|
|
|
|
|
by aswanson
4024 days ago
|
|
Dude, you're going no true scotsman with bringing consumption in. Where did anyone in this thread bring in that as part of the argument other than you? What was asked was is an approach to zero unemployment ok, and could you imagine any vectors of approach to that condition being bad, and do we have any negative societal examples at or about that state of affairs? The answer is obvious, meaning we have more data points about that situation than your proposed robo-utopia as the only convergent solution, and since we have data on that condition, states resembling it are far more probable than your proposed unitary ideal. Idealism should always be suspect in things involving humans: economics, philosophy, ideals, political parties...anything involving large sums of humans that proposes the exact solution should always be looked at as extremely suspect. Political romanticism and One True Answers are the historical places where the body bags are. I distrust pure libertarianism, pure socialism, pure democracy, and any political philosophy that promises me A Perfect World. I say that as a strong political supporter of both Ron and Rand Paul. |
|
It was Aswanson who raised the apocalyptic scenario of no jobs, presumably because all our material needs are taken care of by robots or Chinese people, not me.