I disagree with Lisa, Sylvia, and Nancy. Yes, it was longer than usual, but the short story is still instructive and puts Lucas's comments in a specific context. Too many folks want their information in short, simplistic bits, or they'll move on to the next entertainment they find. This essay was, instead, about the philosophy of interactions between workers and the obscenely wealthy, not about any particular statistic. It is a harbinger of a very possible future that demands our consideration now.
I appreciate the point you are trying to make with this story, but it is incompletely unbelievable. How could Franklin not notice or care about hundreds of people in his hometown who are getting fired? As coworkers, he had to have been friends with almost all of those people and some of them were probably his relatives. He never noticed the trend toward treating people like disposable garbage until he was the piece of garbage being disposed of?
This story does not work the way you intended it. I think you should try again.
Another defect in the story is that it lacks economy. You can see that Franklin is going to be fired about 30 lines before it happens. I didn't stop reading the story before because it was too long—I stopped because I felt my intelligence was being insulted. BTW, this is the first one of your posts I have not finished reading. Almost everything you do is wonderful, but not this.
The other question that was raised in my mind was more positive— who are the two people who have influenced you the most in your thinking about the flaws in our economy?
This was a long story, but I was engaged until the end. I would like to see more stories like this. I have read a lot about improving efficiency and about corporate culture over the years, but this story added emotion to my intellectual understanding. I bet I will remember this long after I forget most of the other Substack newsletters I will read this month. Keep up the good work, Lukas.
Yes. When I read, “good morning, Hal,” I immediately thought of 2001: A Space Odyssey. As it turned out, that’s exactly where it was going. It reads like an episode of the Twilight Zone. It doesn’t matter that the story was long, predictable, or less than believable. It’s a cautionary tale, and the message is clear.
We now have the power to make the dystopia come true. But the political system remains the same, or even more stacked toward the fewer and fewer people with wealth.
We have the capabilities of the internet. 2 way secure, encrypted communication. Tools such as this Substack to discuss issues in depth instead of in sound bites and catchy phrases. As scary as it sounds, we could even vote via the internet (the Dominion voting case was found to be fake).
We can change the political system without any amendments to the constitution. We could change it at the party level. We could each discuss, every issue and vote on every bill, at the party level. We could each discuss and vote on the party platform that produced those bills.
Pie in the sky, maybe. But imagine an electorate that was really informed, deciding what happens.
For folks commenting that this is too long, would you consider asking yourself why you have that reaction? You watch Netflix, most likely, or watch YouTube videos. I can definitely see that if you were expecting a email and got a story there might be a big gap between your expectations and time commitment! But to have impact beyond sound bites, we need story. I salute Lucas for using this piece for exactly that reason. (And I know this won't be coming around every issue, so I also treasure it for its difference.)
Indeed. One reads depressingly about how so many people - especially the younger generation - have lost the ability let alone the desire to READ stuff that excees 128 characters. Books? if they even get to an eBook that would be good. Books on paper - I suspect most of them might not have ever even seen one or handled one. Comic books with pictures and minimal words that purport to explicate some story or other - that seems to engage them more nowadays.
I really liked this--it gets the message across with a humanizing element that is often missing from strictly fact-based narrative. Efficiency has a serious cost. I hope you continue writing these stories.
I've often wondered what people who suddenly have nothing but leisure are supposed to do with themselves. Usually its portrayed as some kind of utopian world. If you are creative and can devote your time to your art (whatever that may be), that is one thing, but if you do not have that kind of creativity, you will be left out with nothing but time on your hands. And a lot of people will fall into that set of circumstances.
Anybody who's been retired for awhile is already in that situation. I just love having my life be my own. The sticky part is having all that time, with sufficient resources that you don't have to worry about having the proverbial roof over your head or your next meal.
My good decision was to start saving and investing early in life. Small, regular amounts grow! I never had a high paying job, but between Social Security, a small pension and investment income, I have just enough that I don't have to worry about it.
We don't know what will happen. We did not know what would happen when we switched from farming to manufacturing. We did not know what would happen with computers. We did not and still do not know what will happen with the internet.
Change is inevitable. Governments and people who embrace change and adapt will thrive. Those that don't adapt will go away.
I liked it. I am over 60, but hate to think this is the future for the kids I taught in school. Reminds me of Orwell's 1984. Unfortunately no news network will touch the truth. Lucas needs to be on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
I’ve seen this story in real life in my 30 yrs in corporate life..I was on the executive side of the letter and always knew the outcomes for the “ones doing the actual work” during the transformation of the business. It could be different, but short term profits drive executive comp…whatever the definition of family means to you it does not apply to business and always remember you own your career.
I just want to underline what you've said here, Kate. "whatever the definition of family means to you it does not apply to business and always remember you own your career."
Without going into a polemic about capitalism I would just want to add the word UNION
to this conversation. There really is strength in numbers. We are always going to need to stand together.
Although I have never belonged to a union my belief is unions are necessary when executives are incompetent, untrustworthy and do not respect and reward the value others bring to the outcome of the business objectives.
I thought this was an extremely effective way to illustrate the future. While Biden emphasized the need to produce more jobs and lowered the unemployment rate in this country to its lowest level, the incoming administration only wants to fatten their shareholders wallets at the expense of everyone else.
Thanks for creating this. I hope the second part includes a successful revolution 😊
“They’ll stay,” she said. “Along with the night guards. For liability.” So, the insurance companies still hold sway, and suing ALPHA will be the primary means of obtaining wealth? It seems like that is a scenario that is currently in use.
I still like the line from Pogo, an old comic strip, "We have met the enemy and he is us. "
It's a populist message and in many ways a valid message. It's been a reality for many in both rural areas and urban areas. It's been a reality in manufacturing, engineering, computer science, accounting and all other occupations for decades and maybe centuries (except the Middle Ages). It's been a reality for me on both the causing and receiving side.
Cars and trucks replaced horse caretakers and breeders. Tractors replaced hoes. You could make a similar list of thousands of changes.
Are we better today than we were 100 years ago?
Change is not an enemy. Stagnation, however is an enemy. Change is inevitable.
The populist response. Good has come as well as bad. We live longer, but we can also die in hordes from nuclear war. We work 40 hours a week instead of 60 hours a week (at least as a norm). We eat better and in my case get fat easier. We have more leisure time. We can travel farther and faster and to more places.
Pick some point in history and stop progress at that time. Envision what today looks like. We could still be working punch presses instead of monitoring robotics that drives those presses. We could be dying in wrecks from cars without seatbelts and with steel dashboards. Or in my case, we could be a clerk at a Walgreens or a buss driver instead of a computer programmer. I liked programming. Clerking, driving and programming are available today.
Change is neither good nor bad. Change is inevitable. Knowledge helps you adapt to change. Therefore knowledge is power.
People in control, need to limit other's power. One way is to limit knowledge. Limiting knowledge, limits change and keeps the people in control, staying in control.
But change is inevitable. Control is temporary. The length of that control is governed by how much knowledge is increasing (or decreasing).
We don't know what the future brings. Freezing time or make-work is not the answer. Knowledge (which does not equal education) is. Instead of seeing how bad it could be, see how good it could be (and how much better it is today than a hundred years ago).
The primary job of government is to take care of its people. Government needs to manage the change, not stop it. People need to manage the change also. They need to adapt. Governments and people that refuse to adapt will be left behind (Iraq etc.). Government needs to provide the tools and means for the people to adapt and the sustenance to survive during the transition.
What do you want your party to do? Stay the same or provide the means to adapt to a changing world?
I did not read every line...too long for me! But I did not see a discussion of how the rich will get richer if there is no one to buy their products..... having s greatly reduced workforce may be nice but comes with the downside of not having any consumers. Just like lowering taxes for the uber rich, if we consumers have no money to buy their products having no taxes on no profits isn't much of a deal. I pretty much know nothing about economics, but it seems to me that the way corporations make money is by selling something for more than it costs and to do that you need consumers to buy that product and you need either to make the product so it has to be bought over and over or you need to increase the number of persons buying it. In a relatively workerless society, where will these consumers come from (likewise for doing away with the current social safety nets we have in the nation...all those welfare dollars foods stamps, medicaid dollars are spend locally..how will that impact the local economies? In my county about 20% of the folks are on medicaid. If the program is ended and replaced with only a concept, will that mean we need 20% less workers here in the health care industry (rural hospitals rely a lot on medicaid as do most nursing homes) which would mean 20% fewer folks to buy things at Walmart which mean maybe 20% of the Walmart folks need to be laid off which means they have less money to spend and so it goes on and on. I imagine I have some pretty faulty thinking here, but seems to sort of make sense to me.
Think of the old English movies with kings, lords and the ruling class with the paupers living in the streets.
For me, money is sustenance. For the uber rich who have more money than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes, money is a point system. The uber wealthy, like Musk and Trump and Bezos, become the kings and lords of the ruling class. The goal is power not money.
I think you are right. I think there are many billionaires we don't know about because they don't need the limelight, and know how to wield power in a way these guys don't. Also I think, and again I may be way off base, that there is no honor among thieves and sooner or later these guys will be vying to be top dog of something and will be at each other's throats.....as you say, it's not about the money it's about power and I think maybe folks that are that obsessed with power soon find out they don't like sharing it.
If all the workers are replaced by machines, who will be able to afford the goods those machines produce? Henry Ford figured that out a long time ago--that's why he paid his workers well, so they could buy the cars.
I disagree with Lisa, Sylvia, and Nancy. Yes, it was longer than usual, but the short story is still instructive and puts Lucas's comments in a specific context. Too many folks want their information in short, simplistic bits, or they'll move on to the next entertainment they find. This essay was, instead, about the philosophy of interactions between workers and the obscenely wealthy, not about any particular statistic. It is a harbinger of a very possible future that demands our consideration now.
Thoughtful reply! I wrote mine before I read yours.
I appreciate the point you are trying to make with this story, but it is incompletely unbelievable. How could Franklin not notice or care about hundreds of people in his hometown who are getting fired? As coworkers, he had to have been friends with almost all of those people and some of them were probably his relatives. He never noticed the trend toward treating people like disposable garbage until he was the piece of garbage being disposed of?
This story does not work the way you intended it. I think you should try again.
Another defect in the story is that it lacks economy. You can see that Franklin is going to be fired about 30 lines before it happens. I didn't stop reading the story before because it was too long—I stopped because I felt my intelligence was being insulted. BTW, this is the first one of your posts I have not finished reading. Almost everything you do is wonderful, but not this.
The other question that was raised in my mind was more positive— who are the two people who have influenced you the most in your thinking about the flaws in our economy?
This one hits hard, I disagree with the couple of other responses, and I normally don’t care for “stories” either, but this hits hard and on target.
Please join Bluesky.
This was a long story, but I was engaged until the end. I would like to see more stories like this. I have read a lot about improving efficiency and about corporate culture over the years, but this story added emotion to my intellectual understanding. I bet I will remember this long after I forget most of the other Substack newsletters I will read this month. Keep up the good work, Lukas.
Similar stories were common in 1960s science fiction. It was depressing then and is still depressing.
Yes. When I read, “good morning, Hal,” I immediately thought of 2001: A Space Odyssey. As it turned out, that’s exactly where it was going. It reads like an episode of the Twilight Zone. It doesn’t matter that the story was long, predictable, or less than believable. It’s a cautionary tale, and the message is clear.
We now have the power to make the dystopia come true. But the political system remains the same, or even more stacked toward the fewer and fewer people with wealth.
We have the capabilities of the internet. 2 way secure, encrypted communication. Tools such as this Substack to discuss issues in depth instead of in sound bites and catchy phrases. As scary as it sounds, we could even vote via the internet (the Dominion voting case was found to be fake).
