What do you think?
Rate this book
Why the Future is Workless
Even as the robots gather on the near horizon this book argues we have choices about the manner in which we greet them. A world without work as we know it could be a good thing. The landscape of work is changing right in front of us, from Uber, Airbnb and the new share economy to automated vehicles, 3D printing and advanced AI. The question isn't whether robots will take our jobs, but what we will do when they do. The era of full-time work is coming to an end and we have to stop holding out the false promise that at some magical moment the jobs are going to reappear. So what does our future in the brave new world of non-work look like? In this timely and provocative book, Tim Dunlop argues that by embracing the changes ahead we might even find ourselves better off. Workless goes beyond the gadgetry and hype to examine the social and political ramifications of work throughout history and into the future. It argues we need to think big now, not wait until we're in a dystopian world of mass unemployment and wealth held in the hands of a minority.
- GenresNonfictionEconomics
288 pages, Paperback
Published September 1, 2016
2 people are currently reading
122 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
September 25, 2016
It’s 9:29pm on a Friday night. I’ve had dinner, watched a movie, and finished a glass of wine. And yet two minutes ago, I sat down at my computer and checked my work email.
Everywhere we look, computers are changing the face of work. We are plugging them into existing machines so they can drive themselves. We are custom building machines to enable them to manufacture everything from iPods to houses. And mere software itself is replacing human workers, spitting out stock reports or providing medical advice.
According to Tim Dunlop, there are three ways we as a society are responding to this change. The ‘Business as usual’ school of thought recognises the change, sees there’s a profit to be made from it, and hopes that our historical experience —where machines create as many jobs as they consume— will hold. The ‘Back to the future’ school by contrast pines for the industrial era, rails against ‘neoliberalism’, and want protectionism and a large welfare state to manage the disruption.
Neither is that attractive or coherent as a world view. Instead, argues Dunlop the future needs to be ‘Workless’. In this engaging and accessible book, Dunlop argues that we need to fundamentally re-think how society is organised if we are to manage and indeed benefit from the radical changes occurring in who does the labour of our society.
The link between technology and the organisation of society is one that has long been recognised —just ask yourself why you live in a city but your great great grandparents may not have. As the machines change, so must we. The heart of Workless is Dunlop’s argument for two essential political adjustments to smooth the transition. One material, the other moral.
First, he strongly endorses a Universal Basic Income. Showing the results of trials around the world, of emerging scholarship on the idea, he argues that only through such a scheme can we provide a financial floor which sustains those who will lose part or all of their work to computers. That is, between 40 and 70 percent of us if the predictions are true.
Second, he wants society to abandon its ‘work ethic’. The notion that anyone who doesn’t work is a bludger, that work is what ought to define us and our value. Wrapped into this is a somewhat erratic argument against neoliberalism and the cost of economic reforms of the past thirty years.
As much as I really wanted to love this book, it is this second theme that I struggled with. In part because I have a more pro-free market and optimistic outlook than the author. But more so because even with a UBI and robots everywhere, I still want a human society which is ambitious, that strives, that builds and creates anew.
Ironically, it was a book Dunlop draws on early on in his analysis which began to pull this thread loose for me. Dunlop draws in the work of Hannah Arendt to make the important distinction between ‘labour’ —menial tasks required for survival— and ‘work’, meaning the higher level acts of creation and destruction which define human achievement.
Dunlop only makes occasional reference to what humans would do in a society where all questions of labour were handled by machines. Like Arendt, he makes occasional reference to the ancient Greeks, recognising that on the back of slave labour, they made astounding advances in astronomy, mastered mathematics, and created the foundations of western philosophy, science, art, governance, theatre and history.
But, in a point I’m sure Arendt liked to stress, these were not people without a ‘work ethic’. On the contrary, they were fiercely competitive, willing to publicly condemn those who did not live up to their social ideals. They were not a people who allowed public retreat to the comforts and indulgences of home. You lived your life in public, and were judged for it. They created the Olympic Games precisely to judge who was the strongest, the fastest, the bravest, and the best among them.
So following Dunlop, I agree there is a need to radically rethink our society in light of the technology of change, and I am increasingly willing to support a UBI as a minimum first step. But following Arendt and the Greeks, I want to preserve a deep ‘work’ ethic in our society.
