| ▲ | gruez 3 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
>The best (short-term) case is that they become eternal parasites. Producing a product that delivers value and people are willing to pay for makes you a "parasite"? Sure, it might cause massive disruptions to the labor market, but that's mostly orthogonal to whether it's a "parasite" or not. Mechanized farming has almost wiped out agricultural employment (compared to pre-industrial levels), but that doesn't make tractor manufacturers or fertilizer companies "parasites" | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | chowells 38 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
No, that's actually more destructive in the short term. That was the OP's point. If they actually become something effective, they will utterly destroy the economy. If they fail, they will drag the economy down around them as they go. The least destructive possible outcome is becoming eternal parasites. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | skulk 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
tractor manufacturers or fertilizer companies didn't suck down the work of generations of predecessors in a questionably-legal fashion only to turn around and sell a heavily discounted version of that back to them. I'm not sure where "parasite" becomes appropriate, but your analogy is poor. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tverbeure 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Your analogy would be less terrible if mechanized farming took the fruits of traditional farmers and repackaged it. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||