4 ms·

Lets hope this comes soon.

by seivan 14y ago

MarkMc 14y ago
Really? I usually love technological progress, but in this case it would mean many (millions?) of desperately poor people losing their jobs. I'm hoping this comes much later.
- adventureful 14y ago
  Not to mention the potentially scary scenario: China with a couple hundred million desperate people. Large wars have been caused by far less.
- adrianN 14y ago
  And while we're at it, let's also destroy all mechanical looms?
  - icebraining 14y ago
    I think robots are great, but I'd prefer if China had time to transition to an economy less dependent on exports, as they are trying to do.
  - MarkMc 14y ago
    Interesting. Destroying mechanical looms is not a practical solution of course, but in theory yes: The benefit to so many poor people would be so great that it could be worth having an inefficient textile industry. There are probably less costly ways of helping the poor, but it would be better than the status quo.
    - gouranga 14y ago
      I've thought this for years. Automation makes people redundant and you end up with people who consume but produce nothing. Those people are labelled as 'poor' as they are given minimal cash to survive on as they have no value to add to mainstream society. If you increase automation and drop the retirement age in most countries to shorten the workforce and allow people to exist comfortably after retirement, I reckon you'd solve both ends of the problem i.e. less "poor" people and more people doing something constructive. Smashing looms however doesn't do anything other than commit more people to slavery and poverty.
      - krschultz 14y ago
        It would probably be preferable to subsidize education than to subsidize retirement.
- seivan 14y ago
  That's how revolution is born. I really wish for this. And for the poor, well they can do as the french did hounded of years ago. History repeats itself for the Chinese, the greedy didn't learn or thought themselves to be invincible. http://brontecapital.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/macroeconomics-of-chinese-kleptocracy.html http://brontecapital.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/macroeconomics-o... I really wish for this.

Lets hope this comes soon.

by seivan 14y ago

Lets hope this comes soon.

Really? I usually love technological progress, but in this case it would mean many (millions?) of desperately poor people losing their jobs. I'm hoping this comes much later.

adventureful 14y ago
Not to mention the potentially scary scenario: China with a couple hundred million desperate people. Large wars have been caused by far less.
adrianN 14y ago
And while we're at it, let's also destroy all mechanical looms?
- icebraining 14y ago
  I think robots are great, but I'd prefer if China had time to transition to an economy less dependent on exports, as they are trying to do.
- MarkMc 14y ago
  Interesting. Destroying mechanical looms is not a practical solution of course, but in theory yes: The benefit to so many poor people would be so great that it could be worth having an inefficient textile industry. There are probably less costly ways of helping the poor, but it would be better than the status quo.
  - gouranga 14y ago
    I've thought this for years. Automation makes people redundant and you end up with people who consume but produce nothing. Those people are labelled as 'poor' as they are given minimal cash to survive on as they have no value to add to mainstream society. If you increase automation and drop the retirement age in most countries to shorten the workforce and allow people to exist comfortably after retirement, I reckon you'd solve both ends of the problem i.e. less "poor" people and more people doing something constructive. Smashing looms however doesn't do anything other than commit more people to slavery and poverty.
    - krschultz 14y ago
      It would probably be preferable to subsidize education than to subsidize retirement.
seivan 14y ago
That's how revolution is born. I really wish for this. And for the poor, well they can do as the french did hounded of years ago. History repeats itself for the Chinese, the greedy didn't learn or thought themselves to be invincible. http://brontecapital.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/macroeconomics-of-chinese-kleptocracy.html http://brontecapital.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/macroeconomics-o... I really wish for this.