3 ms·

The graph of gainful-employment vs. technological-efficiency is not linear. It first increase, then has a hump, and goes down from there. Eventually you get tw

The graph of gainful-employment vs. technological-efficiency is not linear. It first increase, then has a hump, and goes down from there. Eventually you get two groups - A few highly skilled and specialized people that design, maintain, and improve the automated systems. A large amount of unskilled workers, who are nothing more than "replaceable units", that get told what to do by those systems. And that does not even attempt to even show the amount of unemployable people that would be around from all the human jobs lost in the first place after the hump. Just think of the fast food industry, and how technologic improvements would "disrupt" it (by removing the work force). And then who do you sell the product to? The person who does not have a paycheck?

ChuckMcM 13y ago
Uh, sarcasm miss? Oh_sigh was taking the "full Luddite" tack (I believe sarcastically). It is absolutely true that not needing to pay pensions or workman's comp is a part of the move to technology. But total jobs available goes up with increasing technological use while creating localized labor displacements.
notatoad 13y ago
link to this graph please? as far as i know, unemployment has been fairly steady since the beginning of time. as new technologies come about, new jobs are created to replace the ones taken by machines. we're losing truck drivers at an alarming rate, but never before has there been so many designers and environmental consultants and political analyst jobs. it sucks if you're a truck driver, but doesn't really change much for global economics.
mcguire 13y ago
"A few highly skilled and specialized people that design, maintain, and improve the automated systems. "A large amount of unskilled workers, who are nothing more than 'replaceable units', that get told what to do by those systems." That is a pretty effective description of any post-industrial-revolution economy.

ChuckMcM 13y ago

Uh, sarcasm miss? Oh_sigh was taking the "full Luddite" tack (I believe sarcastically). It is absolutely true that not needing to pay pensions or workman's comp is a part of the move to technology. But total jobs available goes up with increasing technological use while creating localized labor displacements.

notatoad 13y ago

link to this graph please? as far as i know, unemployment has been fairly steady since the beginning of time. as new technologies come about, new jobs are created to replace the ones taken by machines. we're losing truck drivers at an alarming rate, but never before has there been so many designers and environmental consultants and political analyst jobs. it sucks if you're a truck driver, but doesn't really change much for global economics.

mcguire 13y ago

"A few highly skilled and specialized people that design, maintain, and improve the automated systems. "A large amount of unskilled workers, who are nothing more than 'replaceable units', that get told what to do by those systems." That is a pretty effective description of any post-industrial-revolution economy.