The best example I can think of, of an automation device that has done this, is a smartphone. There are now something like 3.5 billion people that have one, and it won't be long before nearly every one on Earth does.
Smartphones enable numerous tasks that people once had to hire another person to do for them, to be done automatically. The result is people's tastes expanding, as the global population becomes capable of providing more goods/services than ever before.
Looking at the environment/climate/resources, we may not know where the cliff lies, but we do know there is one and also that we are accelerating towards it without having good ideas as to how to stop.
The idealistic/utopianist ideas about humanity's potential are actually correct in this case I believe.
I agree, I'm sick of marketing speak and PR omitting news because it might be hard to hear. If we're just honest about what's happening, we can fix it or at least mediate it.
The nail technicians meanwhile will find work in industries created as a consequence of consumers having more disposable income with which to spend on new goods/services, from having to spend less on nail work:
https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/6717/economics/the-luddit...
It is always those goods/services that are the least automatable that cost the most. If getting one's nails done becomes automated, we may see consumer spending shift to the next most valuable service that can't be automated, like home cleaning, caretaking of the elderly, massage therapy, childcare, tutoring, or barrista work. Automation allows us to enjoy a higher standard of living.
Putting people out of work is not pushing anyone up a ladder. As one person gets more productive with automation their peers lose jobs.
From an economic perspective, if a factory owner replaces people with automation it's because it costs less. Hiring an automation expert and all the associated costs is a net win for them. But those jobs are higher paying, so we know it takes fewer people at the higher rate to achieve the owners lower cost.
>> Smartphones enable numerous tasks that people once had to hire another person to do for them, to be done automatically.
So first the automation put people out of work making smart phones. You try to counter that negative effect by pointing out how the phones help people but... Now the smart phones are making people more efficient, which as you say will eliminate more jobs.
Automation always eliminates jobs. The only time it frees up people to do other things is when those things are lower market value than what they were already doing - almost by definition.
I'm not against automation BTW, just against the common fiction that it's economically good for the working class.
Pushing this narrative without considering the obvious facts is a simple minded view.
Cheaper products are good for the working class because it means they can afford more products. Automation leads to cheaper products. Common sense.
That is the good side of automation for the working class.
So the answer is far more complicated then the simpleton answer you came up with here. The more you automate things the cheaper things get but the less jobs are available.
The gradient is somewhere in the middle you can't completely have no automation otherwise every product will be custom made and expensive as hell.
You can't have 100 percent automation either otherwise there's no one around to have jobs and make money to buy the product.
So economically speaking automation is both good and bad for the working class and only a cost benefite analysis can find the right amount automation that is best.
There free education for you. A lesson in basic math (see my other replies to your misguided views on quaternions) and economics in one day. I'm not so bold Like you as to run around offering paid consulting work for these trivial lessons.
>>I'm not against automation BTW, just against the common fiction that it's economically good for the working class.
Wages in the West have grown 20 fold, in inflation adjusted terms, since 1820, and that's all due to automation. Automation is practically synonynous with per capita productivity growth, and that's almost entirely positive for every one.
Then we will be at the mercy of AI or the authoritarian state.
This seems a bit like a Faustian bargain.