sc94597 said:
Honestly, machines replacing workers is actually good for everyone. It allows companies to reduce costs, which reduce consumer prices (assuming a competitive market), or it allows them to invest in other ways, and allows for more high wage positions that would not otherwise exist. It is a gain for capitalists, bourgoise, proleritat, working-class, upper-class, poor, etc, etc. I work at Walmart currently so that I might reduce my student loan dependancy. I would much rather work to help customers in other ways than to do menial mechanical cashiering, that I do now, which is something a machine can do, for example. There is not a net loss in the amount of jobs with the introduction of machines, just as there wasn't in the industrial revolution, and there wasn't in the internet age, the jobs just change in their nature. The more monetary wealth that exists, the more opportunities to find the job I, you, or anybody else prefers and enjoys doing. That is the difference between the wealthy countries and the less wealthy ones. There are more opportunities, not fewer. And for the Mexicans and the Chinese, well life is just better off with these opportunities that exist for them. Chinese persons today, the rich and the poor, are better off than they were under Mao and his strict socialism. Mexicans picking fruit in California are better off in the semi-"Capitalist" United States than they were in the more oppressive markets of Mexico. Hong Kongers (the freest market in the world) are so much better off than the mainland Chinese, and 40 years ago they were in the same financial situation. So I really don't see how communism is better than free-markets (whether or not you want to call it capitalism, is up to you.) |
I full agree machines benefit society. Although not so sure about the self checkout systems in super markets, they always prove more trouble than they're worth so far. "Put the item on the tray, put it back in the cart, put only one item on the tray at a time, leave the item on the tray, please wait for assistance. Sorry you can't place your bags on the tray, it messes up the scale" Screw that. Walmart wouldn't give you another task anyway, just like the grocery baggers you would simply be looking for another job. Robot cashiers would be frigging cool though :)
Creating jobs in low wage countries can help those countries. It's a double edged sword though. It can also disrupt local economies. For example by flooding the market with left over subsidized food products in return, next to making countries dependent on hiring out its workforce instead of creating a sustainable economy of their own. It's usually the (corrupt) government that benefits most from imf deals, and plenty of dicatators have gotten support from the western world for stable access to cheap resources and labor.
(Mostly) free markets are the best we have atm, better than a closed border policy. The rich and powerful will always skew the system in their favor whenever possible. Yet hungry western consumers are the best option for developing countries right now. The western world got where it is on the back of colonialism, slavery and exploitation of vast resources. Those doors are closing fast.
