Guest Post by Doug Casey
You’ve heard the axiom “History repeats itself.” It does, but never in exactly the same way. To apply the lessons of the past, we must understand the differences of the present.
During the American Revolution, the British came prepared to fight a successful war—but against a European army. Their formations, which gave them devastating firepower, and their red coats, which emphasized their numbers, proved the exact opposite of the tactics needed to fight a guerrilla war.
Before World War I, generals still saw the cavalry as the flower of their armies. Of course, the horse soldiers proved worse than useless in the trenches.
Before World War II, in anticipation of a German attack, the French built the “impenetrable” Maginot Line. History repeated itself and the attack came, but not in the way they expected. Their preparations were useless because the Germans didn’t attempt to penetrate it; they simply went around it, and France was defeated.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
The generals don’t prepare for the last war out of perversity or stupidity, but rather because past experience is all they have to go by. Most of them simply don’t know how to interpret that experience. They are correct in preparing for another war but wrong in relying upon what worked in the last one.
Investors, unfortunately, seem to make the same mistakes in marshaling their resources as do the generals. If the last 30 years have been prosperous, they base their actions on more prosperity. Talk of a depression isn’t real to them because things are, in fact, so different from the 1930s. To most people, a depression means ’30s-style conditions, and since they don’t see that, they can’t imagine a depression. That’s because they know what the last depression was like, but they don’t know what one is. It’s hard to visualize something you don’t understand.
Some of them who are a bit more clever might see an end to prosperity and the start of a depression but—although they’re going to be a lot better off than most—they’re probably looking for this depression to be like the last one.
Although nobody can predict with absolute certainty what this depression will be like, you can be fairly well-assured it won’t be an instant replay of the last one. But just because things will be different doesn’t mean you have to be taken by surprise.
To define the likely differences between this depression and the last one, it’s helpful to compare the situation today to that in the early 1930s. The results aren’t very reassuring.
CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY
1930s
Banks, insurance companies, and big corporations went under on a major scale. Institutions suffered the consequences of past mistakes, and there was no financial safety net to catch them as they fell. Mistakes were liquidated and only the prepared and efficient survived.
Today
The world’s financial institutions are in even worse shape than the last time, but now business ethics have changed and everyone expects the government to “step in.” Laws are already in place that not only allow but require government intervention in many instances. This time, mistakes will be compounded, and the strong, productive, and efficient will be forced to subsidize the weak, unproductive, and inefficient. It’s ironic that businesses were bankrupted in the last depression because the prices of their products fell too low; this time, it’ll be because they went too high.
UNEMPLOYMENT
1930s
If a man lost his job, he had to find another one as quickly as possible simply to keep from going hungry. A lot of other men in the same position competed desperately for what work was available, and an employer could hire those same men for much lower wages and expect them to work harder than what was the case before the depression. As a result, the men could get jobs and the employer could stay in business.
Today
The average man first has months of unemployment insurance; after that, he can go on welfare if he can’t find “suitable work.” Instead of taking whatever work is available, especially if it means that a white collar worker has to get his hands dirty, many will go on welfare. This will decrease the production of new wealth and delay the recovery. The worker no longer has to worry about some entrepreneur exploiting (i.e., employing) him at what he considers an unfair wage because the minimum wage laws, among others, precludes that possibility today. As a result, men stay unemployed and employers will go out of business.
WELFARE
1930s
If hard times really put a man down and out, he had little recourse but to rely on his family, friends, or local social and church group. There was quite a bit of opprobrium attached to that, and it was only a last resort. The breadlines set up by various government bodies were largely cosmetic measures to soothe the more terror-prone among the voting populace. People made do because they had to, and that meant radically reducing their standards of living and taking any job available at any wage. There were very, very few people on welfare during the last depression.
