| Okay I like what you have said above. I can tell your not just arguing with me to argue. The only point I think we disagree on is whether or not technology only benefits the rich or if the benefits trickle down to the poor/simpleton public. >I rebutted, stating (quite historically I might add) only those that own the machines will benefit, at least for a time, as they are in fact, private property. This isn't true. For example a man with an IQ of 90, lets name him Joe has never owned a machine that makes cpu's or computer monitors. However, in the last 50 years the cost of a computer has collapsed. Joe can buy a calculator for 99 cents. This calculator would have cost over a million dollars 50 years ago. This happens because of competition between "the people that own the machines". If it wasn't for competition, yes Joe would be screwed. He would not be able to afford a 24" monitor or a 3ghz cpu. However a 24" monitor costs $250!!! This is because of competition. Because of competition all of the things that machines make will become commodities. This means in the future stuff will be cheap. The worlds Wealth (manufactured goods, knowledge) will be Immense. If the population levels out at some point (which is another problem) all this wealth has to go some where. Rich people will throw away stuff, give it to the good will. If robots are really creating everything that is mass produced, there will be so much extra tvs, computer, clothes, food etc... Not all of this will be thrown in a dumpster. Lets say we have X people on earth right now and Y amount of wealth. Each person on earth has some % of Y wealth. lets say the really poor have 1 trillionth a percent of Y wealth. Now lets go forward 500 years the world has maybe 2X people and has 100,000,000Y wealth. If the poor even have a hundredth Trillionth of the new Y value, they have much more wealth than you or I will ever have. What will they do to earn money? The reason I say Art is because it is the one thing that still has value, its the only thing that isn't a commodity. I guess human interaction will also have value. But it doesn't matter the fact is with so much wealth the rich have too much money and not enough places to spend it. The poor simpletons wont be able to walk 2 feet with out being hit by away to given money. The world will be bursting at the seams with wealth. And people will realize wealth != happiness. Take a look at this article from yesterday; "A MILLIONAIRE is giving up his £3 million ($7 million) fortune because he said they never made him happy." He added: "For a long time, I believed that more wealth
and luxury automatically meant more happiness."
But over time, a conflicting feeling nagged at him.
He said: "More and more I heard the words: "Stop what
you are doing now - all this luxury and consumerism -
and start your real life." I had the feeling I was
working as a slave for things that I did not wish for or
need."
But it took him several years before he acted on it as he
admitted he was not "brave" enough to give up all the
trappings of his comfortable existence instantly.
The turning point came during a three-week holiday in
Hawaii with his former wife.
He said: "It was the biggest shock in my life, when I
realised how horrible, soulless and without feeling the
five-star lifestyle is.
"In those three weeks, we spent all the money you could
possibly spend. But in all that time, we had the feeling
we hadn't met a single real person - that we were all
just actors. The staff played the role of being friendly
and the guests played the role of being important and
nobody was real."
http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/My%2BMoney/Story/A...Wealth will not be an issue for simpletons or smart people, being happy will be the issue, just as it is today. So the real concern is not how will the less intelligent get by in the future but rather how do we help people now and in the future live happy lives (the answer isn't money or wealth or for that matter in the future, it was discovered by Buddha about 2500 years ago...) |