4 ms·

Because many only look at first order consequences and ignore anything beyond that. Despite history having a huge number of societally enhancing innovations to

Because many only look at first order consequences and ignore anything beyond that. Despite history having a huge number of societally enhancing innovations to reference that also took jobs at the time.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Clent 3y ago
Where this historical changes also aligned with decades of wage stagnation? I'm not buy this shit anymore. Most technological advances are economic enhancing innovations, society be damned! The technology being developed today is consolidating wealth at the top. No one is getting from the gig economy. Stock holders on the other hand? Doing amazing!
- bboygravity 3y ago
  Or. It's entirely possible that the currency inflation is caused by something completely unrelated (central banks and government spending/lending) and you're confusing correlating events (the development of new technologies and decrease in buying power) with causation.
- dragontamer 3y ago
  > The technology being developed today is consolidating wealth at the top. No one is getting from the gig economy. The top level Tax Rate has declined from 91% tax rate to 37% tax rate from 1950s through 2020s, and you blame technology for the failure of our society to redistribute wealth?
giraffe_lady 3y ago
So? I don't claim otherwise. The fact that a life ground to dust is an effective lubricant for the engine of progress or whatever is not comforting or righteous. Maybe you could stand to consider the first order consequences a little more.
- adam_arthur 3y ago
  Feeding the poor via technological advances lowering cost of food production is not righteous in your opinion? Despite those agricultural workers who lost their jobs. Innovation in aggregate benefits most people in the long run via lessening real costs of goods. Producing goods in an inefficient manner raises the real cost of living for society. Was life better when the average person spent 80% of their income on food? Will life be worse for the average person when goods and services become 50% cheaper through AI driven automation?
barrysteve 3y ago
First order consequences are still consequences. Forcing people into second order thinking is forcing submission. Making some fantasy up about improving the lives of foreigners (and tech companies cash flow) at the expense of your neighbour is peak humanism.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Clent 3y ago

Where this historical changes also aligned with decades of wage stagnation? I'm not buy this shit anymore. Most technological advances are economic enhancing innovations, society be damned! The technology being developed today is consolidating wealth at the top. No one is getting from the gig economy. Stock holders on the other hand? Doing amazing!

bboygravity 3y ago
Or. It's entirely possible that the currency inflation is caused by something completely unrelated (central banks and government spending/lending) and you're confusing correlating events (the development of new technologies and decrease in buying power) with causation.
dragontamer 3y ago
> The technology being developed today is consolidating wealth at the top. No one is getting from the gig economy. The top level Tax Rate has declined from 91% tax rate to 37% tax rate from 1950s through 2020s, and you blame technology for the failure of our society to redistribute wealth?

giraffe_lady 3y ago

So? I don't claim otherwise. The fact that a life ground to dust is an effective lubricant for the engine of progress or whatever is not comforting or righteous. Maybe you could stand to consider the first order consequences a little more.

adam_arthur 3y ago
Feeding the poor via technological advances lowering cost of food production is not righteous in your opinion? Despite those agricultural workers who lost their jobs. Innovation in aggregate benefits most people in the long run via lessening real costs of goods. Producing goods in an inefficient manner raises the real cost of living for society. Was life better when the average person spent 80% of their income on food? Will life be worse for the average person when goods and services become 50% cheaper through AI driven automation?

barrysteve 3y ago

First order consequences are still consequences. Forcing people into second order thinking is forcing submission. Making some fantasy up about improving the lives of foreigners (and tech companies cash flow) at the expense of your neighbour is peak humanism.