Buying apples for 1/10 the price isn't the part of the cycle that is most concerning. Nor is the part about firing 9/10 of the workforce -- although that assumes the company is operating at near 0% margins, and that the employment needs of the company scale linearly with total sales in dollars. Neither of these two are that common.

The thing that concerns me most is the lack of new jobs that absorb the redundant workforce. However, my concerns are probably somewhat unorthodox in that I think this represents a number of ideological problems rooted in both the employees and the employers.

The best way to encompass all of these is by the following truism: you are only capable of one specialization, give or take, in a given lifetime. And what we've been defining as specialization has been narrowing as rapidly as specializations have been getting deeper and more involved.

To play off of the analogy above, our society would look at these people, assert that it has no further need for "apple preparation specialists," and discard this class of people into the bin of history. At best, they go through retraining in some new specialization, but that takes a long time, and they are considered entry-level in their new specialization at the end.

It is this mentality where you get the laundry-list of "key proficiencies." The unwritten assumption is that all jobs are still a matter of rote memorization and repeated execution of steps, and as the years of experience with a particular technology accrue, the unconscious memorization of these steps improves.

The problem with this approach is that it is completely wrong. We do not account for people's ability to deductively reason, and we therefore do not account for the parts of the new skillset they'll know without being told by someone. The tragedy is that people believe they can't: employers, recruiters, and even the employees. This last part is the most tragic. The rank-and-file employees who believe this philosophy are so common that I become animatedly excited when I meet one who doesn't.

So, yeah. I think it goes deeper than just saying there aren't any jobs; we should really be deeply analyzing what assumptions about the nature of skill and work ethic we've been falsely believing all this time. So far, most of the analysis I've seen has just been repetition of these assumptions, with calls that we psuh forward initatives that work around them.