[aquila48]

“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.

[Enlightened1]

History doesn't repeat, but it rhymes. Oh believe me I know more history than the average academic weinee. You said, "The purpose of any business is to make money not to create job." Now you are using the straw man fallacy or you missed my entire point. Companies prefer technology like automation and A.I. because then they can hire less people. Thus, it allows them make more money. I never argued that a company was not in business to make money. You said that and then argued it as if I disagreed. Haha! Technology is growing exponentially and not linear as you are implying in your 200 + year argument.

Please see chart below,

 

Then you said, "And like before new needs and jobs will be created. Why do you think that things will remain static?" It will not work that way because the technology will take over most jobs. Thus, creating a huge welfare class. We are about 13 years from that point. Me: “Yes they did, but many of their new jobs, like their previous job, are slowly and incrementally being impacted by automation and A.I.” You: "And like before new needs and jobs will be created. Why do you think that things will remain static?" I just said the new jobs would be impacted my new technology, and it's only a matter of time before the people have to migrate to another job that's also being impacted by technology. That's not Static. I can tell you are confused on what is static. If technology is changing an industry, company, etc.., then it's dynamic and not static. Static is what you see for the most part on a college campus or in government agencies. Anyway, to answer your question because this is the current trend. It the direction we are heading, and we are seeing it impacting most things. I'm following the trends. "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?)" There you go again comparing apples to oranges. Fighting the last war instead of the current war and living in the present. The past is nothing but a guide. It's like a reading a script when you are new to something vs. improvising, overcoming and adapting when well versed, seasoned and/or experienced. This does not mean ignore your history, but use the past as a guide. Nothing wrong with looking back, but that does not guarantee what the future will look like. Past performance does not guarantee future results or success. We live in a dynamic world. History doesn't repeat it rhymes. Finally, please do not patronize me by asking me my age. I have been around for a while. Now I understand your mindset. You are only thinking about your generation. The baby boomers are the first generation of Americans to royally screw all future American generations. The good news is the pendulum is beginning to swing the other way. Hopefully, we can do it peacefully. For the record, I am generation X. Generation Z is the generation that is the most conservative since the great depression. They are just getting started. You then said, Me: “You are arguing an old debate that’s already over.” You: "Oh, settled science, I see!! How could I possibly argue against “settled opinion”." Science is never settled. This is just where the debate is at because people can see it taking over. Oh and as for the unemployment rate. That is the U-4 report which was changed from the U-6 report under Obama. This is because the real unemployment rate was a lot higher. Under Obama we had close to 100 million people out of work, but the U-4 unemployment rate still kept falling while the number of people not in the work force increased. This never happened before unle Obama switched off from the U-6 report. It was joke and conservatives like Limbaugh and Matt Drudge ridiculed it. I do like what President Trump is doing and a huge supporter of him. I think he has a lot of #NeverTrumpers and Obama left overs he needs to fire. "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?" That's another part of the debate. That's where the "livable wage" is being promoted by Mark Zuckerberg because technology is taking over. For the record, I have served the country for 8 years in the United States Marines. I have a college education, and have been working for major Global Corporation for over 20 years. I suggest reading or listening to the book, "The Pentagon's Brain" by Annie Jacobson. It will give you a better idea of where we are at technology wise.