01-07-2017, 04:18 PM
Quote:You don't need many people to manufacture, program, and service the machines. We already have people doing these things and they do not make up a majority of the workforce. With automation they will become more productive and so will be able to support more and more robots.
Yes, but the income those people have pays for plumbers, restaurants, clothes, haircuts, etc. And many of the goods we consume presently are not necessarily produced by machines here at home, but large numbers of people working in factories in Shenzhen and Guangzhou. While bringing those jobs back on shore would lead to a net reduction in total employment, it would lead to an increase in jobs HERE, which would then pay for more haircuts, plumbers, electricians, etc. Subject to the inevitable caveat that there could be an impact on consumption here from a rise in prices... Or so the going arguments for past several decades goes. I think its political currency has faded.
Quote:The issue Dave is talking about will first be manifest in service jobs that employ large numbers of people like truck driving, delivery people, warehouse staff, retail workers, food service workers, housekeepers and home caregivers, orderlies, nursing staff, phlebotomists, etc.
Dave is a big boy and can speak for himself. If you'd like to participate in this section of the debate, please do so directly and not on (supposed) behalf of someone else.
Quote:A machine that can communicate in and comprehend verbal instructions given in natural language, and which can move fluidly as a human does, will be able perform tasks just like those performed by servant or a slave.
Which, as I have already stated, would presumably involved an enormous amount of money and energy to create and maintain all of these ambulatory androids, which are not much in evidence right now and may never be as cost-effective compared to human labor as you suppose, if they ever get around to going through the trouble of actually existing.
Quote:The future could be a robot slave economy like ancient Rome. The majority of citizens of the ancient city of Rome did not work and even those who did had more days off due to holidays than work days.
Once again, I have already made that exact same reference a couple of posts prior in my response to Dave. If you're going to try and speak for both of you, could you at least do me the courtesy of reading my responses to both?