If as many jobs as possible get automated, how would the economy

Whoever owns the machines receives the profits and decides how the money is spent thus what the economy should aim for.

Manufacturing jobs disappear, service jobs appear. There is this old thinking that only factories create value, value is only created when we turn raw materials into products, so in this line of thought when those jobs are automated people can't create value anymore.

Lets put this in perspective, in 18th century one of the first economic schools called Physiocracy started in France, the main tenant of their school was that value can only be truly created in agriculture, manufacturing only turned one material into another but didn't create shit, so no value was created.

My guess is that when we fully automate most manufacturing jobs, and completely move to a service based economy, the assumption that we need millions of manufacturing jobs so people can create value will be so absurd to us as the assumption of the physiocrats that only people working in agriculture could create value.

>>1653560
>Manufacturing jobs disappear, service jobs appear.

But what about machine learning and AI? It could perform a lot of knowledge-based service jobs.
Nevertheless, how could the demand for those service jobs increase?

>>1653575

>but what about it could perform knowledge based nevertheless

You're mixing different concepts with the expectation of a single outcume which is confusing.

"demand for those jobs increase"

The objective is efficiency, not full employment. Most people self-identify with their jobs, the mind-numbing ones that can be automated will be deprecated from a simple evolutive standpoint. Most people get deluded into these mind-numbing jobs without the intrinsically innate ethos to pursue them sincerely and passionately, alienated from the fetishization of goods, not realizing they've become a commodity in the first place.

File: 1437226827460.jpg (38KB, 553x720px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 553x720px

>>1653517
the tech advances so fucking fast in the past 10 years, nobody knows where the fuck we are in 15 years. RIP i guess for 99% of population

File: trump_flicker_face_yess.jpg (51KB, 620x412px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 620x412px

>tfw get paid 17 a hour to watch a robot run changing out the core every 2 hours to not at all depending on the size.

Thanks Donald trump

>>1654657
These sentences has been in magazines and newspapers since the 40s. Most of the jobs that existed 50 years don't exist today. 50% of the jobs today won't exist 50 years from now. Doesn't mean 50% of jobs will be gone. They will just change. Instead of riding horses and delivering mail, they started operating trains or building rail systems, Instead of having people manually pack product from extrusion lines, they have a robot that does it with an operator that get's paid twice as much, an extrusion tech, and maintenance tech.

>>1654702
>Instead of having people manually pack product from extrusion lines, they have a robot that does it with an operator that get's paid twice as much, an extrusion tech, and maintenance tech.

I understand your point, but wouldn't the general number of jobs decrease? It can't be that every worker becomes an operator or programmer, can't it?

File: Elysium_Poster.jpg (20KB, 259x383px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 259x383px

>>1653517
I

I work in a food factory. We have quite a bit of automated machinery, robots that fill and weigh bags of product, build boxes, package, etc.. you cannot believe how often they fuck up and spaz out, and we have to do it manually. These are machines that they paid 15 million for, and they barely work half the time. And introducing product to the line to be processed will never be automated, due to how the factory is set up (no way to do it without major remodeling of the building). Also, there is always at least one person checking product at each stage for foreign material and quality, since things still get by the multiple optical sorters, filters, and screens. They may be able to reduce the number of people, but there will always have to be some kind of human workforce.

>>1654782
>operator
When we automated our factory, each line went from requiring 1.5 packers and 1 operators. We reduced it to just needing an operator but we also needed extrusion techs, more maintenance techs, etc. So the piss poor jobs were replaced by higher paying more skilled jobs. But we were able to put out product faster and more efficient.

I'm not saying every job, but I'm just saying automation creates higher paying jobs because the skills required to operate, maintain, build, the logistics, the developers, etc. If you aren't willing to pick up new skills (which is basically on the job training) then I don't feel sorry for you one bit being unemployed. We have literal cross eyed inbred retards getting paid $18/hour to make sure air pressure and tension is good while standing there for 12 hours picking their nose or falling asleep while they wait 2 hours (or some products take up to 72 hours) before they need to change anything out manually. Some shifts we just stand there all day or night complaining to the material handlers (fork lift operators) about how bad our feet hurt every time they ride by.

>programmer
Most jobs right now are being replaced by programmers. The technology that replaced you created jobs. The manufactures that make the technology created jobs. The logistics created jobs. The maintenance and repair created jobs. Etc.