We can change the political system without any amendments to the constitution. We could change it at the party level. We could each discuss, every issue and vote on every bill, at the party level. We could each discuss and vote on the party platform that produced those bills.
Pie in the sky, maybe. But imagine an electorate that was really informed, deciding what happens.
It reminded me of the Twilight Zone.
I was just about to say that this made me think of Ray Bradbury!
For folks commenting that this is too long, would you consider asking yourself why you have that reaction? You watch Netflix, most likely, or watch YouTube videos. I can definitely see that if you were expecting a email and got a story there might be a big gap between your expectations and time commitment! But to have impact beyond sound bites, we need story. I salute Lucas for using this piece for exactly that reason. (And I know this won't be coming around every issue, so I also treasure it for its difference.)
Indeed. One reads depressingly about how so many people - especially the younger generation - have lost the ability let alone the desire to READ stuff that excees 128 characters. Books? if they even get to an eBook that would be good. Books on paper - I suspect most of them might not have ever even seen one or handled one. Comic books with pictures and minimal words that purport to explicate some story or other - that seems to engage them more nowadays.
I really liked this--it gets the message across with a humanizing element that is often missing from strictly fact-based narrative. Efficiency has a serious cost. I hope you continue writing these stories.
I've often wondered what people who suddenly have nothing but leisure are supposed to do with themselves. Usually its portrayed as some kind of utopian world. If you are creative and can devote your time to your art (whatever that may be), that is one thing, but if you do not have that kind of creativity, you will be left out with nothing but time on your hands. And a lot of people will fall into that set of circumstances.
Anybody who's been retired for awhile is already in that situation. I just love having my life be my own. The sticky part is having all that time, with sufficient resources that you don't have to worry about having the proverbial roof over your head or your next meal.
My good decision was to start saving and investing early in life. Small, regular amounts grow! I never had a high paying job, but between Social Security, a small pension and investment income, I have just enough that I don't have to worry about it.
We don't know what will happen. We did not know what would happen when we switched from farming to manufacturing. We did not know what would happen with computers. We did not and still do not know what will happen with the internet.
Change is inevitable. Governments and people who embrace change and adapt will thrive. Those that don't adapt will go away.
I liked it. I am over 60, but hate to think this is the future for the kids I taught in school. Reminds me of Orwell's 1984. Unfortunately no news network will touch the truth. Lucas needs to be on the Daily Show with Jon Stewart.
I’ve seen this story in real life in my 30 yrs in corporate life..I was on the executive side of the letter and always knew the outcomes for the “ones doing the actual work” during the transformation of the business. It could be different, but short term profits drive executive comp…whatever the definition of family means to you it does not apply to business and always remember you own your career.
I just want to underline what you've said here, Kate. "whatever the definition of family means to you it does not apply to business and always remember you own your career."
Without going into a polemic about capitalism I would just want to add the word UNION
to this conversation. There really is strength in numbers. We are always going to need to stand together.
Although I have never belonged to a union my belief is unions are necessary when executives are incompetent, untrustworthy and do not respect and reward the value others bring to the outcome of the business objectives.
Corporations are not “family,”
unless you mean, “family,” in the mafia sense.
I thought this was an extremely effective way to illustrate the future. While Biden emphasized the need to produce more jobs and lowered the unemployment rate in this country to its lowest level, the incoming administration only wants to fatten their shareholders wallets at the expense of everyone else.
Thanks for creating this. I hope the second part includes a successful revolution 😊
“They’ll stay,” she said. “Along with the night guards. For liability.” So, the insurance companies still hold sway, and suing ALPHA will be the primary means of obtaining wealth? It seems like that is a scenario that is currently in use.
I still like the line from Pogo, an old comic strip, "We have met the enemy and he is us. "
It's a populist message and in many ways a valid message. It's been a reality for many in both rural areas and urban areas. It's been a reality in manufacturing, engineering, computer science, accounting and all other occupations for decades and maybe centuries (except the Middle Ages). It's been a reality for me on both the causing and receiving side.
Cars and trucks replaced horse caretakers and breeders. Tractors replaced hoes. You could make a similar list of thousands of changes.
Are we better today than we were 100 years ago?
Change is not an enemy. Stagnation, however is an enemy. Change is inevitable.
The populist response. Good has come as well as bad. We live longer, but we can also die in hordes from nuclear war. We work 40 hours a week instead of 60 hours a week (at least as a norm). We eat better and in my case get fat easier. We have more leisure time. We can travel farther and faster and to more places.
Pick some point in history and stop progress at that time. Envision what today looks like. We could still be working punch presses instead of monitoring robotics that drives those presses. We could be dying in wrecks from cars without seatbelts and with steel dashboards. Or in my case, we could be a clerk at a Walgreens or a buss driver instead of a computer programmer. I liked programming. Clerking, driving and programming are available today.
Change is neither good nor bad. Change is inevitable. Knowledge helps you adapt to change. Therefore knowledge is power.
People in control, need to limit other's power. One way is to limit knowledge. Limiting knowledge, limits change and keeps the people in control, staying in control.
But change is inevitable. Control is temporary. The length of that control is governed by how much knowledge is increasing (or decreasing).
We don't know what the future brings. Freezing time or make-work is not the answer. Knowledge (which does not equal education) is. Instead of seeing how bad it could be, see how good it could be (and how much better it is today than a hundred years ago).
The primary job of government is to take care of its people. Government needs to manage the change, not stop it. People need to manage the change also. They need to adapt. Governments and people that refuse to adapt will be left behind (Iraq etc.). Government needs to provide the tools and means for the people to adapt and the sustenance to survive during the transition.
What do you want your party to do? Stay the same or provide the means to adapt to a changing world?
I did not read every line...too long for me! But I did not see a discussion of how the rich will get richer if there is no one to buy their products..... having s greatly reduced workforce may be nice but comes with the downside of not having any consumers. Just like lowering taxes for the uber rich, if we consumers have no money to buy their products having no taxes on no profits isn't much of a deal. I pretty much know nothing about economics, but it seems to me that the way corporations make money is by selling something for more than it costs and to do that you need consumers to buy that product and you need either to make the product so it has to be bought over and over or you need to increase the number of persons buying it. In a relatively workerless society, where will these consumers come from (likewise for doing away with the current social safety nets we have in the nation...all those welfare dollars foods stamps, medicaid dollars are spend locally..how will that impact the local economies? In my county about 20% of the folks are on medicaid. If the program is ended and replaced with only a concept, will that mean we need 20% less workers here in the health care industry (rural hospitals rely a lot on medicaid as do most nursing homes) which would mean 20% fewer folks to buy things at Walmart which mean maybe 20% of the Walmart folks need to be laid off which means they have less money to spend and so it goes on and on. I imagine I have some pretty faulty thinking here, but seems to sort of make sense to me.
Think of the old English movies with kings, lords and the ruling class with the paupers living in the streets.
For me, money is sustenance. For the uber rich who have more money than they could spend in a thousand lifetimes, money is a point system. The uber wealthy, like Musk and Trump and Bezos, become the kings and lords of the ruling class. The goal is power not money.
I think you are right. I think there are many billionaires we don't know about because they don't need the limelight, and know how to wield power in a way these guys don't. Also I think, and again I may be way off base, that there is no honor among thieves and sooner or later these guys will be vying to be top dog of something and will be at each other's throats.....as you say, it's not about the money it's about power and I think maybe folks that are that obsessed with power soon find out they don't like sharing it.
If all the workers are replaced by machines, who will be able to afford the goods those machines produce? Henry Ford figured that out a long time ago--that's why he paid his workers well, so they could buy the cars.
Take DOGE out and shoot 🔫 🤪 them!
Excellent story, Lucas. Thanks for saying this!
I liked this Orwellian depiction of what our future may hold for us. Is it the beginning of the end of our civilization?
Yes.