4 ms·
True, but that doesn't mean we aren't finally seeing the reality pan out. If you want to call all jobs "jobs" then fine: Another way of looking at it is: 150 y
by redwood 13y ago
True, but that doesn't mean we aren't finally seeing the reality pan out.
If you want to call all jobs "jobs" then fine: Another way of looking at it is: 150 years ago people didn't have jobs the way we do today at all. It was completely different.
So we can expect the "jobs" of the future, e.g. the life experiences of the future, to be completely different.
That difference will have major unavoidable ramifications for government, taxation, freedom, democracy, everything.
- wmeredith 13y agoI'm pretty sure that if someone from 150 years ago shadowed me for a day, they would conclude that what I do is not "work".
- lifeisstillgood 13y agothat is a very good point - effectively what they did was work in the mechanical sense - now we have outsourced that to machines. What you do would have been clerical, logistical or planning work, or possibly creative. And the first three are definitively going to be outsourced to computers soon. So what will the person in 150 years do that you will not call work?
- cafard 13y agoThe US was primarily agricultural, but there was quite a lot of manufacturing, commercial, and government employment back then. So I think that "at all" is putting it too strongly.
- cm2012 13y agoAristocratic work in particular was not so different from today.