Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There seems to be dozens & dozens of similar articles available on-line. They all seem to contradict what you two have been telling us. But those authors don't have the benefit of the great view from your Ivory Towers.
Poor misguided fools. They don't know how much they don't know.
There seems to be dozens & dozens of similar articles available on-line. They all seem to contradict what you two have been telling us. But those authors don't have the benefit of the great view from your Ivory Towers.
Poor misguided fools. They don't know how much they don't know.
It has been going on since the rise of Industry.
Not always great, but at each step, generally viewed as better than that which is immediately prior.
I do not think "we" (DC and I, as this conversation is pretty much just the three of us) . . . have a huge problem with it.
As I noted early on dividing human workloads can be handled with math, sharing and allocation, and as DC noted -- things and people change and adapt.
Sorry, but I do not think this is such an insolvable nor critical problem. Certainly not as much as some Billions of us -- and some fewer Millions of us Really -- all crapping crap into the air. THAT is likely a MUCH bigger long-term problem . . . . and where this thread started and was the intent.
There seems to be dozens & dozens of similar articles available on-line. They all seem to contradict what you two have been telling us. But those authors don't have the benefit of the great view from your Ivory Towers.
Poor misguided fools. They don't know how much they don't know.
there are thousands of stupid people. What's your point?
The Daily Mail is your go to source for solid information? Think that through.
there are thousands of stupid people. What's your point?
The Daily Mail is your go to source for solid information? Think that through.
You may have missed this in my post obviously too lengthy for you to digest properly: "There are dozens and dozens of similar articles...."
As usual, we see the messenger attacked when the message cannot be refuted. Thank you for your valuable input to the discussion.
Phil: Yes, so far innovation has been met with growth in other areas to compensate for the labor savings incurred by the innovation. I don't know if the futurists a century ago foresaw the growth in ancillary industries as the assembly line allowed more Americans to buy autos.....But I'm not aware of anyone now predicting new job growth to equal job loss from automation.
As I said earlier, much of the economic expansion over the past century was necessitated by a population itself still in the exponential stage of growth: just supplying a demand increasing by virtue of population growth necessitated growth in the labor force....But now, with population growth slowing (in most industrialized countries, pop growth is only occurring due to immigration) and soon to stabilize, labor- saving innovations will cause a fall in labor demand.....We need to address the problems of a stable, non-expanding economy. [Capitalists must be cringing at the very thought.]
We don't need a lot of data, just some logic: if the purpose of automation is to increase productivity (ratio of produce to costs), and if demand for supply is already being met by the status quo, then the numerator of that ratio remains constant, so it's the denominator that must fall, ie- fewer &/or lower paying jobs.
When we consider The Big Picture, are our engineering innovations about to reach the point of diminishing returns?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.