Let us leave labour to the machines, and free men and women to throw themselves wholeheartedly into their own work. Into creating art, building communities, starting businesses, designing and refining ideas and participating in public governance as a genuine and ongoing act of citizenship.
Not only do I find this a more invigorating vision of society than the one Dunlop implies, I fear his anti-market tangents in the book will unnecessarily alienate many potential supporters to his ideas. That’s a shame. This is a bold and engaging book by one of Australia’s best thinkers, and it tackles one of the fundamental questions of our time. So Workless is an important contribution, but the task of working through the social changes of the digital revolution is only just beginning.
Everywhere we look, computers are changing the face of work. We are plugging them into existing machines so they can drive themselves. We are custom building machines to enable them to manufacture everything from iPods to houses. And mere software itself is replacing human workers, spitting out stock reports or providing medical advice.
According to Tim Dunlop, there are three ways we as a society are responding to this change. The ‘Business as usual’ school of thought recognises the change, sees there’s a profit to be made from it, and hopes that our historical experience —where machines create as many jobs as they consume— will hold. The ‘Back to the future’ school by contrast pines for the industrial era, rails against ‘neoliberalism’, and want protectionism and a large welfare state to manage the disruption.
Neither is that attractive or coherent as a world view. Instead, argues Dunlop the future needs to be ‘Workless’. In this engaging and accessible book, Dunlop argues that we need to fundamentally re-think how society is organised if we are to manage and indeed benefit from the radical changes occurring in who does the labour of our society.
The link between technology and the organisation of society is one that has long been recognised —just ask yourself why you live in a city but your great great grandparents may not have. As the machines change, so must we. The heart of Workless is Dunlop’s argument for two essential political adjustments to smooth the transition. One material, the other moral.
First, he strongly endorses a Universal Basic Income. Showing the results of trials around the world, of emerging scholarship on the idea, he argues that only through such a scheme can we provide a financial floor which sustains those who will lose part or all of their work to computers. That is, between 40 and 70 percent of us if the predictions are true.
Second, he wants society to abandon its ‘work ethic’. The notion that anyone who doesn’t work is a bludger, that work is what ought to define us and our value. Wrapped into this is a somewhat erratic argument against neoliberalism and the cost of economic reforms of the past thirty years.
As much as I really wanted to love this book, it is this second theme that I struggled with. In part because I have a more pro-free market and optimistic outlook than the author. But more so because even with a UBI and robots everywhere, I still want a human society which is ambitious, that strives, that builds and creates anew.
Ironically, it was a book Dunlop draws on early on in his analysis which began to pull this thread loose for me. Dunlop draws in the work of Hannah Arendt to make the important distinction between ‘labour’ —menial tasks required for survival— and ‘work’, meaning the higher level acts of creation and destruction which define human achievement.
Dunlop only makes occasional reference to what humans would do in a society where all questions of labour were handled by machines. Like Arendt, he makes occasional reference to the ancient Greeks, recognising that on the back of slave labour, they made astounding advances in astronomy, mastered mathematics, and created the foundations of western philosophy, science, art, governance, theatre and history.
But, in a point I’m sure Arendt liked to stress, these were not people without a ‘work ethic’. On the contrary, they were fiercely competitive, willing to publicly condemn those who did not live up to their social ideals. They were not a people who allowed public retreat to the comforts and indulgences of home. You lived your life in public, and were judged for it. They created the Olympic Games precisely to judge who was the strongest, the fastest, the bravest, and the best among them.
So following Dunlop, I agree there is a need to radically rethink our society in light of the technology of change, and I am increasingly willing to support a UBI as a minimum first step. But following Arendt and the Greeks, I want to preserve a deep ‘work’ ethic in our society.
Let us leave labour to the machines, and free men and women to throw themselves wholeheartedly into their own work. Into creating art, building communities, starting businesses, designing and refining ideas and participating in public governance as a genuine and ongoing act of citizenship.
Not only do I find this a more invigorating vision of society than the one Dunlop implies, I fear his anti-market tangents in the book will unnecessarily alienate many potential supporters to his ideas. That’s a shame. This is a bold and engaging book by one of Australia’s best thinkers, and it tackles one of the fundamental questions of our time. So Workless is an important contribution, but the task of working through the social changes of the digital revolution is only just beginning.
