iris
Post
View thread root →
User Avatar
Quick Jay
Just for the record I’m not saying I can imagine the future either, I’m saying it’s practically impossible to do so, but our lack of an image doesn’t change the nature of markets and production. Of course no one in the 1900s could imagine that all the people put out of work would eventually be working to sustain a global electronic communication system and eventually a place switching digital network that could provide practically any service that people desired at their whim… but that’s what happened nonetheless and tractors made it possible, they didn’t “make farm workers poor.”
0
0
User Avatar
Elated Asp
My point was that not all technological breakthroughs disrupt equally. Someone that was a carriage driver could adapt to the invention of cars and become a taxi driver. A self-driving car completely removes the driver from his profession. A secretary can go from using a typewriter to using a computer. An AI chatbot completely removes the secretary from the equation. And sure, these people can go and find some other job, but finding a new profession is more disruptive than learning how to integrate a new tool into your profession. We are not passive bystanders. We are the main character and should prioritize societal well-being over higher GDP even if it means goods and services will be a little more expensive. Faster and cheaper comes at a cost. This is a tangential point to the UBI discussion, but still relevant IMO.
0
0