AIBU to think redundancy crisis is not getting enough media coverage?

Labour theory of value.

These entities were not communist. They have and had a mixture of private and state ownership, just as China has. They can be best described as state socialism or state controlled capitalism.

Liberalism will give way to communism or fascism. Liberation contains within it fascism, because under crisis the state itself will use coercion and state violence to prevent a turn towards what it can not either contain and tolerate and what is antagonist towards state control. Communism is not state ownership and antagonist towards the state and indeed the nation state as a material reality and political block.

Are you saying that even the job centre is laying staff off now due to AI?

DH’s company started by having a recruitment freeze maybe 2 years ago, so no new/extra staff. This then progressed to no recruiting to fill positions as staff left unless completely essential (payroll, HR, finance etc). Now, each department has to make one member of staff redundant by the end of the year. Some (including in DH’s department) are happy to take redundancy but many aren’t.

Where I work in primary care, they are trying to not replace any support staff as they leave - or only on minimum hours if absolutely vital. AI is useless for what we do though, you still need humans to check AI has got things right for the sake of medical safety 🤷‍♀️.

I believe this is one of the steps leading eventually to the institution of a one world government. Sounds extreme? That's what I used to think but now I'm not so sure. I can see it taking place.

Yes the unemployment stat has known issues with accuracy as I said in my post. But also, there is so much going on under the radar - 3d printing, nails, dog breeding, Vinted, content creation- earnings not being accounted for.
Economically inactive is much higher than unemployed. E.g. North East England is 7% unemployed and 26% economically inactive (working age) (approx and poss slightly out of date figures). But I would assume if someone is made redundant and doesn't want to be, they will become unemployed rather than inactive

Well you can believe that, but you’d be wrong. I would never have hired a data analyst because my company was way too small to do so. I don’t know any business of our size doing what we do, which has a dedicated analyst. I, as the business owner, crunched the numbers in a spreadsheet. Now that we can get a deeper and better understanding of our data and our market, we are making better informed decisions which has allowed us to hire more people on the operational side. This in turn allows us to grow revenue and hire more people.
Your comment shows that you fundamentally do not understand the nature of this kind of start up. We started up, as many small businesses do, from the kitchen table. Just me. There were no staff and there weren’t going to be until I could afford to pay them. The difference AI makes is not the difference between starting up with fewer staff (as you suggest) but the difference between starting up and not starting up at all. The technology is reducing barriers to entry, which means ultimately more jobs, not fewer. I am employing 7 people, paying tax, pensions and national insurance. These people are paying tax. Together, we are contributing. AI is boosting our productivity and profitability allowing me to expand the business, take on more staff and pay existing staff more money. Your dystopian fears have echoed down the ages with every major industrial or technical advance but so far have been proven wrong. More people starting more businesses will grow the economy. Yes, there will be upheaval while the market shifts. We need to ensure anyone in this position (as I was recently) receives the support, retraining and compassion they deserve. But different and better jobs will emerge. We’ve seen this time and again. Nobody owes anyone a job. But visionary people, who understand the amazing advances technology is bringing, will use it to create new jobs and industries. The energy spent fighting the technology or doom-mongering would be better spent fighting for equality of access to it and better regulation of it.

A change in the nature of employment caused by societal or technological change. Eg when cars came in and within 10 years all the horse related jobs were gone. People got new jobs.

Hrft but the NHS Trust I work at is promoting band4 redundancies, mostly admin, but front line admin included.

That’s an old trope of current times, ‘we don’t know what new jobs there will be, there will be new ones’.

No there won’t be new jobs. The point of AI is to replace all jobs. The point of computers is to replace people. The big tech bros doing the computing do not care about people.

The current crises have been built up over 50 years of neoliberalism yet people - presumably young - are looking for answers and causes over the last couple of years. There are whole swathes of regions in Britainthat never recovered from the loss of mining in the 80s - there have never been ‘new jobs that didn’t exist in that now’ to fully replace those lost. All that generation were given was the ability to become landlords and fleece the young instead. Those youngsters, now middle or late middle age, mostly never recovered from that early blight of paying rent for decades instead of building their own lives. Intergenerational inequality is a fact and growing. For those affected, with no family support, there has been little point for a long time. Anger has been growing for decades. The few who benefitted are so far removed from those affected that little communication exists and the higher like to minimise or pretend it doesn’t exist, it’s just a function of right wing media or whatever. When everything about society now represents the triumph of upper class right wing media and its utter failure to represent the rest of us.

I think the Techbros are actually quite keen to see Eugenics play out. I’ve thought about it since Elon’s desperation to populate the world - nine kids in I think and his exploration of Mars. They are quite happy to make their money and live in their gated communities, I believe Elon spends all his time travelling between workplaces, so what’s happening on the streets is of little interest to them. Whilst they mostly preach a libertarian viewpoint I expect many of them would be quite happy for civilians to duke it out on the streets and see who comes out the victor. Almost gladiatorial as a concept. The tech Emporers will be able to view the deterioration of civilisation from a distance and see it as a social experiment. You’ve only got to hear Elon talk about no need for pensions and work being optional. He says with a mercurial smirk as though no one needs to be productive and work means nothing to anyone aside from the means to an end ie wages in the bank. It’s all so twisted.

You really only need one fundamental fact to rebut your long post. The existence of high employment levels. No technology has disrupted that for long.