[extropy-chat] 'Unskilled jobs to go in 10 years'

[Damien Broderick]

At 03:53 PM 11/11/2004 -0800, Hal asks:

>Why is it acceptable for your
>neighbor to lose his job if it is done better by a machine, which takes
>no pleasure in its accomplishment; but unacceptable if the job is taken
>by a poor person who is greatly benefited as a result?

Obviously it's *not* acceptable in either case unless provisions are put in 
place to enable the neighbor's transition to a new job (if such exists or 
is even possible--and it won't be possible if automation/nanotech is 
broadly effective or once the whole world is job-leveled) or to obtain some 
of the benefits of the new arrangements (by being a stakeholder, say; 
ideally in many different enterprises--which, in the limit, might be done 
efficiently via enlightened government, or co-ops, or the Mafia, or 
churches, or the Extropy Investment Fund, whatever).

Damien Broderick