upvote
Yes, because people are consumers, horses are not.

Jobs are a mean to make people consumers, not the only mean, but a significant one.

The ability to create more economic activity require both sides to catch up, so we will find a way to do so.

reply
The amount of consumption is largely dependent on income level. There's a recent study from Moody's that says that in the US, the top 10% income bracket now accounts for roughly half of consumer spending. As wealth inequality continues to worsen, it makes more and more sense to solely target high earners because you make the same or more as selling higher amounts of lower priced product but with less overhead.
reply
This sounds like you are deriving an is from an ought.

Is it not conceivable that we won't find a way to do so, and that consumption and economic activity will ultimately decline?

reply
Everyone wants seniors, nobody wants to train juniors.

I imagine this is gonna continue to be true, except that "everyone wants consumers, nobody wants to employ people".

reply
Your statement makes it seem like we had no problem losing professions to automation. I'd argue this isn't true.

There are plenty of poeple who have inadequate work the world over because there isn't enough paid work to do, and most professions are servicing wants, not needs, so the demand is very elastic, with many people now multi talented and still not making ends meet.

reply
I know it's been talked to death already, but the fact that the video is so wrong on self-driving cars is mind-blowing. We can rationalize post-fact as much as we want - still it is shocking that popular belief never expected language models before self driving.
reply
Popular belief never took the regulatory obstacles to self-driving cars seriously. If LLMs required insurance to use, they also wouldn't be available in public yet.
reply
1. There are no rules of economics. Economists attempt to understand things that happen and use that understanding to predict future events, but frankly there’s not a lot of consensus.

2. Economics is a function of human behavior, not horse behavior. Economics is about coordinating human effort. Humans make economics, horses don’t. When economics change in a way that is bad for horses, the horses have no recourse. When economics change in a way that is bad for humans, the affected humans seek to change things.

reply
The fallacy here is that horses were never employees!

They were tools that people used to get things done.

They got replaced by better tools. Just like typewriters got replaced by computers and printers.

reply
> They were tools that people used to get things done.

This is exactly the perspective many executives have of their employees.

reply
Employees are just another way to get things done. Ripe for disruption!
reply