“This is the new model, where you work in these plants for the rest of your life, and your kids work here, and your grandkids work here,” U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick says.
Development of technology isnt always progress. Sometimes its a step backwards.
Progress depends on if it does good or bad. If it just causes a greater disparity of wealth (while building crappy machines that are designed for obsolescence and people dont need), then it is not progress.
Example: looms are arguably progress (almost everyone needs cloth). Robots that manufacturer ICE SUVs are not progress (making more gas guzzlers is causing mass extinction).
Replacing humans with machines generally results in greater disparity of wealth, historically
You still can’t stop progress, so you’ve got to solve that issue another way
If you don’t own the machines you should get supplemental income from being displaced.
You should get income regardless
Development of technology isnt always progress. Sometimes its a step backwards.
Progress depends on if it does good or bad. If it just causes a greater disparity of wealth (while building crappy machines that are designed for obsolescence and people dont need), then it is not progress.
Example: looms are arguably progress (almost everyone needs cloth). Robots that manufacturer ICE SUVs are not progress (making more gas guzzlers is causing mass extinction).
Don’t confuse technological and societal progress.
It may not be positive for society, but you still can’t stop progress, if you don’t develop what’s possible, someone else will.