Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Automation
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="ShaunyP26" data-source="post: 2960725" data-attributes="member: 42035"><p>Automation can't replace every job, but wouldn't have to reach that point before it hit economic growth and incomes. Total spending and total income always equal each other i.e. your spending equals someone else's income and vice versa. If the robots concentrate income to where most people can't buy what the robots produce then the value of that production will plummet and along with it the windfall profits that come with that. Under a purely free market system this would tend to be self correcting over the long run, but rich robot owners have a big incentive to lobby and rent seek and that is what they will do.</p><p></p><p> So redistribution of robot wealth (Bill Gates actually proposed this the other day) or ruthless enforcement of the robot owners interests, is likely the only way a system like this could sustain itself.</p><p></p><p>You should check out Four Futures or Superinteligence if you want a really deep dive. Izabella Kaminska over at Financial Times Alphaville also talks a lot about this.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="ShaunyP26, post: 2960725, member: 42035"] Automation can't replace every job, but wouldn't have to reach that point before it hit economic growth and incomes. Total spending and total income always equal each other i.e. your spending equals someone else's income and vice versa. If the robots concentrate income to where most people can't buy what the robots produce then the value of that production will plummet and along with it the windfall profits that come with that. Under a purely free market system this would tend to be self correcting over the long run, but rich robot owners have a big incentive to lobby and rent seek and that is what they will do. So redistribution of robot wealth (Bill Gates actually proposed this the other day) or ruthless enforcement of the robot owners interests, is likely the only way a system like this could sustain itself. You should check out Four Futures or Superinteligence if you want a really deep dive. Izabella Kaminska over at Financial Times Alphaville also talks a lot about this. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Automation
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom