4 ms·

I agree. I should be forced to pay to keep all the arithmetic workers employed, even though we now have calculators that make them obsolete. Why should arbitr

I agree. I should be forced to pay to keep all the arithmetic workers employed, even though we now have calculators that make them obsolete. Why should arbitrary people be kept afloat in exchange for doing nothing?

mitthrowaway2 4y ago
Okay, so, the year is 2036 and your second child has just celebrated her first birthday. The economy is humming, production of all goods and commodities are way up. Unfortunately, you and your spouse are both unemployed at the moment, because for any skill that you have to offer the labor market, a machine is already available that does the job better, faster, and more cheaply. Quicker fingers, stronger arms, faster legs, and now a mind. Your kid is hungry and your savings account is running low. What do you do?
- docheinestages 4y ago
  I think there will come a point, where almost everything will be automated by machines. Since we cannot just get rid of billions of people, we have to find a way to both feed the people and have something for them to do. That is unless AI takes over control of humanity. This is similar to how prisons function. They have to keep large masses of people, feed them, keep them peaceful, without expecting anything in return.
tiedieconderoga 4y ago
Ohh, so many reasons. * Busy people are peaceful people. Idle hands are the devil's playthings. * Those "arbitrary people" are our neighbors, and prone bodies draped across the sidewalks are bad for property values. * Allowing domestic industries and expertise to vanish too quickly can have unintended consequences. Try buying a new set of subway cars in the US today... That being said, nobody suggested forcing employers to keep redundant positions open. There are plenty of other ways to help keep people productive and engaged in a shifting industrial landscape, which could be funded through various kinds of taxes on the use of AI.

mitthrowaway2 4y ago

Okay, so, the year is 2036 and your second child has just celebrated her first birthday. The economy is humming, production of all goods and commodities are way up. Unfortunately, you and your spouse are both unemployed at the moment, because for any skill that you have to offer the labor market, a machine is already available that does the job better, faster, and more cheaply. Quicker fingers, stronger arms, faster legs, and now a mind. Your kid is hungry and your savings account is running low. What do you do?

docheinestages 4y ago
I think there will come a point, where almost everything will be automated by machines. Since we cannot just get rid of billions of people, we have to find a way to both feed the people and have something for them to do. That is unless AI takes over control of humanity. This is similar to how prisons function. They have to keep large masses of people, feed them, keep them peaceful, without expecting anything in return.

tiedieconderoga 4y ago

Ohh, so many reasons. * Busy people are peaceful people. Idle hands are the devil's playthings. * Those "arbitrary people" are our neighbors, and prone bodies draped across the sidewalks are bad for property values. * Allowing domestic industries and expertise to vanish too quickly can have unintended consequences. Try buying a new set of subway cars in the US today... That being said, nobody suggested forcing employers to keep redundant positions open. There are plenty of other ways to help keep people productive and engaged in a shifting industrial landscape, which could be funded through various kinds of taxes on the use of AI.