Industrial Processing Machinery Rules!

[Revoltingest]

 

[PureX]

All the time and energy that went into designing and building all that technical machinery, and all the money that went into automating all those tasks that had once been done by humans, and at no time along that way did anyone even bother to ask if it was a good thing for our society to do this. Is it good for our society of human beings, and for the Earth that sustains us, for us to have created this giant tree processing plant? Is the community it sits in better off, now, than they were before it was built? Are the surrounding forests better off for this new ability to process a tree that took 30 years to grow into a pile of lumber in just a few minutes?

I'm only asking because no one else involved in this 'miracle of automation' did. Because they are all capitalists. The only question they asked themselves was will we gain a handsome return on the capital we invest in this processing plant? That's it. That's the only question the answer of which mattered to them. Nothing else was even considered beyond how it might effect that profitability. And that's sad.

Sad that we routinely expend so much time and energy and resources on projects like this without ever even once having considered the impact of it on overall human well-being, or on the environment that sustains us. It's all and only ever about the money. The profit to the investors. Nothing else.

 

[Revoltingest]

All the time and energy that went into designing and building all that technical machinery, and all the money that went into automating all those tasks that had once been done by humans, and at no time along that way did anyone even bother to ask if it was a good thing for our society to do this. Is it good for our society of human beings, and for the Earth that sustains us, for us to have created this giant tree processing plant? Is the community it sits in better off, now, than they were before it was built? Are the surrounding forests better off for this new ability to process a tree that took 30 years to grow into a pile of lumber in just a few minutes?

I'm only asking because no one else involved in this 'miracle of automation' did. Because they are all capitalists. The only question they asked themselves was will we gain a handsome return on the capital we invest in this processing plant? That's it. That's the only question the answer of which mattered to them. Nothing else was even considered beyond how it might effect that profitability. And that's sad.

Sad that we routinely expend so much time and energy and resources on projects like this without ever even once having considered the impact of it on overall human well-being, or on the environment that sustains us. It's all and only ever about the money. The profit to the investors. Nothing else.

Have you ever bought lumber?
Have you ever considered that housing
prices would be far far higher if it were
made by hand?
Automation such as this is greener than
hiring & supporting a vast army of workers
to accomplish the same product.

 

[Twilight Hue]

All the time and energy that went into designing and building all that technical machinery, and all the money that went into automating all those tasks that had once been done by humans, and at no time along that way did anyone even bother to ask if it was a good thing for our society to do this. Is it good for our society of human beings, and for the Earth that sustains us, for us to have created this giant tree processing plant? Is the community it sits in better off, now, than they were before it was built? Are the surrounding forests better off for this new ability to process a tree that took 30 years to grow into a pile of lumber in just a few minutes?

I'm only asking because no one else involved in this 'miracle of automation' did. Because they are all capitalists. The only question they asked themselves was will we gain a handsome return on the capital we invest in this processing plant? That's it. That's the only question the answer of which mattered to them. Nothing else was even considered beyond how it might effect that profitability. And that's sad.

Sad that we routinely expend so much time and energy and resources on projects like this without ever even once having considered the impact of it on overall human well-being, or on the environment that sustains us. It's all and only ever about the money. The profit to the investors. Nothing else.

It's certainly going, with the passage of time, to create a class division of haves and have not people.

Putting people out of work is never good policy unless there are provisions to insure an income still exists.

 

[Revoltingest]

Fun with forging!

 

[Revoltingest]

It's certainly going, with the passage of time, to create a class division of haves and have not people.

Putting people out of work is never good policy unless there are provisions to insure an income still exists.

Making lumber without automation would mean that
only the wealthy would be able to afford decent homes.

 

[PureX]

Have you ever bought lumber?
Have you ever considered that housing
prices would be far far higher if it were
made by hand?
Automation such as this is greener than
hiring & supporting a vast army of workers
to accomplish the same product.

Again, it's ALL about the money.

Perhaps if lumber were more expensive, (and the costs were going to labor instead of profits to the capitalists) we'd all be happier in the long run, or we'd have long ago devised better and cheaper material solutions. Something we can grow quickly and in large quantities and then use as fertilizer for the next crop when we're done with it. Some sort of plant based building blocks. If we're clever enough to create that giant high speed lumber mill, we're clever enough to create better alternatives. But we don't even consider them unless there's a big profit margin involved for the investors, because the profit margins are ALL that the investors ever consider. And they make all our production decisions.

I have nothing against automation and high efficiency. The problem is that we NEVER consider the well-being of humanity. We ONLY consider the profit margins to the capital investors. And as a result, we make a lot of really stupid and culturally debilitating decisions. And things just keep getting worse for more and more people instead of getting better.

 

[Revoltingest]

Again, it's ALL about the money.

