Reply #11: They'll have to retrain. [View All]

[Meldread]

Some of them will have the ability to work or oversee the machines, and their wages and their quality of life while on the job should improve as well. Others will have to retrain and find new lines of work. Unfortunately, in the United States most who toil in the fields are illegal immigrants who are exploited, which means it'll be hard for them to take advantage of any government retraining programs that could be offered.

Ultimately, though - my opposition is not based upon whether or not jobs are lost or gained. My opposition is to individuals who oppose technological progress for backward reasons. There will always be jobs lost as technology strives to improve the quality of our lives. Just imagine how many jobs were lost with the invention of the personal computer. What happened to the typewriter and file cabinet manufacturers? You can bet the demand for their products decreased, and with less demand meant less need for workers.

The reality is that, as technology continues to evolve, someday it'll be able to replace the bulk of human labor. It just requires us to rethink how our economy works - human labor is based upon antiquated notions of serfdom and peasantry. It's -NECESSARY- in our current world, just as it is necessary for someone to toil away in the fields picking strawberries. That doesn't make it desirable or a -GOOD- thing.

In my view, technological advancement is a good thing, because it brings us closer to a day when humans are freed from toil - toil that is demanded and required because it results in payment, and that payment is what allows us to provide food, clothing, and shelter. However, at the same time, it requires planning for a future in which human toil is less necessary, and thus a new economy that is not based upon labor must be imagined.