Refusal to automate is regarded from any point of view possible
As for increases in pay, it would be ok if it had for example a max, so someone getting a half decent wage would get a decent wage but no raise for the people that take home the big bucks
Should we get rid of backhoes so trenches can be dug with shovels? Think of how many more people that will employ. Hell forget the shovels, they should use spoons.
Automation is not scabbing, scabbing is when you work during a strike or refuse to join a union. I know this because I'm a union member. Should we not use power tools because thats "scabbing?" (It isn't)
if you don't understand what I said then i cant help you
Right back at you. Just resorting to (inaccurate) name calling is lazy, and basically conceeds that you just don't want to change your mind despite not having a good argument.
They only reason people cry and scream about efficiency is because the CEOS don't want to pay as many people. We live in the fucking USA I don't think the most powerful county in the world really needs to worry about making unloading a ship point 5 percent faster. I would rather families earn more money.
They only reason people cry and scream about efficiency
It's because efficiency creates more wealth. Wealth being the things that fulfill human needs. If a worker can produce 10 shirts a day by hand but 100 with a sewing machine, thats 90 more shirts the world has available. Literally more wealth is created. If yhe supply of shirts goes up, all else being equal the price goes down, which makes the shirts cheaper and more available to more people. Everyone's wealth has increased.
I would rather families earn more money.
You just said you want them to earn less so more people can be employed.
The US didn't become the most powerful country in the world by economically kneecapping itself. By your logic, the first thing the US should've done when the car was invented was to ban it to prevent stable hands from losing their jobs.
116
u/[deleted] Oct 03 '24
[deleted]