There won't be any demand for them and that was my question. What should society do with all the excess people?

Freeze them and use as needed. I'm a scientist, dammit, not a sociologist.

 

You absolutely cannot control population quickly enough to make a difference unless you're willing to have a draconian police state and execute people for violating the no children policy. It didn't work for China and it sure as hell is not the solution for too many people with nothing to do.

Yes, it's not controllable and here's where this population problem is headed.

Go to Metro Manila Philippines, Delhi, India or another country with a population of at least a billion. You will see millions living in slums, poor sanitation, contaminated water, etc. It's already happening here in the U.S. with the so called homeless living on the streets.

To exacerbate the problem, the political money interests are getting government $$$ that should have gone toward useful socio-economic programs. San Francisco is a cesspool of political corruption with money interest skimming off public resources right and left. That's another story that would take up megabytes on AAC discussion board.

 

Yes, it's not controllable and here's where this population problem is headed.

Go to Metro Manila Philippines, Delhi, India or another country with a population of at least a billion. You will see millions living in slums, poor sanitation, contaminated water, etc. It's already happening here in the U.S. with the so called homeless living on the streets.

To exacerbate the problem, the political money interests are getting government $$$ that should have gone toward useful socio-economic programs. San Francisco is a cesspool of political corruption with money interest skimming off public resources right and left. That's another story that would take up megabytes on AAC discussion board.

Why do you stay?

 

I have followed this thread with interest, but be careful about the line we have here on AAC. Corruption exists, but this is not the forum to discuss that. That goes straight into politics.

Odds are disease or starvation will become worse if we don't address some core issues soon. We are already seeing an uptick on the disease front. Omega man anyone?

Unfortunately for the biosphere in general, humans are much more resilient that rats and cockroaches, though both of the latter like using our efforts to keep themselves in business. Like Dr. Strangelove, we would probably go underground given enough time and warning.

 

Odds are disease or starvation will become worse if we don't address some core issues soon.

Agreed. With the rapid rise of superbugs resistant to antibiotics, a possible scenario is that the human population will be disease-limited to a small fraction of its present size. So that will address Papabravo's concerns .

 

Here's a story I heard from industrialist Scott Alton Newell II who is the son of the inventor of the car shredder shown in my avatar.

This story came out of a discussion about how to remain in business (and also stay profitable) in scrap metal recycling when there's a severe drop in the market price for scrap.

Two men were hiking in the forest when they came across a hungry grizzly bear.

The bear started to chase after them, but they quickly turned around and began running away. However, the bear was gaining ground and it was obvious he would eventually catch up with them and have dinner.

One of the men frantically said to the other, "How can we outrun that bear and save our lives?"

However the other man calmly said "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you".

The motto of the story is you don't have to be the best person to remain economically viable, just better than your competitors. Likewise, as humans are becoming more and more obsolete, your strategy should be to always be better than the next Joe.

 

...as humans are becoming more and more obsolete, your strategy should be to always be more skilled than the next Joe.

Or willing to work for less. Computers and robots will take care of all the stuff that needs skills.

I was at a worksite where a GPS-controlled road grader was leveling a multi-field soccer facility with contoured drainage. The blades were raised, lowered and turned automatically as needed to efficiently move the dirt to produce the elevations and slopes that match the design from the civil engineering firm loaded into the grader. The demonstration was that the driver had no previous experience other than driving a dump truck. He was essentially playing a video game in the cab. The really cool part, the GPS control system could communicate with other equipment from the same manufacturer and automatically avoid collisions and optimize the movement of dirt. I had to wonder if the driver was there to only be a scapegoat if the controller was inaccurate and ran over someone.

There were four guys with shovels, I asked what they expected to do. They were going to level the 16" gap between the pre-existing concrete road and the area the grader took care of.

Obsolete? You bet. Skills needed in the future? A strong back and a weak mind.

 

Even if robotics take over a lot of jobs previously done by humans, there will still be a need for some humans at the upper end of the food chain.

You just need to be some of them!!!

 

What to do with excess humans?. Easy! Seen "Soylent Green". "its people"

 

There won't be any demand for them and that was my question. What should society do with all the excess people?

It's an excellent question. The Atlantic ran a long article about this very thing back in the summer. I still have a copy of it. Extensive social welfare will certainly be in order. The monetary system will need extensive control and redistribution. People will do, as you say, paint, play music, craft or just be on perpetual vacation. The way I see it, throughout history the people in charge have been those who exploit human labor. But in the future, it will be the technical folks who will have all the power. Buh-ha-ha-ha!

 

You can also retire and remove yourself from the economic food chain making way for younger workers. In many places it is easier to do that.

 

Nah at a certain point only so many humans would be employed and have access to legal tender so the production need of those robots would decrease and the rest would just pay each other in food and work.

And the system dies out.