> Not only are jobs being lost through robotics on factory floors That is at least theoretically debatable. Demand is a function of price. Imagine a human dri

> Not only are jobs being lost through robotics on factory floors That is at least theoretically debatable. Demand is a function of price. Imagine a human driven factory producing 10 parts for $100 in wages, and a competitor using humans and robots that can produce 11 parts for $100 in wages. The competitor can bid prices down, and not only capture the human only factory's orders, but create new orders as it becomes cheap enough to use the part in new ways. The empirical question is whether that increase of orders makes up for the decrease in labor demanded per unit. It's not immediately obvious which way that goes, and there's multiple anecdotes provided law professor James Bessen of cases where increases in labor demand occur http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/automation-paradox/424437/ http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/automati... Nothing I've read of his suggests a conclusive 'more bots always means more jobs,' and perhaps his anecdotes are carefully chosen, but a blanket assumption that more computers implicitly means fewer people working is unwarranted.