Under capitalism, because greater margins. Under not-capitalism, so as to free up resources and labor for other things or just increase available downtime for people.

>Under capitalism, because greater margins

Under capitalism, or late-stage capitalism, if you will, more efficient procedures aren't normally allowing for greater margins. There are countless examples of more exploitative and wasteful strategies yielding much greater margins than more efficient alternatives.

Fractional reserve lending, rehypothecation, etc.

Sorry to be that guy, but would to prefer if your computer and phone each cost $5000?

In some ways I would, computing lost something once normal people were allowed in.

> The solution isn't "let's stop online flight bookings sites and protect travel agents" because that's an inefficient system

this is akin to the self-checkout aisles in supermarkets, some of which have been rolled back to add back in more human checkout staff.

why? people liked interacting with the inefficient humans. turns out efficiency isn’t ideal in all cases.

i wasn’t trying to argue that everything should be inefficient. i was trying to point out that not everything needs to be efficient.

two very different things, and it seems (?) you may have thought i meant the former.

I know someone who will never use self-check, because he isn't getting paid to scan his own groceries.

I, on the other hand, will use whichever gets me out of the store faster. I don't view shopping for groceries as a social occasion.

I guess it takes all types.