Perhaps if lumber were more expensive, (and the costs were going to labor instead of profits to the capitalists) we'd all be happier in the long run, or we'd have long ago devised better and cheaper material solutions. Something we can grow in large quantities and then use as fertilizer for the next crop when we're done with it. Some sort of plant based building blocks. If we're clever enough to create that giant high speed lumber mill, we're clever enough to create better alternatives. But we don't even consider them unless there's a big profit margin involved for the investors, because the profit margins are ALL that the investors ever consider. And they make all our production decisions.

I have nothing against automation and high efficiency. The problem is that we NEVER consider the well-being of humanity. We ONLY consider the profit margins to the capital investors. And as a result, we make a lot of really stupid and culturally debilitating decisions. And things just keep getting worse for more and more people instead of getting better.

You must be a lot of fun at engine shows.
Try to enjoy seeing & hearing them run,
instead of criticizing them as capitalist tools.

 

[Debater Slayer]

All the time and energy that went into designing and building all that technical machinery, and all the money that went into automating all those tasks that had once been done by humans, and at no time along that way did anyone even bother to ask if it was a good thing for our society to do this. Is it good for our society of human beings, and for the Earth that sustains us, for us to have created this giant tree processing plant? Is the community it sits in better off, now, than they were before it was built? Are the surrounding forests better off for this new ability to process a tree that took 30 years to grow into a pile of lumber in just a few minutes?

I'm only asking because no one else involved in this 'miracle of automation' did. Because they are all capitalists. The only question they asked themselves was will we gain a handsome return on the capital we invest in this processing plant? That's it. That's the only question the answer of which mattered to them. Nothing else was even considered beyond how it might effect that profitability. And that's sad.

Sad that we routinely expend so much time and energy and resources on projects like this without ever even once having considered the impact of it on overall human well-being, or on the environment that sustains us. It's all and only ever about the money. The profit to the investors. Nothing else.

There's high demand for wood--for furniture, houses, and various other products--so this process of automation tries to satisfy that demand. You and I use wood and many other things that were directly or indirectly produced by similar industrial processes.

The question about the environment seems to me one that would be better framed in terms of population numbers, the ecological sustainability of comfortable living past a certain population threshold, and humans' natural desire for comfort even if that has a detrimental effect on the environment. I think these are the more overarching questions, not whether the engineers who simply tried to solve a problem of insufficient supply were being uber-capitalists in doing so.

Besides, a lot of industrial labor is relatively dangerous, physically harsh, and potentially even deadly over the long term. Automation in some areas has not only increased production to meet demand but also effectively saved lives.

 

[PureX]

Fun with forging!

I worked in one of those places as a young man. In the melt shop of a giant steel mill, on the floor around three gigantic electrode ovens. It took about three or four days to "cook" a batch of steel, and we'd all stop work and watch them tip the oven and poor the molten steel into giant buckets, and then over into the molds. They evacuated the air out of the molds before filling them, so the molten steel would get sucked into it like rain. And the molds had windows in them so you could see it happening inside them. The place closed down soon after, as all of them did. But I was happy to have gotten to see one in action.

 

[Revoltingest]

Automation is awesome!

 

[Revoltingest]

Some production is more labor intensive...

 

[PureX]

There's high demand for wood--for furniture, houses, and various other products--so this process of automation tries to satisfy that demand. You and I use wood and many other things that were directly or indirectly produced by similar industrial processes.

Wood is a great material to make things out of. But we don't need to make houses out of it.

The question about the environment seems to me one that would be better framed in terms of population numbers, the ecological sustainability of comfortable living past a certain population threshold, and humans' natural desire for comfort even if that has a detrimental effect on the environment. I think these are the more overarching questions, not whether the engineers who simply tried to solve a problem of insufficient supply were being uber-capitalists in doing so.

The engineers are hired by the capitalists. Always to make the capitalists more money. Never to improve the lot of humanity or the planet. This is my point. We aren't even considering the well-being of humanity or the planet when we decide what we build next. We ONLY consider the profits to the capital investors. I'm not against engineers, or even the capitalists. I'm against our never considering the well-being of humanity or the planet when we set about re-arranging the world.

 

[PureX]

Making lumber without automation would mean that
only the wealthy would be able to afford decent homes.

We can make decent homes out of all kinds of materials.

 

[Revoltingest]

We can make decent homes out of all kinds of materials.

What do you propose instead....concrete, sod, straw, bacon?

 

[Heyo]

What do you propose instead....concrete, sod, straw, bacon?

Bricks or stones, like people use who value a solid home.

 

[Revoltingest]

Bricks or stones, like people use who value a solid home.

Solid brick or stone is very spendy & poorly insulated.
My wooden house was built in 1875, & has no signs
of decaying.

 

[Revoltingest]

Low tech gear making....

 

[Heyo]

Solid brick or stone is very spendy & poorly insulated.
My wooden house was built in 1875, & has no signs
of decaying.

150 years. Pfft. Find a wood building this old:

 

[Revoltingest]

150 years. Pfft. Find a wood building this old:

Yet my house is in better shape than when it was built.
The pyramids....old they are, but in sorry shape.