First try to stay focus on this debate. We are talking about the future and not the present or the past.
Well I am glad you admit companies are saving money through Automation and A.I.
That validates my entire point that the companies are hiring less people..., as technology does more and more jobs in all industries and every walk of life.
Then you mention jobs that have been greatly impacted, but say people have moved on to other jobs. Yes they did, but many of their new jobs, like their previous job, are slowly and incrementally being impacted by automation and A.I.
As technology improves it’s impacting more and more jobs. People are being replaced. You some how think most people will be able to run off to some other job that will not be impacted by automation or A.I. That’s complete nonsense.
What you are really arguing is an old augment that would have been true 30 years or more ago, but what was true then is not true in the future. It may be some what true today since at the moment automation, A.I. robots, etc... have not taken over everything. However, it will not be true 30 years from now at the direction we are heading.
You are arguing an old debate that’s already over. Read what guys like Ray Kurzweil, Bill Joy, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Stephen Hawking and even Mark Zuckerberg say about it. They all take different sides of it and how they think it will play out, but all agree technology, Automation, A.I. and robots will for the most part take over most jobs. The problem is that it will create a large welfare class.
You have been hoodwinked lock, stock and barrel. You are obviously still asleep. The arguments you are making is nothing I have never before or considered.
“First try to stay focus on this debate. We are talking about the future and not the present or the past.”
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” - Santayana.
Past experience of similar situations can tell you a lot about the future of similar situation today. Not perfect but much better than extrapolating through willful ignorance. You may want to study a bit of history - it would make you even more enlightened.
“That validates my entire point that the companies are hiring less people..., “
That validates your ignorance and understanding of what any company does. The purpose of any business is to make money not to create job. The only reason a business would ever hire a person is if adding that person makes the business more money. And yes he will replace that person if a machine comes along that makes the business more net money. That’s been true forever.
“as technology does more and more jobs in all industries and every walk of life.”
Technology has been doing more and more since the industrial revolution. Given that technology has been doing more and more for 200+ years, by your logic everybody should be unemployed by now. Last I heard the unemployment rate is about 4.4%.
“Yes they did, but many of their new jobs, like their previous job, are slowly and incrementally being impacted by automation and A.I.”
And like before new needs and jobs will be created. Why do you think that things will remain static?
“You some how think most people will be able to run off to some other job that will not be impacted by automation or A.I. That’s complete nonsense.”
Where do you think millions of ignorant farmers who lost their jobs to farm mechanization at the turn of last century ran off to? As I said, study a bit of history, it’ll do you good. (I’m curious, How old are you?)
“However, it will not be true 30 years from now at the direction we are heading.”
I may not be around 30 years from now at the ripe old age of 99, but I would love to make a bet with you that, barring stupid policies from the government like “guaranteed income” and other idiocies, the unemployment rate won’t be that much different than it is today.
“You are arguing an old debate that’s already over.”
Oh, settled science, I see!! How could I possibly argue against “settled opinion”.
“all agree technology, Automation, A.I. and robots will for the most part take over most jobs.”
Are the robots going to buy their own products, or will all the unemployed people buy the products with the money they don’t have? Do you see the idiocy in that scenario?
“The arguments you are making is nothing I have never before or considered.”
If you in fact considered them, based on your comments, you must have done so with the same depth, diligence and knowledge of a high school freshman.