Quote:
Originally Posted by Anh_Minh
Maybe because they didn't have smart enough robots.
Right now, every meal we eat was made with somebody's sweat. Someone somewhere always pay.
But if it could all be done by robots? Well, someone would have to design them first, and build the first few to build the rest, but ultimately we'd get to a point where a handful of guys worked hard for a bit and fed everyone, forever. Then what?
|
Then we will have a lot of food and it will cost almost nothing to buy.
Are you trying to say that is a bad thing?
Look, this whole argument has been around for so long and has been proven wrong over and over again. Almost none of the jobs from 100 years ago exist in their original form today. Yet we have 'only' 5%-10% unemployment, with a much larger population.
How is that possible when we need so much less people to do a job?
Well, it's easy: we just do more!
If you replace 100 people with showels with a guy with a bulldozer, then what do the other people do?
They all get a bulldozer and build a hundred roads!
When we manage to free labor by using machines, we then allocate that labor to do more things, more effectively, in a bigger scale.
And we are certainly not at the end of scale.
There are still too many things that we should do, only they cost too much. Too high cost of anything important is an indicator that we are not quite there yet.