Hacker News Reader

>That is, if we manage to take back ownership from companies. Today western society is build around income tax, and as long as that doesn't change, we're not heading for freedom but for oblivion.

I don't understand. Ownership of what do you want us to take back and who is us?

View on HN

Not OP, but I read this as "us", as in, working people in the lower or middle class with no notable investments outside of maybe a mortgage, and ownership being ownership of the world's companies (i.e. currently owned by stock- or shareholders depending on whether the company is public or private). I believe they were referring to the worst case scenario where automation removes most jobs (which are not just replaced with others), but because the automation mainly benefits the owners of the companies that own the robots/AIs, the majority of people would simply lose the ability to earn money (because they can no longer find work, and they don't own anything that can generate income for them in other ways). The fact that goods can be produced cheaper is little help if you cannot earn any money at all. The worst case scenario is a breakdown of consumerism, as most consumers stop being able to earn money, and all wealth accumulates with the owners of companies in a way that would make the current 1%/99% split look like a socialist utopia. Is this likely? No idea, but it is one of the possible futures that the current trends point toward, and it has a lot of people worried, and is one of the reasons why there's renewed interest in concepts like basic income among futurists.

That scenario would mean ruin for everyone, the 1% and the 99%.

How do you figure? If they can produce anything with automation what do they care if there's no one to purchase it? Value will be expressed in other ways. I could easily imagine the 1% or whoever completely controlling production and allowing everyone else to die.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com