Why are conservatives opposed to the idea of increasing welfare as automation increases? What's the alternative?

It's simply false that automation simply moves jobs around, it destroys jobs. Yes, when people automate jobs, you need people to work on the robot. But if you needed the same amount of people to work on the robot as people who did the robot's job, then making the robot would be pointless in the first... show more It's simply false that automation simply moves jobs around, it destroys jobs.

Yes, when people automate jobs, you need people to work on the robot. But if you needed the same amount of people to work on the robot as people who did the robot's job, then making the robot would be pointless in the first place!

The whole POINT of automation is that it requires less workers. At the end of the day, you end up with less jobs.

As things become more and more automated, we have less and less jobs. As robots continue to get more and more advanced, more and more difficult jobs will be automated away.

This will lead to massive unemployment and simply not enough jobs for every person.

The benefit to automation is since it's more efficient, it produces way more wealth, so corporations get way wealthier.

There's only two solutions to this I see:

1. Since more wealth is produced, that means greater tax revenue, so we could redistribute that money to help people who cannot get a job.

2. Let people just die off who weren't lucky enough to be born in the right wealthy family who owns the robots.

Simply put, saying "get a job moocher!" is NOT a valid response when he get to the inevitable future in which there simply WILL NOT BE ENOUGH JOBS.
Update: Genociding people to reduce the population... huh, can't say I expected that argument.
15 answers 15