3 ms·

Also nonsense, but irrelevant regardless. By exactly your logic, technology has always increasingly displaced demand for labor. This isn't new at all. So-calle

Also nonsense, but irrelevant regardless. By exactly your logic, technology has always increasingly displaced demand for labor. This isn't new at all. So-called "reskilling" is always outsourced to the responsibility of labor. The professions you describe are regulated into scarcity on an ongoing basis by capital. Any exception to this rule is simply that. In the aggregate, capital accumulates.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
I dont understand your objection. Are you saying that captital regulates AI scientists and Surgeons into scarcity, and that by doing so, they make more profit than if they payed lower salary to those professions?
- readyman 2y ago
  For AI scientist, the data is not in and it's all financial speculation so a different conversation. For surgeons, yes. The American medial industry is uniquely exploitative so invests a tremendous amount of capital in backing up its claims of prividing the "best" medical care (only for wealthy people). Of course, the American Medical Association and American Association of Physicians play their parts in contributing to the scarcity by lobbying for extremely expensive education requirements that can only be afforded by those with inherited wealth (with a few exceptions only via charity). Just as the feudalist aristocracies, the capitalist bourgeoise pull up the ladders behind them. It only works when capital has an incentive. In the case of a few American industries like medical, those incentives are especially strong. However, such incentives do not exist in almost any other country, and salaries reflect this.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    For Surgeons, you are conflating and blaming the actions of labor and the actions of capitalists. I the AMA and AAP driving up is labor driving up costs in its own interest. Same as any other workers association or union working to restrict supply. Capitalists (e.g. hospital owners), have an incentive for lower salaries. Similarly, its not the owners of salons that pushes things like 1,000 hours of training required for a barber. Just because it is anti-consumer, doesn't make the person behind it a capitalist. My fundamental point however is independent of the reason for scarcity, but that labor scarcity itself is what drive high salary for those roles, and an oversupply of qualified workers drive down supply in other roles.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

I dont understand your objection. Are you saying that captital regulates AI scientists and Surgeons into scarcity, and that by doing so, they make more profit than if they payed lower salary to those professions?

readyman 2y ago
For AI scientist, the data is not in and it's all financial speculation so a different conversation. For surgeons, yes. The American medial industry is uniquely exploitative so invests a tremendous amount of capital in backing up its claims of prividing the "best" medical care (only for wealthy people). Of course, the American Medical Association and American Association of Physicians play their parts in contributing to the scarcity by lobbying for extremely expensive education requirements that can only be afforded by those with inherited wealth (with a few exceptions only via charity). Just as the feudalist aristocracies, the capitalist bourgeoise pull up the ladders behind them. It only works when capital has an incentive. In the case of a few American industries like medical, those incentives are especially strong. However, such incentives do not exist in almost any other country, and salaries reflect this.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  For Surgeons, you are conflating and blaming the actions of labor and the actions of capitalists. I the AMA and AAP driving up is labor driving up costs in its own interest. Same as any other workers association or union working to restrict supply. Capitalists (e.g. hospital owners), have an incentive for lower salaries. Similarly, its not the owners of salons that pushes things like 1,000 hours of training required for a barber. Just because it is anti-consumer, doesn't make the person behind it a capitalist. My fundamental point however is independent of the reason for scarcity, but that labor scarcity itself is what drive high salary for those roles, and an oversupply of qualified workers drive down supply in other roles.