a public library if they're looking for something to do."
that's a very laissez-faire attitude. that would defeat the concept of an unemployment center, and no one is going to pay you for jogging or going to a library. do you grasp the fundamental benefits and cost reductions of this plan?

benefits -

-health, mood
-electricity
-something organized to do
-refining the lazy from the group of unemployed
-remibursing those unemployed with employable qualities

savings

-less idleness, crime, drug use, poverty, social atrophy

[Gorgo]

To whom do you refer? The wealthy may be living "off society" as well as anyone else.

Originally posted by dismal, - What obligation do those who live off society have to society? - Can we harness this obligation in a way that produces something useful for society and increases people's incentives to get back to work?

[GreatWyrm of Babylon]

Bob
You know with a calculater and some web browsing you could avoid a lot of silly suggestions. The gym where I work out display power generated for reasons I do not know. It is a healthy clip to keep up with generating a KiloWatt, but even when I was younger I seriously doubt I could keep that pace for more than a couple of hours. Know what the value of 2 kilowatt hours from the electric company is? 10-12 cents.

[Catch 22]

bobdobb the main problem with any welfare for work model isn't that it makes people work instead of sitting around it's that it makes them work for less than minimum wage just get their welfare checks. As anyone knows this will inevitably lead to people working at both a welfare job and at a regular full paying job. Thus you’ve essentially undermined the real purpose of welfare which is to supplement income. Moreover it would and already does lead to many social problems. Most of these are associated with children because single mothers(the largest recipient group of welfare) have to be left at home unattended while mom does two jobs instead of one.

[Leopard]

Originally posted by Bob_Dobbs, if there was a way to turn unskilled labor into a useful valuable product our problems of unemployment and classism would be over. furthermore we could easilyu seperate the 'lazy' and 'unwilling' from those the system has merely forgotten. i propose voluntary use of electricity generating manual devices. for example, exercise bikes equipped with magnets and copper wire, or kinetic devices implanted in shoes or armbands. even if this amount of electricity is not enough to become a real paycheck, those who participate in the program are trying to help and are exerting themselves to assist society. by that merit these people could be rewarded in some way to offset their poverty and reward their ambition, perhaps by giving them favorable kilowatt rates. at least enough to keep them fed. no lazy person would ever go to one of these places. it could be a good way for employers to find people who really want to have jobs of any kind. plus they would be exercising and in good shape, something america could stand to improve a little on.

Mr. Dobbs suggestion is EXACTLY why I am against ceeding power to the government - by allowing the government to force us to 'play its game' we potentially subject ourselves to every little silly idea someone can come up with. It is wrong to take my labor/life to pay for your experimentations!

[Catch 22]

Mr. Dobbs suggestion is EXACTLY why I am against ceeding power to the government - by allowing the government to force us to 'play its game' we potentially subject ourselves to every little silly idea someone can come up with. It is wrong to take my labor/life to pay for your experimentations!

And if you notice he isn't in governemnt

[Lava]

Bob_Dobbs:
> you could go spend some money on some entertainment, use drugs, write some graffiti, or go to the unemployment center and earn a few bucks cycling on the machine for a few hours. it'll be useful for you coz you'll get a few bucks and better health and mood and attitude from exercising.

you'd be pushed to generate a few /cents/ in an hour. Theres no chance that would pay for the bikes, the power control equipment, the building space, one member of staff, security, the insurance, it may not even pay to light the place. Its a complete money sink with no positive output.


> if there was a way to turn unskilled labor into a useful valuable product

there is, many such schemes have been run in the last century. The problem is that staffing, providing equipment and supervision costs such that there really isnt much profit in it, unfortunately.


> our problems of unemployment and classism would be over.

how would a Victorian style workhouse remove classism? Have you ever wondered why the workhouse system was abandoned?


> i propose voluntary use of electricity generating manual devices. for example, exercise bikes equipped with magnets and copper wire, or kinetic devices implanted in shoes or armbands.
>
>even if this amount of electricity is not enough to become a real paycheck, those who participate in the program are trying to help and are exerting themselves to assist society.

no they would cost society, in 2 ways:
first the cost of the project, approximately none of which would be recouped
second the cost of the extra food theyd need would far outweigh the power output


> by that merit these people could be rewarded in some way to offset their poverty and reward their ambition,

ambition? 'Yes Sir! I'd like to be a hamster Sir!'


> this is not a 'job'. it's like recycling cans. 5 cents a can, no employment involved. 5 cents a watt, no employment involved, or whatever the right price is.

here its 8 cents a kilowatt hour. If theyre real musclebound and work like a rabid dog for 1 hour solid, that leccy could be sold to the grid for upto 3 cents!


> this is not a for-profit company.

no kidding


> it's a service to the community

no


> that is marginally involved with money and electricity. it'll give unemployed people something to do that won't cost them money they don't have.

it will, it costs them to get there, and it will cost them big time in food.


> it probably isn't as cost-effective as cranking up the power plant a little more or even building a new one, but it will address social problems

how? by taking folk off the street? helping them get jobs would be way more productive.


> it'd hardly break the bank to borrow a few dozen exercise bikes from junkyards or the museum of science and rig them with magnets and wire them up to a central battery and sell that electricity on the grid.

why would you use bikes that have been junked? You need working ones, ones that meet all the latest safety standards so you dont get sued. Ie new ones.

then there's:

cost of building rent / buy
staff
electricity
insurance
qualified instructor to avoid injuries
etc
etc
it would be a big big money sink


> fuck, you could sell refreshments at the door if you want to turn some extra profit from this.

to people living on welfare? who cant afford them? Why not


> for the politicians, it will marginally decrease our dependance on foreign oil. lol!

it will increase it: oil is used to provide power used in growing, processing, transporting, preparing, and storing food. And hard exercisers are gonna need a _lot_ more food.


> the 'unemployment center' is a better choice because it will produce electricity to a certain capacity,

light and heat for the building will use up whats produced, and probably more


> and anyone can do it, unless they are on disability in which case they need no such help.

of course that isnt actually true, there are loads of people that cant. There are reasons people are unemployed.


> both concepts would provide some kind of paid-activity for the unemployed to perform, both could potentially seperate the lazy from the downtrodden if the employment policies were incorporated.

of course the employment marketplace does that already...


> the point is that you're trying, even if there are problems.

to do what? There is no value in trying to do something stupid.


> both in your post and in the work world this should be respected in some way.

why? If I had an employee come to me who told me they generated their own power all day doing this I'd think they were bonkers, it would give me serious concerns about employing them. At best I'd think they were only mildly mentally defective.


> free time can be an expensive burden for many welfare recipients. imagine an idle tuesday with nothing to do. no job, nothing. you could go spend some money on some entertainment, use drugs, write some graffiti, or go to the unemployment center and earn a few bucks cycling on the machine for a few hours.

correction, a few cents. Which would not pay for the extra food needed, let alone anything else.


> it'll be useful for you coz you'll get a few bucks

no


> and better health

possibly.


> and mood and attitude from exercising.

I doubt it, not if youre not into it but forced to do it. Th Victorian workhouses were hated.


> 'pointless' labor can have significant positive impacts which you are overlooking. and what makes you think that the electrical contribution will be almost nil?

factual numbers, I guess


> if we had even 1/3 of the unemployed/underemployed in america doing this for even 4 hours a day we could produce significant energy, at least on local levels.

1/3 is optimistic. If by significant you mean it could light and heat the building, I'd say it was questionable.


>>"The unemployed can jog in the street or go to a public library if they're looking for something to do."
>that's a very laissez-faire attitude. that would defeat the concept of an unemployment center, and no one is going to pay you for jogging or going to a library.

just as no-one would for pedalling a bike.


> do you grasp the fundamental benefits and cost reductions of this plan?
>
>benefits -

>-health, mood <-- maybe
>-electricity <-- no
>-something organized to do <-- so?
>-refining the lazy from the group of unemployed <-- the job marketplace already does that
>-remibursing those unemployed with employable qualities <-- nope

>savings
> -less idleness,

no benefit - in fact a loss of parent to child time is a negative thing. So is a loss of time during which they could be working towards getting a job.


> crime, drug use,

possibly


> poverty,

would make that worse by failing to get on with getting a job, and requiring far more extra food than getting paid.


> social atrophy

what do you mean by that?



Wouldnt learning some skills, or attending jobcentre where they help you get a job, or going to anger management, or a therapist etc be far more useful?


Regards, Lava

[VXerick]

Originally posted by dismal, Seriously, I'm not sure people can generate enough electricity to pay for the bikes, but there's a good questions here: - What obligation do those who live off society have to society? - Can we harness this obligation in a way that produces something useful for society and increases people's incentives to get back to work?

Their obligation is to attempt to pay for their keep. Some can't but most have sufficient ability to ride bikes. I think it's a great idea. They can go to the library first and get a book and then read it while they are pedaling. That way they collect on their effort at cycling and they add knowledge to their brains. If they pedal long enough and learn enough, they might even decide to go find a real job.

[Leopard]

Originally posted by Catch 22, And if you notice he isn't in governemnt

is there ANYTHING that prevents him (or another like him) from being in government?

Notice the folks that AGREE with this idea - do you think that if it were ever proposed that it would be dismissed out-of-hand?

We currently PAY farmers to NOT grow food... and you think we are immune from enacting 'stupid'/harmful/morally corrupt legislation?

michael

[Occam]

As was pointed out earlier the drain on our economy to furnish all these people with the equipment would be far, far more than recovered in energy. And, the extra food required for them to must maintain themselves would more than use up any small amount they would receive for their efforts. Far better to subsidize them to go to school and learn a variety of skills (one or two isn't enough because of the liklihood that any specific job set will be outsourced). Then they could work and make a much better than minimum wage to get them above the poverty level.

They would also then become tax payers to contribute toward to the cost of the program.

Oh, wait a minute. That defeats the whole idea of keeping a large unskilled workforce to be hired by businesses to do the scut work at minimum pay.

Occam