4 ms·
This is horrible. In my opinion, as soon as something can be done well by a machine, it is from then on unworthy of being done by a human being. That type of ar
by fnordsensei 12y ago
This is horrible. In my opinion, as soon as something can be done well by a machine, it is from then on unworthy of being done by a human being. That type of artificial job creation seems demeaning and somehow akin to some sort of indirect slavery.
Politicians in my country (like everywhere, I imagine) are going on about how job creation is extremely important, and that they are focusing on lowering unemployment. Well, 1) No it isn't, and 2) No, they are not.
1) What's so great about jobs? They are a side effect of the economic model we have, nothing more. What actually matters to us are the things we support by this model. A job can be a great, fulfilling experience, but it is not by virtue of specifically being a job that it is fulfilling, it's because of all the things we actually care about: interesting problems, great coworkers, a purpose in life. We could very well find other ways to support the things we actually care about, and we will have to, once a sufficient amount of jobs are done by machines.
2) All politicians, from left to right, want unemployment. If there were no unemployment, salaries would spiral out of control, which would trigger a massive rise in prices on goods in order to pay those salaries, which triggers more raises in order for employees to afford the goods and so on. In order to prevent this, an unemployment of 5-6% is required, as far as I understand it. Yet somehow, we also have to pretend that those unemployed are not doing society a service, that the cards are not stacked against them, and that we really want them to have a job.
Blergh. Well, enough ranting.