4 ms·

This is an ancient fallacy in economics going back to the mechanization of farm labor. The beauty of capitalism is that what's good for capitalists is also good

This is an ancient fallacy in economics going back to the mechanization of farm labor. The beauty of capitalism is that what's good for capitalists is also good for everyone else. Jobs will be lost but the standard of living will increase for everyone and new jobs created. Until we reach AGI, at which point we can all collectively retire and just do whatever we want.

nwiswell 4y ago
You should probably read some Piketty. There is absolutely nothing which structurally ensures that the wealth created by capitalist pursuits will be distributed sufficiently to ensure that standards of living will increase for everyone, and in fact there are a lot of reasons to believe that the past century was an anomaly in that regard.
- andsoitis 4y ago
  Why does Pikkety think that capitalism is not the major engine that has been increasing the standard of living for people worldwide? Does he think something else has been the essential motor behind that improvement in the material condition of humans around the world?
  - nwiswell 4y ago
    https://hbr.org/2014/04/pikettys-capital-in-a-lot-less-than-696-pages https://hbr.org/2014/04/pikettys-capital-in-a-lot-less-than-...
thebradbain 4y ago
Or, more likely, based on all of human history, you have a few people at the top who “own” the AI, gatekeep and charge for access to it, own the IP-equivalent of whatever it produces, and life will continue as normal for 80%-99% of peasants/laborers working for the lucky few AI-aristocrats. Even if AGI itself was “good”, that does not mean it will be used or deployed fairly and equitably. In fact, I’d posit without major regulation it will just increase the wealth gap
- anomaly_ 4y ago
  You need a reality check if you think life today for most people isn't materially better than 50, 100, 500 years ago thanks to improvements driven by capitalism.
  - avidphantasm 4y ago
    Think of how good life would be if socialism had been allowed to flourish and not smothered in the cradle by the US.
    - bigDinosaur 4y ago
      The biggest Communist ('socialist' is not well defined at all and shouldn't really be used in a serious discussion) enterprise, the USSR, failed on its own merits (or lack thereof). It was in no way strangled by the US. A major reason was that central planning doesn't work that well and you need a market economy - strongly associated with Capitalism - to actually achieve success. Perhaps in some AI-driven future a planned economy etc. could work well, but that certainly hasn't been the case so far. China famously realised this in the late 80's.
      - skinnymuch 4y ago
        Where did you do your learning? Why are you using the word communism? Socialist and Socialism are well defined. Capitalist is a sillier word when used for avg citizens who are exploited and oppressed. Russia was dirt poor in 1917. They became a super power in 30-40 years moving an enormous amount of people out of poverty and lack of modern niceties. China changed in 78 enough already. How do Cuba or Vietnam survive? How did they survive when heavily sanctioned and attacked by capitalist westerners? We have yet to see a capitalist country do that.
        kazinator 4y ago
        Whom they couldn't move out of poverty, they just killed. I can't speak for grandparent, but when I say "communist" disparagingly, I speak as someone who was born and raised in communist Czechoslovakia, who remembers actual communism. I remember being in kindergarten, learning how there was a great, kind man Lenin who loved children. And I was already somehow thinking, something is off: this shit shouldn't be taught to kids like us. So you kids can crumple that up in your woke pipes and smoke it. Pardon me, vape.
failuser 4y ago
That’s not a given, it needs to be fought tooth and nail to be true. And we have slid back on many of the those fronts: anti-trust laws are almost dead, tax evasion is rampant and not pushed in any meaningful way, the power to influence elections with money in unchecked. Adding AI to that mix will be explosive. My hope that this catalyze the movement to claw back some of those achievements.
flangola7 4y ago
This reads like satire

nwiswell 4y ago

You should probably read some Piketty. There is absolutely nothing which structurally ensures that the wealth created by capitalist pursuits will be distributed sufficiently to ensure that standards of living will increase for everyone, and in fact there are a lot of reasons to believe that the past century was an anomaly in that regard.

andsoitis 4y ago
Why does Pikkety think that capitalism is not the major engine that has been increasing the standard of living for people worldwide? Does he think something else has been the essential motor behind that improvement in the material condition of humans around the world?
- nwiswell 4y ago
  https://hbr.org/2014/04/pikettys-capital-in-a-lot-less-than-696-pages https://hbr.org/2014/04/pikettys-capital-in-a-lot-less-than-...

thebradbain 4y ago

Or, more likely, based on all of human history, you have a few people at the top who “own” the AI, gatekeep and charge for access to it, own the IP-equivalent of whatever it produces, and life will continue as normal for 80%-99% of peasants/laborers working for the lucky few AI-aristocrats. Even if AGI itself was “good”, that does not mean it will be used or deployed fairly and equitably. In fact, I’d posit without major regulation it will just increase the wealth gap

anomaly_ 4y ago
You need a reality check if you think life today for most people isn't materially better than 50, 100, 500 years ago thanks to improvements driven by capitalism.
- avidphantasm 4y ago
  Think of how good life would be if socialism had been allowed to flourish and not smothered in the cradle by the US.
  - bigDinosaur 4y ago
    The biggest Communist ('socialist' is not well defined at all and shouldn't really be used in a serious discussion) enterprise, the USSR, failed on its own merits (or lack thereof). It was in no way strangled by the US. A major reason was that central planning doesn't work that well and you need a market economy - strongly associated with Capitalism - to actually achieve success. Perhaps in some AI-driven future a planned economy etc. could work well, but that certainly hasn't been the case so far. China famously realised this in the late 80's.
    - skinnymuch 4y ago
      Where did you do your learning? Why are you using the word communism? Socialist and Socialism are well defined. Capitalist is a sillier word when used for avg citizens who are exploited and oppressed. Russia was dirt poor in 1917. They became a super power in 30-40 years moving an enormous amount of people out of poverty and lack of modern niceties. China changed in 78 enough already. How do Cuba or Vietnam survive? How did they survive when heavily sanctioned and attacked by capitalist westerners? We have yet to see a capitalist country do that.
      - kazinator 4y ago
        Whom they couldn't move out of poverty, they just killed. I can't speak for grandparent, but when I say "communist" disparagingly, I speak as someone who was born and raised in communist Czechoslovakia, who remembers actual communism. I remember being in kindergarten, learning how there was a great, kind man Lenin who loved children. And I was already somehow thinking, something is off: this shit shouldn't be taught to kids like us. So you kids can crumple that up in your woke pipes and smoke it. Pardon me, vape.

failuser 4y ago

That’s not a given, it needs to be fought tooth and nail to be true. And we have slid back on many of the those fronts: anti-trust laws are almost dead, tax evasion is rampant and not pushed in any meaningful way, the power to influence elections with money in unchecked. Adding AI to that mix will be explosive. My hope that this catalyze the movement to claw back some of those achievements.

flangola7 4y ago

This reads like satire