January 17, 2018
This book isn't exactly what you'd call a page turner. It's dry, it's very academic and pedestrian in most parts. But it offers some unique and interesting views of where we might be headed, and how we might sustain ourselves when we get there. It's a book about capitalism, neoliberalism, and government's role in our economy and our lives. If that sounds like a very wide swath filled with generalities, the fact is that it's not, really.
Dunlop talks about the difference between "labor" and "work", and how, through the neoliberalist agenda, the two have come to be identified as being the same thing. This is a very important point--made early on in the book--upon which rest quite a number of the author's views and claims. And these views are compelling.
He discusses what AI and robots are doing to us, and how we might manage in a world in which they take up MOST of the tasks (work) that humans do today. When MOST of us have no means of employment, where does that leave us? If MOST of us are unemployed, does the word "unemployed" really have any meaning? Interesting topics, and not just pie-in-the-sky philosophy. These are real world problems that loom over us today, and will consume us tomorrow if we don't deal with them soon.
If you're a staunch believer in "business as usual", if you are a diehard devotee to the concept of "free markets" and capitalism, there's a good chance you won't like this book. But even for skeptics there is a lot of food for thought here. Well worth taking this in, as it is already affecting EVERYONE on this planet. While Dunlop doesn't claim to provide the answer(s) to our forthcoming problems, he does offer up various scenarios, and fills his book with many credible citations and references, annotations that can steer the reader toward other sources of information as well.
I give him high marks--not because I agree or disagree with him--because he has done a good job of research and has put it all together in a concise, logical fashion.
Dunlop talks about the difference between "labor" and "work", and how, through the neoliberalist agenda, the two have come to be identified as being the same thing. This is a very important point--made early on in the book--upon which rest quite a number of the author's views and claims. And these views are compelling.
He discusses what AI and robots are doing to us, and how we might manage in a world in which they take up MOST of the tasks (work) that humans do today. When MOST of us have no means of employment, where does that leave us? If MOST of us are unemployed, does the word "unemployed" really have any meaning? Interesting topics, and not just pie-in-the-sky philosophy. These are real world problems that loom over us today, and will consume us tomorrow if we don't deal with them soon.
If you're a staunch believer in "business as usual", if you are a diehard devotee to the concept of "free markets" and capitalism, there's a good chance you won't like this book. But even for skeptics there is a lot of food for thought here. Well worth taking this in, as it is already affecting EVERYONE on this planet. While Dunlop doesn't claim to provide the answer(s) to our forthcoming problems, he does offer up various scenarios, and fills his book with many credible citations and references, annotations that can steer the reader toward other sources of information as well.
I give him high marks--not because I agree or disagree with him--because he has done a good job of research and has put it all together in a concise, logical fashion.
June 21, 2017
When I picked this up I thought it would be the typical uncritical celebration of an automated future. The Keynsian idea of an increasingly productive economy creating a life defined by leisure, rather than work, facilitated by technology is a common topic. But it is most often advocated from technologists who have great difficulty in conceiving of a world outside the framework of a consumer economy.
This book offers a far more interesting critique of possibilities brought about by the inevitability of automation - and firmly situates these possibilities within the current economic framework of neo-liberalism. If we embrace changes to our work lives brought about by automation within an economic framework that privileges the welfare of Capital, as opposed to individuals, then we should be very wary of the outcomes of these changes.
The author also investigates the work ethic / protestant work ethic, that has for decades shaped our individual identity - and questions it's utility in a world where the issue is not whether we have enough, but how we can improve distribution of what we have (i.e. why do allow governments to let the 0.01% improve their position in the economy, to the detriment of everyone else, globally). The author also argues for consideration of a universal basic income as ways of address inequality and to improve society for all.
I enjoyed having my economic worldview, shaped by neo liberalism and solid work ethic, challenged.
This book offers a far more interesting critique of possibilities brought about by the inevitability of automation - and firmly situates these possibilities within the current economic framework of neo-liberalism. If we embrace changes to our work lives brought about by automation within an economic framework that privileges the welfare of Capital, as opposed to individuals, then we should be very wary of the outcomes of these changes.
The author also investigates the work ethic / protestant work ethic, that has for decades shaped our individual identity - and questions it's utility in a world where the issue is not whether we have enough, but how we can improve distribution of what we have (i.e. why do allow governments to let the 0.01% improve their position in the economy, to the detriment of everyone else, globally). The author also argues for consideration of a universal basic income as ways of address inequality and to improve society for all.