Today
It’s hard to say how those who are still working are going to support those who aren’t in this depression. Even in the U.S., 50% of the country is already on some form of welfare. But food stamps, aid to families with dependent children, Social Security, and local programs are already collapsing in prosperous times. And when the tidal wave hits, they’ll be totally overwhelmed. There aren’t going to be any breadlines because people who would be standing in them are going to be shopping in local supermarkets just like people who earned their money. Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of it is that people in general have come to think that these programs can just magically make wealth appear, and they expect them to be there, while a whole class of people have grown up never learning to survive without them. It’s ironic, yet predictable, that the programs that were supposed to help those who “need” them will serve to devastate those very people.
REGULATIONS
1930s
Most economies have been fairly heavily regulated since the early 1900s, and those regulations caused distortions that added to the severity of the last depression. Rather than allow the economy to liquidate, in the case of the U.S., the Roosevelt regime added many, many more regulations—fixing prices, wages, and the manner of doing business in a static form. It was largely because of these regulations that the depression lingered on until the end of World War II, which “saved” the economy only through its massive reinflation of the currency. Had the government abolished most controls then in existence, instead of creating new ones, the depression would have been less severe and much shorter.
Today
The scores of new agencies set up since the last depression have created far more severe distortions in the ways people relate than those of 80 years ago; the potential adjustment needed is proportionately greater. Unless government restrictions and controls on wages, working conditions, energy consumption, safety, and such are removed, a dramatic economic turnaround during the Greater Depression will be impossible.
TAXES
1930s
The income tax was new to the U.S. in 1913, and by 1929, although it took a maximum 23.1% bite, that was only at the $1 million level. The average family’s income then was $2,335, and that put average families in the 1/10th of 1 percent bracket. And there was still no Social Security tax, no state income tax, no sales tax, and no estate tax. Furthermore, most people in the country didn’t even pay the income tax because they earned less than the legal minimum or they didn’t bother filing. The government, therefore, had immense untapped sources of revenue to draw upon to fund its schemes to “cure” the depression. Roosevelt was able to raise the average income tax from 1.35% to 16.56% during his tenure—an increase of 1,100%.
Today
Everyone now pays an income tax in addition to all the other taxes. In most Western countries, the total of direct and indirect taxes is over 50%. For that reason, it seems unlikely that direct taxes will go much higher. But inflation is constantly driving everyone into higher brackets and will have the same effect. A person has had to increase his or her income faster than inflation to compensate for taxes. Whatever taxes a man does pay will reduce his standard of living by just that much, and it’s reasonable to expect tax evasion and the underground economy to boom in response. That will cushion the severity of the depression somewhat while it serves to help change the philosophical orientation of society.
PRICES
1930s
Prices dropped radically because billions of dollars of inflationary currency were wiped out through the stock market crash, bond defaults, and bank failures. The government, however, somehow equated the high prices of the inflationary ’20s with prosperity and attempted to prevent a fall in prices by such things as slaughtering livestock, dumping milk in the gutter, and enacting price supports. Since the collapse wiped out money faster than it could be created, the government felt the destruction of real wealth was a more effective way to raise prices. In other words, if you can’t increase the supply of money, decrease the supply of goods.
Nonetheless, the 1930s depression was a deflationary collapse, a time when currency became worth more and prices dropped. This is probably the most confusing thing to most Americans since they assume—as a result of that experience—that “depression” means “deflation.” It’s also perhaps the biggest single difference between this depression and the last one.
Today
Prices could drop, as they did the last time, but the amount of power the government now has over the economy is far greater than what was the case 80 years ago. Instead of letting the economy cleanse itself by allowing the financial markets to collapse, governments will probably bail out insolvent banks, create mortgages wholesale to prop up real estate, and central banks will buy bonds to keep their prices from plummeting. All of these actions mean that the total money supply will grow enormously. Trillions will be created to avoid deflation. If you find men selling apples on street corners, it won’t be for 5 cents apiece, but $5 apiece. But there won’t be a lot of apple sellers because of welfare, nor will there be a lot of apples because of price controls.
Consumer prices will probably skyrocket as a result, and the country will have an inflationary depression. Unlike the 1930s, when people who held dollars were king, by the end of the Greater Depression, people with dollars will be wiped out.
THE SOCIETY
1930s
The world was largely rural or small-town. Communications were slow, but people tended to trust the media. The government exercised considerable moral suasion, and people tended to support it. The business of the country was business, as Calvin Coolidge said, and men who created wealth were esteemed. All told, if you were going to have a depression, it was a rather stable environment for it; despite that, however, there were still plenty of riots, marches, and general disorder.
Today
The country is now urban and suburban, and although communications are rapid, there’s little interpersonal contact. The media are suspect. The government is seen more as an adversary or an imperial ruler than an arbitrator accepted by a consensus of concerned citizens. Businessmen are viewed as unscrupulous predators who take advantage of anyone weak enough to be exploited.
A major financial smashup in today’s atmosphere could do a lot more than wipe out a few naives in the stock market and unemploy some workers, as occurred in the ’30s; some sectors of society are now time bombs. It’s hard to say, for instance, what third- and fourth-generation welfare recipients are going to do when the going gets really tough.
THE WAY PEOPLE WORK
1930s
Relatively slow transportation and communication localized economic conditions. The U.S. itself was somewhat insulated from the rest of the world, and parts of the U.S. were fairly self-contained. Workers were mostly involved in basic agriculture and industry, creating widgets and other tangible items. There wasn’t a great deal of specialization, and that made it easier for someone to move laterally from one occupation into the next, without extensive retraining, since people were more able to produce the basics of life on their own. Most women never joined the workforce, and the wife in a marriage acted as a “backup” system should the husband lose his job.
Today
The whole world is interdependent, and a war in the Middle East or a revolution in Africa can have a direct and immediate effect on a barber in Chicago or Krakow. Since the whole economy is centrally controlled from Washington, a mistake there can be a national disaster. People generally aren’t in a position to roll with the punches as more than half the people in the country belong to what is known as the “service economy.” That means, in most cases, they’re better equipped to shuffle papers than make widgets. Even “necessary” services are often terminated when times get hard. Specialization is part of what an advanced industrial economy is all about, but if the economic order changes radically, it can prove a liability.
THE FINANCIAL MARKETS
1930s
The last depression is identified with the collapse of the stock market, which lost over 90% of its value from 1929 to 1933. A secure bond was the best possible investment as interest rates dropped radically. Commodities plummeted, reducing millions of farmers to near subsistence levels. Since most real estate was owned outright and taxes were low, a drop in price didn’t make a lot of difference unless you had to sell. Land prices plummeted, but since people bought it to use, not unload to a greater fool, they didn’t usually have to sell.
Today
This time, stocks—and especially commodities—are likely to explode on the upside as people panic into them to get out of depreciating dollars in general and bonds in particular. Real estate will be—next to bonds—the most devastated single area of the economy because no one will lend money long term. And real estate is built on the mortgage market, which will vanish.
Everybody who invests in this depression thinking that it will turn out like the last one will be very unhappy with the results. Being aware of the differences between the last depression and this one makes it a lot easier to position yourself to minimize losses and maximize profits.
So much for the differences. The crucial, obvious, and most important similarity, however, is that most people’s standard of living will fall dramatically.
The Greater Depression has started. Most people don’t know it because they can neither confront the thought nor understand the differences between this one and the last.
As a climax approaches, many of the things that you’ve built your life around in the past are going to change and change radically. The ability to adjust to new conditions is the sign of a psychologically healthy person.
Look for the opportunity side of the crisis. The Chinese symbol for “crisis” is a combination of two other symbols—one for danger and one for opportunity.
The dangers that society will face in the years ahead are regrettable, but there’s no point in allowing anxiety, frustration, or apathy to overcome you. Face the future with courage, curiosity, and optimism rather than fear. You can be a winner, and if you plan carefully, you will be. The great period of change will give you a chance to regain control of your destiny. And that in itself is the single most important thing in life. This depression can give you that opportunity; it’s one of the many ways the Greater Depression can be a very good thing for both you as an individual and society as a whole.
Editor’s note: America is about to enter a crisis far more severe than what we saw in 2008–2009.
It could all start after Trump’s inauguration and could change everything… in sudden, unexpected ways.
This is exactly why Doug and his team put together a time-sensitive video explaining how it could all go down.
This could be a college course.
Or it could be wrong…hard to say.
True, any sort of speculation could he wrong but the dismal reality is that never in history has this nation been in the throes of such extreme economic distortions. It’s being kept afloat only through the mechanism of artificially low interest rates. Inflation is rampaging, despite the government-released figures. I do most of the family food shopping and I see it daily. The only commodity that’s down is fuel prices, due to new extraction techniques which have rendered the US a net energy exporter. Nearly half of all new car sales are to leasing companies, the same situation that prevailed in the UK forty years ago. People simply can’t afford to buy them any longer. Housing prices are actually declining in many parts of the nation, a decline that would become a rout if interest rates returned to just 5%, let alone the 17% prime that Ronald Reagan inherited from the Arch Buffoon of All Time (ABAT) Jimmuh Cottuh, who famously announced that, “The ‘murrican people mayhap jus’ gonna have to get used to a lower standard of living.” Of course, Jimmuh was subsequently and unceremoniously booted out of the White House. Unfortunately, the Donald’s inheriting a monstrous can of worms, for which he’ll likely get the blame, just as did Herbert Hoover for the Great Depression, when the real villain was FDR.
Great article! Think of it like this..when [not if] ‘it’ happens & SHTF, you will not be able to survive in the big cities. The DAY the trucks stop rolling and the EBT cards quit working, it will be days too late to get out. Recently I had a taste of this in my town..the large grocery store I shop at had a “computer glitch” happen and all terminals stopped ALL electric transactions at once. I was waiting in line w a cart load. People were confused, pulling out of lines, babies cring and folks just arguing w the cashiers, but nobody was getting any food…except ME and one other old geezer like me..we were paying CASH. I try to do that every time and that day I..walked up to the head of the line, as did he..with carts loaded. I whipped out my wallet and handed the boy a $100 Federal Reserve note and a $20 and walked out w ALL my shyte..and with the pi$$toff stares of about 2 dozen folks who got nothing…. The day SHTF for real, I know even that federal reserve note might not work….but that day (if the store has not been looted) I will use the pre-1965 silver coins wh I always carry. Two or three 90% silver dollar coins wd probably buy my groceries..and I & Mr Glock will walk out w our stuff. We are prepared.
money is king and those with none and in debt will be sorry and run around saying what happen.
Greetings,
Financial investing for Depression 2.0 is something I tend to shy away from. It seems to me that a smarter investment for someone starting out would be non-perishables like laundry detergent, toilet paper, rechargeable batteries, etc. I’ve read the blogs of those that have lived thru recent Depressions and I’ve tried to take note as to what did or did not have value.
Probably the only thing we can be sure of is that government manipulation of the market at the time of crisis will make basic consumer goods vanish entirely into the black market. Those of us whose last name isn’t Rockefeller or Zuckerberg will be doing our buy-sell-trade on the black market. Trading toothpaste for gold, silver and/or weapons and ammunition will probably be a good way to acquire some wealth especially since the public doesn’t have any understanding of precious metals. After all, what’s a wedding band or two when you are out of toilet paper?
.22 lr or 9mm ammo will be king
In Pennsylvania nonetheless! https://www.thestreet.com/story/13958265/1/an-entire-shopping-mall-just-sold-for-100.html
Want a sign of how bad retail has gotten? Check out the astonishing price an entire mall just sold for in auction.
Wells Fargo Bank won the bid for the 1.1 million square foot Galleria at Pittsburgh Mills on Wednesday for $100.
Serious question.
Is Doug Casey reliable, or is he a fraud?
I think he has good ideas about libertarian governance, and a good grasp of history. Prediction wise, no better or worse than most. While his views are based on good logic, the time frame has been off ( the hardest thing to get correct)
He runs a newsletter business. He is a smart guy, but his job is to sell newsletters. He isn’t a fraud. I wrote articles for the Casey Report for about a year. I think you can get as good information for free, rather than pay for his newsletter.
To get a good read on Casey, try his book “Totally Incorrect.” Funny, provoking, and he gives his philosophy on a number of issues. If nothing else, it is entertaining. He has a small chapter on the Donald (note: not too complimentary)
If you think what Casey said in this article is unreliable or that he might be a fraud then carefully and critically read the article and ask yourself what points, if any, seem unreliable, unreasonable or fabricated. In my view the article is historically accurate and his points and conclusions are sound and logical. I have followed him for many years and from what I understand he is a very successful and wealthy investor who follows his own advice.
bb
I’ve only read a handful or less of his articles in full. So, the question was sincere.
I don’t trust articles from people who have an ulterior motive ….. that is, to sell me some of their shit. I am tired of being everyone’s wallet.
That being said, this guy doesn’t seem to enamored with Doug;
http://www.casadeculturacluj.ro/articles/crooks-liars-idiots/exposed-doug-casey-part-1
Although I fall on the silver side in the Au vs. Ag argument, I find it glaring that Casey omitted FDR’s seizure & immediate devaluation of the former during the depression when US $’s were backed by the glittering metal.
With that said, to paraphrase Denninger:
You can’t win a wager on the end of the financial system (world); if you’re wrong, you lose your bet and if you’re right, you can’t collect.
The most valuable assets you can have are your knowledge, skills and tools. The the greater your skill set, the more you can do for yourself, the less you’re dependent on others to do anything; the better off you will be no matter what the conditions are around you.
Real estate prediction is totally wrong. It’ll keep appreciating. Of course, “location, location” adage remains as valid as ever. Miami – a magnet city for the whole western hemisphere – will match Hong Kong prices at some point, while Detroit won’t get off life support for another century if ever.
I found Doug Casey first, which led me to TBP. I don’t read Doug Casey or subscribe to his newsletters anymore, especially since he sold his newsletter to Porter Stansbury.
I read TBP everyday.
One thing entirely missing from all this is the new element of automation rapidly approaching…
Forget giant robots in giant factories; the new artificial intelligence and general robotics are rapidly approaching the point they can replace ANY job – including the writing of financial articles (and yes, there are already such articles being published. Today.)
Blue and white collar jobs are surprisingly easy to automate once we have artificial intelligence above a toddler level. And remember, most human workers are not, by any means, actually working for 8 hours a day or whatever. If a robot doesn’t stop working it could match a human even if only working half as fast.
We’ve never seen such a far-reaching devaluation of labor, and approaching so fast. This will have a far bigger impact than the industrial revolution.
I’m still waiting for a Stepford wife robot made without murdering the original. The sales pitch could be showing the financial advantage of a one-time purchase price of a keeper that is less than one-tenth the cost of a real wife when divorce, baubles, irritation, take-out meals, psych meds, shopaholism, gifts, maids, second cars, childcare, couples therapy, and prostitutes/secretaries/girlfriends/neighbors are taken into account.
“the new artificial intelligence and general robotics are rapidly approaching the point they can replace ANY job – including the writing of financial articles (and yes, there are already such articles being published. Today.)” ———– Alan
Interesting point. You are probably correct about bots writing financial articles … but, why? Well, I think because we’re talking about numbers and number crunching analysis. Seems logical that they could do that.
Maybe they’ll be able to write dry boring medical articles, or things pertaining to law, or a physics article. In other words, things related to facts.
But, writing is safe otherwise. A bot will never ever be able to write with passion and feeling . Do you think a bot will ever be able to compose a piece about life lessons / life on the farm like hardscrabble farmer does? Nope. Never. Recall the quote from one of the Terminator movies — “It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear …” And without those HUMAN feelings, all a bot writer will ever turn out is boring mundane trash.
Lastly, I’m not sure humans will ever ever be able to program “humor”. Spock said to Kirk in one move; “Humor, it is a difficult thing, Captain.” Indeed, it is! I believe it is impossible to code a set of algorithmic rules for humor. Even STNG’s Data in the 25th century couldn’t master humor. Mark Twain’s work couldn’t be duplicated by a bot if they had eternity to do it.
