Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

If that were all that happened it would be great. But automation leaves a lot of people off the payrolls without jobs and if those jobs are paying less then less expensive food is not less expensive. And incomes have dropped more than inflation in most cases for the poor which means it is not cheaper for those less able to afford it. Complicated problems are not whisked away with making things less expensive = benefit everyone.


"But automation leaves a lot of people off the payrolls without jobs"

No, it does not.

Before automated agriculture something like 90% of the population was directly engaged in agricultural labor.

We don't have 90% unemployment or anything like it, and we also have social supports for those who are unemployed (also largely nonexistent in those days).

" And incomes have dropped more than inflation in most cases for the poor which means it is not cheaper for those less able to afford it."

This is pure nonsense. Sorry, it just is.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/how-amer...

In 1900, 43% of income was spent on food.

In 2003, only 13% of income was spent on food.


> "we also have social supports for those who are unemployed "

Something that the very wealthy are trying to roll back.

I think the premise that automation will just shift work to other industries will be severely tested in the age of the self driving car and other forms of advanced automation.


"I think the premise that automation will just shift work to other industries will be severely tested in the age of the self driving car"

Look: we've gone from 90% agricultural workers to about 1% agricultural workers. Hand-weavers and spinners: gone (other than specialized or artsy-craftsy stuff). Neighborhood bakeries: gone (likewise). The list could go on forever.

People have been predicting massive unemployment since the days of the Luddites. It's never happened. What's special about driving that makes it an exception to the historical trend?


Imagine a machine that has all of your intelligence, dexterity and creativity. What work will you do that said machine will not do better?

Perhaps we can all become artists - but then again, machines will be able to compose songs, write stories and create abstract art.

This is going to be very different than previous waves of automation that largely augmented human muscle.

Bringing it back to the original thread, I think the concern is that rising income inequality will accelerate as the wealthy will increasingly own the means of automation.

Some mechanism for wealth redistribution will be needed if we are going to avoid a meltdown in society. That doesn't mean that all should be equal, but we ought to think about how we can provide everyone with enough to live with dignity.


Or perhaps we'll all just sit around watching porn and playing video games. Who cares? Why not let people do what they want?

"I think the concern is that rising income inequality will accelerate as the wealthy will increasingly own the means of automation."

Machines can make hamburgers, but they can't buy them. "Income inequality" is not the problem you think it is, or pretend to think it is.

Since when did "income inequality" become the worst possible thing in the entire world? Given the track record of previous regimes that sought to produce "income equality" (> 100 million killed in the 20th century), I think calls for "income equality" need to be looked at with a very harsh and critical eye.


The problem with your argument is that you make it sound like it's inevitable that the net effect of automation on the welfare of human societies will be positive in the past, present and the future and while the other party questions this assertion and IMO he's legitimate reasons to be skeptic of this claim that automation was, is and will always be a good thing.

Also, can you tell me what would happen to the work force when most of the jobs in the services sectors will be automated?

Because as I see it, jobs in the agriculture and manufacturing - to greater extent - sectors are almost extinct and their counterparts in the services sector are on the way, the so-called quaternary sector can't absorb all the surplus and masses of labor that will sit idle because the the nature of that sector of the economy is that it's more of capital intensive and labor averse and can't create enough job opportunities to an ever growing human population and work force.

What would be the solution to this problem then?




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: