3 ms·
I cannot wrap my head around how far awry society has gone, that "eliminating tedious labor that no one really wants to do" gets reframed as "destroying jobs".
by dTal 3y ago
I cannot wrap my head around how far awry society has gone, that "eliminating tedious labor that no one really wants to do" gets reframed as "destroying jobs". Obviously in reality the benefits do not immediately flow to the people relieved of work, yet this obvious critical flaw of capitalism is always blamed on the automation in question. Yet few suggest we destroy our existing automation, no matter how many wonderful jobs it would recreate such as "washerwoman" and "water carrier". Society is clearly wealthier, the more "jobs" we eliminate.
- syndicatedjelly 3y agoThat’s just your opinion on what jobs are “fun” and “not fun”. The reason those people do those jobs isn’t because it fulfills their 7th level of Maslow’s hierarchy, it’s because it puts foods on the table. So when that’s taken away from them, what’s left? Join a coding bootcamp?
- kebsup 3y agoHaving an abundance of resources and people having nothing to do seems like an easier problem than lack of resources and people working 12 hours a day.
- syndicatedjelly 3y ago> Having an abundance of resources and people having nothing to do Many revolutions have started under exactly these conditions. The problem is that some person or group is going to end up owning those resources, preventing their benefits from flowing to the people "with nothing to do". It's not a perfect dichotomy of either work 12 hours a day or do nothing, some balance has to be struck such that everyone can do something to contribute to society in a meaningful way.