3 ms·
I it, or at least should be. The problem is with our current socioeconomic structures it would mean that the majority of the population would have no purchasing
by m12k 9y ago
I it, or at least should be. The problem is with our current socioeconomic structures it would mean that the majority of the population would have no purchasing power whatsoever, since their only valuable resource, their ability to work, would disappear. Mass starvation, rioting, etc. doesn't sound too nice. If we somehow make our way out of that into a Star Trek-esque post-scarcity utopia, then yes, it'd be amazing.
- valuearb 9y agoIf it's so cheap to build robots/AI that it's cheaper than working, then anyone will be able to afford robots. That's the essential logical test the fear of robots can't pass.
- toexitthedonut 9y agoThat is the issue that needs to be looked at more closely. And in a fantasy world the consumer is a separate entity from the worker. But a weak workforce means weak consumers. Companies can talk about cost reducing by cutting their workforce all they want, but I wonder how many stop and think how that would negatively impact the purchasing power of their former employees.