![]() ![]() I’m not arguing against the automation of the workforce, but there needs to be the realization that this will lead to a rise in government assistance to the unemployed in the form of higher business taxes and higher taxes for the wealthiest segment of the nation. Fewer jobs leads back to more unemployment. Lower demand for products and services leads to more job cuts. ![]() Lower numbers of consumers causes a lower demand for products and services. ![]() ![]() As you cut back on available jobs, fewer people can afford to purchase products without putting themselves into a debt that they may not be able to pay off. The problem should be obvious, as we are experiencing a similar problem now with our current unemployment rates. This, too, will obviously raise a stink with employers, and lead to work outsourcing and relocation. The other option is to raise taxes on businesses with a lower than X% local/national human work force (if you won’t employ them, then you’re going to pay for the government to support them). Will we expect government to step in and mandate that X% of a businesses work force be human? Surely businesses would be a stink, as they are now about calls for raising minimum wages and health care, that such a law would kill off the smaller businesses and there would be those that fight this by either outsource that X% human employees, or pull stakes and relocate their business to a more automated factory friendly country. My question has been what will we do when the majority of employers find it more cost effective, given rising minimum wages, to replace their work force with robots? You need JavaScript enabled to view it.ĭon't miss out.Sean Everett takes a look at the robotic revolution and the possible benefits, both positive and negative, that may come from it.Ī number of years ago, I read Manna: Two Visions of Humanity’s Future and knew that the premise that the majority of employment would be automated at some point. If you’re interested in discussing this or other lighting solutions for your product or design, contact us here in Melbourne on +613 9413 9000 or email us at This email address is being protected from spambots. Rohinni has backed its versatility – from glowing logos on signage, to lighting wallpaper, even car headlights – and they hope to have the first Lightpaper™ products on shelves by the end of 2015. With an estimated lifespan of twenty years, Lightpaper™ is looking like a strong player in the future of lighting. It’s cheap, quick, and easy to produce, which will hopefully make it a very accessible option for people with limited resources. All that it requires is an electrical current – no circuit board, no soldering bulbs. Size isn’t the only thing that Lightpaper™ cuts down on. They assure that future versions of the product will not have this issue. Rohinni are still working out how to distribute the LEDs evenly, as current versions of Lightpaper™ are not evenly bright. This process isn’t without it’s problems, though. The LEDs are mixed with ink and then printed onto a material that conducts electricity. It’s called Lightpaper™ and we here in Melbourne think it's pretty cool. Idaho-based company Rohinni has taken this idea to an extreme, creating LEDs the size of a blood cell, allowing light to be printed. Working in product design, we are always looking at how technologies are changing, and it seems like a lot follow the philosophy of “make it smaller”. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |