This question is for liberals only

[westwall]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

In a word no. Laws of that nature only serve to cause companies to leave this country. Far better to retrain the workers into a profession that is needed.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Who would purchase robots to clean and garden when you can get people at minimum wage ?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?"

Of course not, the notion is ridiculous – and likely un-Constitutional.

The solution to the problem is to invest in education and training programs so Americans are the ones designing and building such automation.

Needless to say, the appropriate solution is one most on the right will oppose.

 

[amrchaos]

Did it bother you when ATMs put bank tellers out of work?

No, but that really was the beginning wasn't it?

LOL.

Uhh, no. Not even close.


Did it bother you when the Northrop loom put textile workers out of work? (that's not the beginning either)

True it goes back pretty far, but the trend doesn't seem to be stopping wouldn't you say?

No - its not. It has been going on quite a while. And its largely responsible for the high qualify of life you and I enjoy today.

Unemployment today is is 6.2%. It was 4.0 in the year 2000. 7.1 in 1980. 5.5 in 1960. 5.2 in 1928.

Advances in automation have been going on that entire time. Yet it seems to have no affected the unemployment rate.

Why?

Its simple. When a business automates - it is able to produce the produce or service you buy for left. The difference may be pocketed by the business - it may go into reducing the price - it may go into raising wages for the remaining employees - or any combination thereof - it does not disappear. Whoever has it, spends it on increasing their quality of life - creating employment elsewhere.

NET job gain or loss is zero.

Yeah no shit it's been very beneficial in the past, but after a certain point it is going to negatively affect the need for human labor. Futurists take this position.

There is a point, but it is unlikely to exist in the "unskilled labor" level.

The automations introduce a new set of markets which more than likely compensate for the automatons replacing jobs. The question of demand for labor will be replaced by maintance of the auto matons as well as replacing broken or older automation devices.

Also, it may not b profitable for every industry to switch to automation. Hence fast food restaurants may use them but Higher end restaurants will be restricted due to changes in the menu and creativity in the kitchen. The same applies across the board, from architecture to creative writing. Automation will be limited because it is for large scale repetitive low skill work.

Note as well, this will force laborers to become skilled. Unskilled workers are the ones that face the dangers of competing with automation.

 

[Disir]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

No.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Did it bother you when ATMs put bank tellers out of work?

No, but that really was the beginning wasn't it?

LOL.

Uhh, no. Not even close.


Did it bother you when the Northrop loom put textile workers out of work? (that's not the beginning either)

True it goes back pretty far, but the trend doesn't seem to be stopping wouldn't you say?

No - its not. It has been going on quite a while. And its largely responsible for the high qualify of life you and I enjoy today.

Unemployment today is is 6.2%. It was 4.0 in the year 2000. 7.1 in 1980. 5.5 in 1960. 5.2 in 1928.

Advances in automation have been going on that entire time. Yet it seems to have no affected the unemployment rate.

Why?

Its simple. When a business automates - it is able to produce the produce or service you buy for left. The difference may be pocketed by the business - it may go into reducing the price - it may go into raising wages for the remaining employees - or any combination thereof - it does not disappear. Whoever has it, spends it on increasing their quality of life - creating employment elsewhere.

NET job gain or loss is zero.

Yeah no shit it's been very beneficial in the past, but after a certain point it is going to negatively affect the need for human labor. Futurists take this position.

Futurists always have. We're still waiting.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Of course not, the notion is ridiculous – and likely un-Constitutional.

Ridiculous yes - unconstitutional, no.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

You're pathetic. The only problem is the sheer laziness of the minimum wage loosers. Don't want to lose your job? Stop asking for more than your worth & educate yourself.

Fucking leeches

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

You're pathetic. The only problem is the sheer laziness of the minimum wage loosers. Don't want to lose your job? Stop asking for more than your worth & educate yourself.

Fucking leeches

Is that how you pulled yourself out of poverty?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

You're pathetic. The only problem is the sheer laziness of the minimum wage loosers. Don't want to lose your job? Stop asking for more than your worth & educate yourself.

Fucking leeches

Is that how you pulled yourself out of poverty?

Yes it is.








Dumbass

 

[Searcher44]

I already know what the rightwing will answer with.

Should there be laws limiting a company from investing in technological automation that replaces human labor?

The keyword here is limit, not eliminate. This problem is only going to get worse and worse in the coming decades.

No. Companies should not be forced to hire a human $30k a year plus benefits and all the other costs when a machine can do it for $10k a year. If we don't need millions of workers to feed the beast maybe future society won't have as many humans overpopulating and consuming all our resources.

So instead of having ten kids to work your farm have two kids and raise them to be engineers.

Humans around the world definitely have to lower their birthrate. That's been happening in the west since when? Maybe the Industrial Revolution. Family farms everywhere used to naturally encourage having as many kids as possible Lot's of labor on farms in the past. When I was a kid in a small farming community there were lots of families around us of ten or more . (And I'm not that old). And it's one of the reasons smart people have been trying to spread the word for decades, Education, Education, Education. Your country and my country have to find a way to make higher education including the technological side, affordable for every one.