Tuesday, January 29, 2013


Quote of the day from Gregor Macdonald:
The combination of robots and cheap electricity could well unleash a new phase of profitability for corporations – and, of course, the owners of the means of production. What’s less likely, however, is that any such revolution is sustainable. 
Because unlike the Industrial Revolution, which added powerful BTUs in the form of coal to augment human labor, thus creating a tidal wave of profits and increased wages, a robot revolution promises to furnish the world with stuff at the expense of human employment. 
Many thinkers currently writing on this subject believe that a labor force deprived even further of purchasing power, yet given greater access to cheap goods, will wind up richer on the whole. I won’t say that’s wrong, but I will say it seems unlikely.
Chris Martenson has a great interview with Gregor here.

1 comment:

  1. There is no problem apart from being stuck in a rut of a certain way of thinking.

    If an automated infrastructure is creating wealth and accompanying goods and services without human input, all that happens is that our traditional method for 'fairly' distributing this wealth becomes redundant.

    It forces us to think of a new method to fairly distribute this wealth. A method that is not based (however tenuously) on work contributed.

    'Human employment' need not always and forever be in the service of profit. There is much else to employ us, as shocking an idea as that is...


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...