3 ms·
But the inverse of that is a bit ridiculous: don’t automate the things so you can create busy work for more people. It sounds even more ridiculous if you phrase
by chrischen 4y ago
But the inverse of that is a bit ridiculous: don’t automate the things so you can create busy work for more people. It sounds even more ridiculous if you phrase it as make and keep people alive just to do busy (fake) work.
- tnzk 4y agoThe point was, at such a developmental stage, large portion of population wouldn't be capable of automating stuff, so keeping people busy and alive would be better than starve them with nothing to do.
- chrischen 4y agoThat's exactly how and why progress is halted. People yell "think of the jobs" and prevent new advances in automation or technology that would actually save lives or better lives, just for the sake of protecting the incumbent industries.
- epistasis 4y agoRight, p -> q does not imply q -> p, and does not imply !p -> !q,yet too often when it comes to economics, that sort of fallacy underlies key arguments on selling policy to the populace.