Or how automation, housing and other costs are pushing young people to give up on capitalism and look to Socialism for answers. This essay was inspired by a recent article on Quillette entitled:
Workers are scarce and wages are rising. “The relationship between American businesses and their employees,” reports the New York Times, “is undergoing a profound shift: for the f… (text from article)
A thoughtful and intelligent piece, reflective of many of the concerns raised by Andrew Yang’s 2020 Presidential Primary Run, which I found myself supporting for the simple reason that he did have some rather useful ideas like a Tobin-style tax on financial transactions- but was more important because of the general generosity with which he was willing to treat the political opposition in our toxic partisan landscape.
Instead of racism, sexism and homophobia, Russiagate, Hilary’s emails and a whole host of other conspiracy theories, he correctly intuited that the reason for the massive switch of blue collar voters in battleground states from Obama to Trump had more to do with the labour devastation caused by offshoring, trade deals and automation than all of the above. Little wonder then that the likes of MSNBC took every opportunity to sabotage his campaign, omitting him from graphics when lower polling mainstream politicians were included- because his narrative was a direct threat to their Hate Inc. anger economics and negative engagement business model.
Key to understanding the current political and cultural upheaval simmering beneath the Culture Wars, as a contributory root cause, is the realisation we have been rapidly switching out reasonable well-paid jobs manufacturing tradables for service jobs which have, until very recently, been extremely poorly paid. And in case you imagined automation wasn’t coming for you, AI can now design contracts better than any lawyer, it looks set to gut radiography as a profession and the entire finance sector will, in the next couple of decades, become little more than a job involving client hand-holding, with the exception of a few quants and qualified actuaries, operating in the stratosphere of the top 0.2% of mathematical ability.
But it’s not the only adverse economic factor pushing young people towards greater sympathy for Socialism. University fees have pushed the cost of education to the point it requires what amounts to a mortgage, through the massive expansion of administrators, corporate officers and extremely well-remunerated diversity officers. At the same time, housing in the and UK and US, already beset by antiquated, burdensome and archaic planning laws, has become the purvey of an emergent oligopoly with a small number of suppliers buying up the land in a practice known as land banking, and who have- at least in the UK- engaged in price gouging through deliberate undersupply.
This YouTube video by British Free Speech comedian, libertarian and cultural commentator Dominic Frisby is quite succinct and to the point on the subject:
He asks the question why one group of young people might be afforded the opportunity to settle down and have a family, whilst another is barred from doing so, when the only thing separating them is time- a matter of which generation they were born into? Who knew that housing would become the new appreciating asset class for the global rich, a form of up-front rentier economics facilitated by artificially low interest rates?
Although I am generally a great believer in free markets, it is governments role to ensure a fair system in which the game is not rigged- and there is an extent to which housing has become an oligopoly through aggregation, subject to an Iron Triangle of Interests (a phrase coined by Telegraph economist Liam Halligan in his recent influential book Home Truths- an expert guide for anyone looking to develop specialist knowledge of the flaws in housing supply).
Don’t get me wrong, I think automation is a serious problem- but housing is probably the greater threat, and labour displacement is a feature, not a bug, of capitalism. History teaches us that although capitalism is a great reallocator of resources financially and in the long-run, it is less able to reallocate labour other than intergenerationally, with obsolete workers more often left to the generosity of the State and whatever charitable provision exists, than able to transition to new market opportunities, unless they happen to be bright, young, lucky or all of the aforementioned. It’s also led to any number of unstable periods of history, beset by system-wide political violence and destruction of property, only compounding the misery.
But however painful, it is the only thing powerful enough to push our civilisation forward, to lift us up from the wrenching poverty and brutal people necessity dictated we become. In two hundred years, it has led to roughly 85% of the world’s population being raised up from the most abject conditions subsistence farming or worse, malnourished, losing their teeth by 25, and their lives by 35.
Controversially, other than the Printing Press, it is also the engine of all social progress- recent evidence from China suggests that the people only begin to care about air quality and the environment when average earnings exceed $5K a year, and I’m sure we could find all manner of similar thresholds throughout history relating to slavery, the vote for women and racial/gender equality.
The problem, the new element in the equation, is the way the Twitter bubble has distorted the perceptions of our media class, coupled with the internet and social media. It makes serious problems like Climate Change seem far more apocalyptic than they actually are- and there is a symbiosis which occurs between the angst the young feel at the quite justifiable desperation they feel about their inability to acquire property and start a family, and their illusionary perceptions of the ills of the world, which are in recent times generally overly catastrophised and, in many instances, downright wrong.
It’s what makes people yearn for the totalitarian nightmare which Socialism always becomes, with its poverty inducing economic Armageddon and inclination towards mass murder. It’s why the regulatory burden needs to be shifted away from small businesses and onto the shoulders of large corporations, why we need to massively shift public expenditure away from universities and towards technical and vocational training, and why there needs to be radical reform to housing markets. Because without these changes the temptation of totalitarian Socialism will simply prove too much over time, leaving the next generation to inherit Hell on Earth at their own hands.
You are on point as always. It is a marvel how less than academically gifted high school students are driven to universities where they are warmly welcomed into social studies and hence into cafes as baristas, the twittersphere and blockading pipelines as born again activists. Even classical studies such as English or History are dead hard to make a career out of. As an Arch. Anth. student, I spent a few years doing temp work until I landed in marketing. I would with foresight better have opted for a vocational digital marketing qualification or something highly specialized and rather more technical, witnessing as I do that getting someone to run a complicated google adwords or facebook campaign can cost up to $200+ an hour. Back in the day a degree meant something, today rather less so and the cost is onerous. Your observations on the bloated administration is also something that infuriates me, as they are parasites.
As an aside about generously paid diversity officers, I watched the online "diversity training" course a friend/government worker had to do. I watched an entire module and came away with the understanding that none of the scenarios would ever play out except in the imagination of someone who has been indoctrinated to suspect the world is full of misogynistic racists who continually oppress angelic POC. The scenario I watched contained caricatures -- a kind, innocent shopper accosted by a thuggish security guard. It made me think of a situation when I visited a Burberry outlet store. As I entered, the security guard looked up and positioned himself discreetly so he could keep me in his eyeline as I moved around and browsed. I thought - well, I'm dressed a bit casually and these are $1200 scarves and $4000 jackets so I can understand this. As I was leaving, a man entered the store and walked purposefully around, looking deliberately to engage with the security guard, and began a tirade about racism and how he was being targeted as a thief, and gratuitously offensive to the shop girls - words I could hear clearly. All of them looked terrified to engage, imagining a future of picketers outside the store. I suspect it is due to the surfeit of social studies degrees that leave people poor, under employed and inclined to invent oppression. I can see the lure of socialism to shop girls and tirading rude man alike, believing they will be elevated and no longer have to suffer these injustices. A responsible government would put policy in place to direct students to actually useful educational streams, look to retain jobs at home and make housing affordable.
Sorry, went a bit off topic there, but agree - as Canada is moving towards a totalitarian system fuelled by the under employed output of our educational system and skilled identitarian lobbyists and professional victims - I can't help but think I should cash out of Canada and move to Costa Rica, which at least has a good health system and weather.
It’s what makes people yearn for the totalitarian nightmare which Socialism always becomes, with its poverty inducing economic Armageddon and inclination towards mass murder. It’s why the regulatory burden needs to be shifted away from small businesses and onto the shoulders of large corporations, why we need to massively shift public expenditure away from universities and towards technical and vocational training, and why there needs to be radical reform to housing markets. Because without these changes the temptation of totalitarian Socialism will simply prove too much over time, leaving the next generation to inherit Hell on Earth at their own hands.
This is a super subject Geary. You’ve really tied the essence of the problem together rather too well, because placed together it has an absurd deliberateness about it as much as consequential results of mere globalisation.
As a traditionalist I favour strong borders, democracy, small government intervention, free markets, opportunity, entrepreneurism, competitive markets etc., a social impetus structure designed to encourage an individual to better ones life through effort, but with the caveat that such a structure both encourages wide swathes of public participation and that it is a broadly workable and achievable possibility.
At the same time, housing in the and UK and US, already beset by antiquated, burdensome and archaic planning laws, has become the purvey of an emergent oligopoly with a small number of suppliers buying up the land in a practice known as land banking, and who have- at least in the UK- engaged in price gouging through deliberate undersupply.
