"jon_banquer" wrote in message
...
On Thursday, August 29, 2013 10:59:55 PM UTC-7, George Plimpton wrote:
On 8/29/2013 10:54 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:

In article ,

"Scout" wrote:



"Siri Cruise" wrote in message

...

In article ,

George Plimpton wrote:



The history of automation is one of *increasing* productivity and
thus

increasing the relative wages of the people doing the work. It is
also

a history of eliminating tedious, ugly drudge work that no one
really

wants to do.



Does automation increase or decrease the number of employees for the
same

level

of production?



Depends on the nature and extent of the automation. Generally speaking
it

decreases the number of employees needed for the same production since
that

is often a factor in why automation can be cost effective.



Which would mean production would have to increase to employ the same
number of

people. That means demand would have to increase. But average wages in
the US

are dropping. So who will supply the demand?



You're looking at this wrongly and stupidly. You are mistaking the

prospects of those workers in an industry that sees increased automation

as typical of the prospects of workers in all industries.



You are an idiot. You have *NO* background, neither academic nor

practical, that enables you to comment authoritatively on this. Shut up.


*YOU* shut the **** up, you goddamned **** stain.

Who will supply the demand?

--(the rich can only eat so much cake)....


Time to bring out your sock puppets, Pimple.