If jobs are “lost” because robots are doing more work, why is it a problem that the population is aging and there are fewer in “working age”? Shouldn’t the two effects sort of cancel each other out?
In: 13038
Automation only positively affects Socialism. Capitalism will waiver with automation. As the workers don’t own the means of production in capitalism, any automation created only serves the bourgeois and funnels that excess “labor value” into their pockets, while at the same time they STILL have you the employees work, usually for the same or less money, just in different roles. Most people 50 years ago assumed that we would be working less today due to technology, robots, and computers. But yet were working just as much if not more (as now more of the population is working, women) working 40, 50, 60, 70 hours.
In a socialist version of the economy, we COULD work less. Any increase in efficiency created by robots would be celebrated. A socialist economy would accelerate development of AI/robotics/automation, as less would need to work.
You’re right, that is how it should work, but we sadly live in a reality where capitalism has won almost worldwide for the time being. Even so called social democracies, as they are still functionally capitalist in a capitalist world, still rely on large working populations even in this century. Robots SHOULD counterbalance retirees and a decrease in population. But nope.
Latest Answers