Indeed. Spoon feeding bits of clay at exorbitant prices and releasing it bid style for those begging to engage in lifetime bank debts. It’s got to the point that it feels like a giant ponzi scheme between the corporate developer and those lovely bank chaps.
I mean who tags a piece of clay at 100k, or 500k, or a lot more? But of course it’s value addressed to the ongoing competition. Then there’s the suppliers and merchants who are constantly inflating their profits, which are minimally 30% anyways. Windows around 60% profit, kitchens 40-60% sheer profit. Building labour is set by supply and demand so builders go in high, knowing full well that if they fail, that the next contract is only a call away. Anyways, the overall profit to the builder, which is effectively only labour, is around 40%. All along the chain from the soil to the bricks to the windows to the labour the margins are basically doubling the cost of a new home and that’s not really taking account of the land cost which is massive and an argument in of itself.
Next one can compare renting trends over the past 10 years. Whereas formerly young people would rent a house they now often can not; not with all their other associated costs. Some can’t stay with their parents and it may be the case that they’re on minimum age and single. Well what we’re seeing is a massive increase in shared accommodation. A poor mans commune. Landlords are capitalising. Instead of renting off a house for £500 per month, they rent rooms at £350 per month and the renters share the bills. Checking “Rightmove” in my own area where there is still cheap houses to purchase, I found ten pages of shared accommodation before I reached the next affordable tier; the whole house rent bracket.
The point here is that say you pick up a minimum wage of just under £300 per week, possibly in unsafe employment, well you can manage to carve out a semblance of independent life. Maybe even have £100 after paying the essentials.
The comparison to 30 years ago is dismal and stark and young people who would tend to trend with following their parents work and achieve ethos are encountering nothing but walls. They are feeling the pressure on their freedoms and available choices. They are trapped in a position where their costs and desire to mix and mingle, spend and enjoy and be young is compromised by the very costs of having to pay for a roof and food. With all the MSM and leftist communist and woke speak narrative and their lived experience lacking a young persons former perspective, it’s little wonder that many are feeling shut out of traditional conservatism and actually embracing more Marxist attitudes.
Globalisation has created a market that has broken the ability to climb ladders. I’m unsure of the statistics but I heard it to be 60% of the population that is disenfranchised. No longer can an individual country sort out this issue as it’s locked into a global system that is fast making corporate power larger than national power. Each year there is born new numbers with less and less chance of following their parents example. Costs are simply becoming too far out of sync with affordable wages. Leading the masses toward socialism as their favoured outcome.
You are on point as always. It is a marvel how less than academically gifted high school students are driven to universities where they are warmly welcomed into social studies and hence into cafes as baristas, the twittersphere and blockading pipelines as born again activists. Even classical studies such as English or History are dead hard to make a career out of. As an Arch. Anth. student, I spent a few years doing temp work until I landed in marketing. I would with foresight better have opted for a vocational digital marketing qualification or something highly specialized and rather more technical, witnessing as I do that getting someone to run a complicated google adwords or facebook campaign can cost up to $200+ an hour. Back in the day a degree meant something, today rather less so and the cost is onerous. Your observations on the bloated administration is also something that infuriates me, as they are parasites.
As an aside about generously paid diversity officers, I watched the online "diversity training" course a friend/government worker had to do. I watched an entire module and came away with the understanding that none of the scenarios would ever play out except in the imagination of someone who has been indoctrinated to suspect the world is full of misogynistic racists who continually oppress angelic POC. The scenario I watched contained caricatures -- a kind, innocent shopper accosted by a thuggish security guard. It made me think of a situation when I visited a Burberry outlet store. As I entered, the security guard looked up and positioned himself discreetly so he could keep me in his eyeline as I moved around and browsed. I thought - well, I'm dressed a bit casually and these are $1200 scarves and $4000 jackets so I can understand this. As I was leaving, a man entered the store and walked purposefully around, looking deliberately to engage with the security guard, and began a tirade about racism and how he was being targeted as a thief, and gratuitously offensive to the shop girls - words I could hear clearly. All of them looked terrified to engage, imagining a future of picketers outside the store. I suspect it is due to the surfeit of social studies degrees that leave people poor, under employed and inclined to invent oppression. I can see the lure of socialism to shop girls and tirading rude man alike, believing they will be elevated and no longer have to suffer these injustices. A responsible government would put policy in place to direct students to actually useful educational streams, look to retain jobs at home and make housing affordable.
Sorry, went a bit off topic there, but agree - as Canada is moving towards a totalitarian system fuelled by the under employed output of our educational system and skilled identitarian lobbyists and professional victims - I can't help but think I should cash out of Canada and move to Costa Rica, which at least has a good health system and weather.
It’s what makes people yearn for the totalitarian nightmare which Socialism always becomes, with its poverty inducing economic Armageddon and inclination towards mass murder. It’s why the regulatory burden needs to be shifted away from small businesses and onto the shoulders of large corporations, why we need to massively shift public expenditure away from universities and towards technical and vocational training, and why there needs to be radical reform to housing markets. Because without these changes the temptation of totalitarian Socialism will simply prove too much over time, leaving the next generation to inherit Hell on Earth at their own hands.
This is a super subject Geary. You’ve really tied the essence of the problem together rather too well, because placed together it has an absurd deliberateness about it as much as consequential results of mere globalisation.
As a traditionalist I favour strong borders, democracy, small government intervention, free markets, opportunity, entrepreneurism, competitive markets etc., a social impetus structure designed to encourage an individual to better ones life through effort, but with the caveat that such a structure both encourages wide swathes of public participation and that it is a broadly workable and achievable possibility.
At the same time, housing in the and UK and US, already beset by antiquated, burdensome and archaic planning laws, has become the purvey of an emergent oligopoly with a small number of suppliers buying up the land in a practice known as land banking, and who have- at least in the UK- engaged in price gouging through deliberate undersupply.
Indeed. Spoon feeding bits of clay at exorbitant prices and releasing it bid style for those begging to engage in lifetime bank debts. It’s got to the point that it feels like a giant ponzi scheme between the corporate developer and those lovely bank chaps.
I mean who tags a piece of clay at 100k, or 500k, or a lot more? But of course it’s value addressed to the ongoing competition. Then there’s the suppliers and merchants who are constantly inflating their profits, which are minimally 30% anyways. Windows around 60% profit, kitchens 40-60% sheer profit. Building labour is set by supply and demand so builders go in high, knowing full well that if they fail, that the next contract is only a call away. Anyways, the overall profit to the builder, which is effectively only labour, is around 40%. All along the chain from the soil to the bricks to the windows to the labour the margins are basically doubling the cost of a new home and that’s not really taking account of the land cost which is massive and an argument in of itself.
Next one can compare renting trends over the past 10 years. Whereas formerly young people would rent a house they now often can not; not with all their other associated costs. Some can’t stay with their parents and it may be the case that they’re on minimum age and single. Well what we’re seeing is a massive increase in shared accommodation. A poor mans commune. Landlords are capitalising. Instead of renting off a house for £500 per month, they rent rooms at £350 per month and the renters share the bills. Checking “Rightmove” in my own area where there is still cheap houses to purchase, I found ten pages of shared accommodation before I reached the next affordable tier; the whole house rent bracket.
The point here is that say you pick up a minimum wage of just under £300 per week, possibly in unsafe employment, well you can manage to carve out a semblance of independent life. Maybe even have £100 after paying the essentials.
The comparison to 30 years ago is dismal and stark and young people who would tend to trend with following their parents work and achieve ethos are encountering nothing but walls. They are feeling the pressure on their freedoms and available choices. They are trapped in a position where their costs and desire to mix and mingle, spend and enjoy and be young is compromised by the very costs of having to pay for a roof and food. With all the MSM and leftist communist and woke speak narrative and their lived experience lacking a young persons former perspective, it’s little wonder that many are feeling shut out of traditional conservatism and actually embracing more Marxist attitudes.
Globalisation has created a market that has broken the ability to climb ladders. I’m unsure of the statistics but I heard it to be 60% of the population that is disenfranchised. No longer can an individual country sort out this issue as it’s locked into a global system that is fast making corporate power larger than national power. Each year there is born new numbers with less and less chance of following their parents example. Costs are simply becoming too far out of sync with affordable wages. Leading the masses toward socialism as their favoured outcome.
“ it is governments role to ensure a fair system in which the game is not rigged”
A role never to be fulfilled except in myths.