I enjoyed having my economic worldview, shaped by neo liberalism and solid work ethic, challenged.
September 18, 2016
Writes wistfully of the ancient Greeks: why we should embrace robots and apps as our digital slaves, freeing us to pursue ennobling 'non-work' activities. Forceful thesis for a basic minimum income. Like a lot of writing around tech and innovation, little exploration of the implications of developments in health / medicine.
November 2, 2019
Tim Dunlop provides a sensible and intelligent discussion on the destiny of employment in Workless, examining the future of work and human endeavour – and the opportunity of prosperity for all – as the neoliberal concept of endless growth fails against the unstoppable disruption of advanced technology and the subsequent reduced need for human labour.
The rise of AI, robotics and automation will consume jobs, and likely on a scale largely unimagined by many who strictly adhere to capitalist policies of amassing great personal wealth (who will personally ensure that humans are replaced by software/hardware to enhance profits and maintain a business edge). Dunlop argues that we can reshape our relationship with work, transitioning from paid employment to a guaranteed income for all, redistributing wealth on a worldwide scale as our understanding of the importance of full-time work shifts as the jobs disappear and machines become the new slaves.
Dunlop’s reasoned argument is sound and rather exciting in it’s overall implications of how we may live if we embrace the change as an opportunity to break free from monotonous work, low wages and reduced working conditions. However, as noted throughout the book, modern governments are actively failing citizens by ignoring the broader social and political issues of our times in favour of nationalism, fear and absurd ‘the market will decide’ rhetoric. Unfortunately, it will take considerable effort and determination from many for us to see widespread adoption of basic income as a replacement for current welfare systems.
The concepts presented within Workless are not new, and Dunlop’s summation certainly doesn’t offer a radical leap from the thoughts of others contemplating impending workplace and lifestyle changes, yet this is a highly readable explanation of where we are at as a society, and it will hopefully trigger further discussion and debate.
The rise of AI, robotics and automation will consume jobs, and likely on a scale largely unimagined by many who strictly adhere to capitalist policies of amassing great personal wealth (who will personally ensure that humans are replaced by software/hardware to enhance profits and maintain a business edge). Dunlop argues that we can reshape our relationship with work, transitioning from paid employment to a guaranteed income for all, redistributing wealth on a worldwide scale as our understanding of the importance of full-time work shifts as the jobs disappear and machines become the new slaves.
Dunlop’s reasoned argument is sound and rather exciting in it’s overall implications of how we may live if we embrace the change as an opportunity to break free from monotonous work, low wages and reduced working conditions. However, as noted throughout the book, modern governments are actively failing citizens by ignoring the broader social and political issues of our times in favour of nationalism, fear and absurd ‘the market will decide’ rhetoric. Unfortunately, it will take considerable effort and determination from many for us to see widespread adoption of basic income as a replacement for current welfare systems.
The concepts presented within Workless are not new, and Dunlop’s summation certainly doesn’t offer a radical leap from the thoughts of others contemplating impending workplace and lifestyle changes, yet this is a highly readable explanation of where we are at as a society, and it will hopefully trigger further discussion and debate.
June 1, 2017
A really interesting book on the future of work but a lot of it really did go over my head. However I did learn a lot of new words like "neoliberalism". I'm not sure that the theories of the book will end up in our economy having the political climate that we have but it will be interesting to see where it ends up in say 50 years time.
September 12, 2016
3.5/5.
I'll start by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment of the current state of affairs. The proposal of the author is that eventually robots will replace most jobs, leaving us to do with our time as we wish, with a fundamental income provided by the government. Work on top of that is optional. Now, I'm quite open to the idea of a change to the current norms. I am certainly of the opinion that the neoliberal system is leading us to an eventual demise. I agree that the inequality in the distribution of wealth is one of the biggest issues facing society. So I was really looking forward to discussion of potential solutions...
However, this book certainly lacked what I expected from it. It's a slow start - in fact, just skip the first chapter - but he really nails the issues of the socioeconomic world. He belaboured the issues of capitalism and it's affect on society now and in the future, but didn't back up his own proposal other than to suggest that the current system doesn't work, so we must accept his. Where was the discussion of how 'Postwork' will be funded, given that all state welfare comes from taxes? When does he envisage the milestones of the different systems, and what will they entail? Will robots be able to do critical, non-linear tasks such as doctoring, nursing, and teaching young children?
