> then they're capital equipment aka automation, which doesn't substitute for labor and in practice increases employment by making labor more productive. Not i

> then they're capital equipment aka automation, which doesn't substitute for labor and in practice increases employment by making labor more productive. Not if the institutions can't handle the challenge of moderating price stability without decreasing demand, as they're doing right now. The alternatives would be to demur or tax. So that capital is relatively distributed. If capital isn't distributed, people won't be paying people to do stuff because they won't have capital. It's a continuous version of suffrage. Markets are effectively a distributed consensus mechanism, but if voting power isn't widely distributed, people don't won't have the ability to allocate time and resources as needed. Authority becomes concentrated then into relatively few hands. Can you imagine a technology comes along that could 1000x the productivity of all information workers and your first reaction is to reduce demand for labor instead of softening adjusting the distribution of capital so that demand can grow in a more healthily distributed way?