I’m an advertising writer, what’s known as a ‘copywriter’.
Touching people’s emotions is what I do – and there is already at least one AI software out there that writes sales copy.
Successfully.
As I often point out to clients, they don’t pay me big bucks because I’m a “good writer” or because I’m “creative”, but because I get results, using tricks, techniques and at times formulas, that have been proven to work again and again.
Sales copy is arguably tougher than humor, which has some fairly simple formulas, but that’s my point – what we think of today as human and untouchable by robot won’t be for very much longer.
Happily the software that can get sales as good as a copywriter costs over $30 million. I only charge $3k 🙂 But one thing we know about tech is that it keeps dropping in price. What kind of software will be available off the shelf for $99 in 10 years? Or, more likely, as a service?
Any physical movement that humans can do, robots can already do. The only remaining challenge is balance adjustments in real time, and they’re getting there rapidly. Any job that involves sitting down doesn’t really need the balance thing, so that job is at risk.
As you say, any job dealing with facts or numbers, software can already do it vastly faster, without ever getting bored or making mistakes.
Adobe has already produced software that can listen to you speak for a moment and can then perfectly mimic your voice. Future software won’t speak like a robot; it will sound human, it will understand human speech and will be programmed to do a darn fine job of caring. In fact one can argue that software programmed to care actually cares more than a sulking spotty teenager or some over-stressed call center worker in another country.
Siri and Alexa already have some basic humor and know the latest in-jokes.
What I’m saying is AI and robotics are already far, far more advanced than most people realize. Nerds talk of the tipping point when they become so smart they can create and program themselves, layman joke of the rise of killer terminators taking over the world.
I’m more concerned at the millions of jobs that WILL be at risk, and rapidly start vanishing, once such tech is a bit more tweaked, tested and polished. As a ‘high end creative’ my work is probably pretty secure for a long time but if you just write poor quality articles for Google bait? You’ve already been replaced – and the software is getting better.
By the time most of us can afford a self-driving car the laws will be changed to force us to use them (“Driving manually is do dangerous!!”) but it won’t matter, as most of us won’t have a job to go to.
Yes, if all the jobs go to automation then there’ll be nobody to buy the goods and services. Sure, but that there’s an edge to this cliff won’t stop the stampede towards lower costs, higher quality, fewer mistakes etc.
The tech will be capable of replacing around 50% of the jobs out there within the next 5 years. I’m not saying just because they can they will – few can afford $30 million to replace me for example, but once the ball is rolling it will get faster, better, cheaper, and even faster, even better, even cheaper etc.
Look at your phone. Look at phones from 10 years ago. Now try to imagine the phones in 10 year’s time?
I work in the automation business. I am one of the guys who programs our selves into production equipment. I’ve been completely wrong about the impact of cell phones and social media and many other things. So take what I say with a bit of salt. But having said that we’re facing a gap between competent techs and management and what is needed for the leap to really pervasive automation. And the biggest gap of all is in vision and imagination. We’ve gotten most of the tech popularized by Star Trek, but where is the next inspiration? Harry Potter and Star Wars re-releases? Our culture and our people are retreating into magic and superstition.
“Sales copy is arguably tougher than humor, which has some fairly simple formulas,”
———– Alan
First of all, thank you for posting. Your comments are interesting and thought provoking. Furthermore, what I am about to say is not meant to be disrespectful to you. Just my layman’s opinion.
I strongly disagree with your comment. One commercial is pretty much the same as every other commercial. The “trick” to manipulating folks via advertising basically focuses on one of two emotions; fear or greed. NOT having something — “ohmigod, I’m gonna die if I don’t get that wart remover!!”, or WANTING something —- “ohmigod, if I get that wart remover I’ll be able to get a date!” …. is the basic essence of every advertising campaign out there. What’s so difficult about that?
