← Back to context

Comment by scruple

2 days ago

> the past couple generations adapted

That concedes the point. Their descendants adapting decades later means the generation that lived through it absorbed the full shock of the transition. For displaced labor in the 1810s, adapting meant overworking in factories with horrible conditions and a permanent collapse in their living standards across the board. The dispute was never about accepting or banning automation, they were identifying that capital would absorb all of the gains while labor would be forced to absorb all of the shocks.

The only constant has always been change. And that just raises the question of why should we preserve ditch digging for our children just so they have meaningless labor to cling to, when we have the option to make new and better things for people. Few of us here are 'labor' in any meaningful sense, to begin with. And while I have spent time working at a factory, and I don't begrudge the robots for taking it away.

The notion that there's some idyllic past to cling to is just wishful thinking to me. The days when one person working with their body alone could have meaningful impact are long gone. We'll have to find a new prosperity that doesn't rely on zero sum thinking from economists who divide by zero, too.

  • No no, the question is whether you are willing to sacrifice your comfort and your children's comfort, and your grandchildren's comfort... in exchange for (hopefully) your great grandchildren's comfort.

    • That hasn't been my family's experience, nor my own. My grandfather's generation had already adapted to the problems of my great grandfather's generation, though they certainly did struggle.

      2 replies →