We are doing multiple productive things. Zillions of them.

They are like 50 companies making robots right now that will soon do a lot of work.

There are advances in many fields.

Headlines are dominated by something else, the 'news' is not a good reflection of reality.

What about the workers that will be eventually replaced by said robots? You think they're just going to get free money to exist? Most likely they'll end up in the private prison system or in institutions while the corporations pocket all of the savings. Things are a lot more complicated than they seem I think...

▲

bluegatty 4 hours ago | parent [-]

95% of us used to labour as serfs on farms. 4.5% were technical trades. 0.5% noble class, 0.01% high elite.

The industrial revolution moved almost 95% of people away from direct agrarian labour.

We'll find ways.

It won't be pretty in some cases, but we'll figure it out.

▲

westmeal 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I hope you're right but I think it won't be pretty in all cases. It's easy to forget the industrial revolution wasn't entirely positive for common people or for that matter the environment.

	▲	bluegatty 3 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That's upside down. The industrial revolution was more beneficial for 'common people' than it was for anyone else. The 'industrial revolution' upended the ancien regime of basically feudal order. For the fist time, it created actual 'surplus' in the economy, and that surplus went into all sorts of things: education, leisure, the arts, medicine, travel. The very concept of 'working people' taking a vacation - very modern idea. Then that broke through into basic real emancipation, universal suffrage. Then medicine, healthcare, social services etc. All of that only happens because of elevated productivity that's not captured by a passive elite. The game is different now for sure, but there's almost no argument that can be made for 'less surplus'. It's almost like saying 'what if energy were free, that would be bad'. No - it would mostly be good. Well figure it out