I was disappointed to find that his only argument for Postwork was that it's "inevitable", and the current system is broken, so just accept it. His all-to-brief advice on how to adopt Postwork was essentially only the broad "embrace technology" and "challenge the concept of work ethic". Both very reasonable points, but certainly left me wanting much more.
A solid effort at getting the discussion going, and pointing out where we're headed if we don't change, but lost stars for not diving into the nitty-gritty of Postwork. I'm sure that was by design, but it could have been so much more.
I'll start by saying that I wholeheartedly agree with his assessment of the current state of affairs. The proposal of the author is that eventually robots will replace most jobs, leaving us to do with our time as we wish, with a fundamental income provided by the government. Work on top of that is optional. Now, I'm quite open to the idea of a change to the current norms. I am certainly of the opinion that the neoliberal system is leading us to an eventual demise. I agree that the inequality in the distribution of wealth is one of the biggest issues facing society. So I was really looking forward to discussion of potential solutions...
However, this book certainly lacked what I expected from it. It's a slow start - in fact, just skip the first chapter - but he really nails the issues of the socioeconomic world. He belaboured the issues of capitalism and it's affect on society now and in the future, but didn't back up his own proposal other than to suggest that the current system doesn't work, so we must accept his. Where was the discussion of how 'Postwork' will be funded, given that all state welfare comes from taxes? When does he envisage the milestones of the different systems, and what will they entail? Will robots be able to do critical, non-linear tasks such as doctoring, nursing, and teaching young children?
I was disappointed to find that his only argument for Postwork was that it's "inevitable", and the current system is broken, so just accept it. His all-to-brief advice on how to adopt Postwork was essentially only the broad "embrace technology" and "challenge the concept of work ethic". Both very reasonable points, but certainly left me wanting much more.
A solid effort at getting the discussion going, and pointing out where we're headed if we don't change, but lost stars for not diving into the nitty-gritty of Postwork. I'm sure that was by design, but it could have been so much more.
February 7, 2017
I enjoyed this look at the past, present and possible future of work, and the political and economic systems that shape it.
The author starts with the question 'will a robot take my job' but ends up asking bigger and more interesting questions. A well researched and referenced book.
There is an all too brief but tantalising glimpse of a utopian world in which we could be 'workless' .. what the author really means is not sitting about idle all day, but simply untethered from the Protestant work ethic and the neoliberal economy .. no longer necessarily confined to a job making a profit for someone else, and instead freed up to explore and define ourselves through more meaningful and interesting activity that we wouldn't necessarily class as work. I would have liked another chapter devoted to this world view and what it might look like. There are subtle parallels drawn to the society of Ancient Greece (with robots instead of slaves).
Underpinning the book is the idea of a basic wage, which is not new, but something I had not heard of before, and makes perfect sense as a way of ameliorating the negative effects of job scarcity.
The author starts with the question 'will a robot take my job' but ends up asking bigger and more interesting questions. A well researched and referenced book.
There is an all too brief but tantalising glimpse of a utopian world in which we could be 'workless' .. what the author really means is not sitting about idle all day, but simply untethered from the Protestant work ethic and the neoliberal economy .. no longer necessarily confined to a job making a profit for someone else, and instead freed up to explore and define ourselves through more meaningful and interesting activity that we wouldn't necessarily class as work. I would have liked another chapter devoted to this world view and what it might look like. There are subtle parallels drawn to the society of Ancient Greece (with robots instead of slaves).
Underpinning the book is the idea of a basic wage, which is not new, but something I had not heard of before, and makes perfect sense as a way of ameliorating the negative effects of job scarcity.
December 6, 2016
It is a very important book. I plan to recommend it to all my friends. The future is here and things are already different from the old understanding of work on many levels. The apps are taking over our everyday life and tablets become our universe.
For anyone who is interested in being employed and "Job ready" this book is a big help. It shatters the illusions of an old concept of full-time work and gives some ideas on how to survive in a world that is workless.
For anyone who is interested in being employed and "Job ready" this book is a big help. It shatters the illusions of an old concept of full-time work and gives some ideas on how to survive in a world that is workless.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews