• Knightfox@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah, but it’s cyclical. You need people to buy product, but people need money to buy product. Yeah, the ultra wealthy will have money, but you can get more money from 10 million people buying something for $10 than from 10 people buying something for $100,000.

      If you get rid of the jobs then people don’t have money so who will buy [PRODUCT]?

      You could have 10 trillion people on the earth, but if you only have 3 billion jobs the issue isn’t population. You could argue that 3 billion jobs support up to 15 billion people, but the issue still isn’t the population at that point, it’s the number of jobs.

      • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        the last paragraph is were capitalism fails, and where socialism works. 3 billion jobs can support 15 billion people, but that would mean giving the fruits of that labor to those people who have no jobs. This is distributing the product of the labor force to everyone, so everyone can live, that is socialism. If you say ok, let’s just have 3 billion people, one per job, then you aren’t producing for 15 billion, and now the job pool will shrink accordingly.

        So, if/when machines come to a point where one, basic, job creates enough GDP to support a massive amount of people, then you need the populace to own the means of that production.