You have to be making some awfully specific assumptions about what the article is claiming in a throwaway sentence to conclude that it's a lump of labor fallacy

You have to be making some awfully specific assumptions about what the article is claiming in a throwaway sentence to conclude that it's a lump of labor fallacy. I don't see the article committing itself to a broad argument about the theoretical fungibility (or lack thereof) of labor just because it was noting that the workers need to find new jobs. There's a huge personal cost to the workers. >and definitely in the short term it can lead to real misery for those losing the competition and not having the time or savings to wait for a new job or for an investment to start paying off Yes, exactly. That's a reasonable interpretation of what's being said. >But that doesn’t mean that we should just stop innovation and stop trying to become more productive. But I don't think this is.