Humor is astronomically more difficult than that. True story; — An Australian news anchor was interviewing the Dalai Lama and opened with a joke (with the aid of an interpreter); “The Dalai Lama walks into a pizza shop and says, ‘Can you make me one with everything?’” The Dalai Lama gave him a blank look, not understanding in the least bit what was just said. The cute and funny American phrase – “When life hands you lemons, make lemonade.” – does not translate successfully in any other language.
Humor involves the totality of the recipient’s and teller’s culture. Easy? Good luck writing a set of rules for culture! A very big part of humor — ask our former comedian hardscrabble farmer — relies on timing. How is it possible to code timing? The Dalai Lama example above not only involves cultural aspects, it also relies on wordplay. How is it possible to code wordplay? How can a bot ever understand sarcasm? Banter, wind-ups and teasing. Understanding banter, being able to follow it and return it and knowing when someone is trying to wind you up. Can a bot ever understand double entendres?
So far, I’m talking basically about short one liners. But, what about long story jokes? The programmer must be able to answer the question – “What makes a story joke funny?”. When and where does the punchline occur? What if you don’t supply a punchline, but decide to let the audience make the connection? You need a book to answer all that … and even then it doesn’t work, as if it’s possible to teach a human to “be funny”. You can’t teach humans to be funny. Really. So, good luck teaching a machine to be funny.
I’ll stop now although I could go on for much longer. Anyone who thinks humor is easy has never stood on stage in front of an audience of strangers to tell a joke.
Actually, those subtleties of culture are fairly simple to master, according to anthropologist Edward T. Hall, in his works, “The Silent Language” and “Beyond Culture”, among others. We are seeing more and more processes reduced to algorithms – why not predictable human behaviors and responses, such as the advertising you’ve pointed out? Why not humor? A robo-soldier with cross-cultural algorithms and no fear of death and no prejudices might even be more successful than humans at persuasion, humor . . . come on, where’s your discover-inventor’s spirit?
One thing that is overlooked here is the role of demographics in both the depression of the 30’s and the current depression.
In 1929 there was an abrupt decline in working individuals who were in their peak earning years. So there was nobody to buy stuff. The decline happened simultaneously in Europe and the US.
In 2008 the first of the boomers began retiring. Today we have 300,000 Americans turning 65 every month and this will go on for another 15 years!
At the same time the X gen kids are maturing and of those who are working with reasonable incomes they will come into their most productive years starting in about 2023. But that will only last about five years. Unlike the boomers who came into their most productive years over a period of 18 years. Clinton and Reagan had zero to do with the booming economy’s they enjoyed. They were just there.
The US is set for a period of protracted, chronic unemployment.
The other parts of the article that point out government mandated meddling and the resultant exacerbation of the problems they meddle in are spot on.
The potential for compounding an unavoidable situation is more of a probability than not.
This was a great article. Made a lot of good points and opened some new perspectives on some old ones. Well written. Thanks D.C.
Humor, like culture, is continually changing. My favorite is the guy who tells about his daughter hearing “Hey Jude” on the radio: “Dad, that sounds just like Paul McCartney!” “It is, honey, that’s an old hit by the Beatles”. “WOW, Paul McCartney was in a band before Wings?”
Just as in that example, what’s funny changes over time. New people wander into the fame buzzsaw (like the guy playing “Lucifer” on TV) and old ones wander out into obscurity (what is the name of the gal who played the third Golden Girl, opposite Betty White and Bea Arthur?).
Similarly, I think humor migrates, mutates, vegetates and harmonizes as the culture does. Nerd humor has been big for a while (“The Big Bang Theory”) and so has mixed-racial humor (“Fresh off the Boat” and similar). What will be humorous five years from now, and who will program an AI to figure out the rules of the new humor? Will an AI ever HAVE its own sense of humor, and will that sense of humor be human or computer-driven?
So everyone reading this is taking it as gospel despite clear inaccuracies and completely absent evidence? Please be more skeptical about the things you accept as true. Doug gives us no reason to believe anything he wrote here, whether verifiably true or not.