We already know that a slave economy raises all non-slave boats.
The problem, economically, was that there were problems with the slave stock that were human in nature. Like pregnancy, slave-owner abuses over “insubordination,” as well as slave-owner sexual preferences over the wife unit… The list goes on.
Even if all that could be managed in purely economic terms, you still had the other problem that would never go away: morality and good will.
In that whole swath of rich history, morality won the day. Humanity, won the day. With many lines of opposition, the day finally came where, the clear economic benefit of owning human slaves got outweighed by a combination of industrial revolution, and morality, where the former gave strength to the latter to finally make a stand.
In other words, it was industry and the demonstration of what could be done by machinery and factories and picked, trained, skilled labor—who were paid a market wage—that got people to get all moral about slavery, finally.
So it’s not perfect.
But it’s still history.
While we still never ever hear the end of the injustice by descendants who never felt it, but figure themselves entitled—in a new context—anyway, it’s soon going to be superseded by a new class of slaves made of metal, and controlled by electronics and servo motors (electro-hydraulics for the big shit).
How far off from a brick layer, to a housemaid? Then, a chauffeur? Yard bitch?
And then, what’s next?
At this point, it’s humans still creating tools, but in essentials, isn’t it what’s been going on since the advent of civilization 10,000 years ago? Innovation is constant and unending, with a dual goal: save time and human labor, achieve more efficiency; which, in economies, means more dollars—if you are marketing what you produce. It also means more wealth and more leisure time, and that’s the Big Worry, as you’ll see.
Idle hands are the Devil’s playhouse, or something like that….
Humans make tools. Sometimes they make them to save themselves of labor or get more out of their labor. Sometimes they make them to relieve themselves of paying another human for their labor, since a machine comes with more predictable results and costs are more fixed.
…I’ve been self-employed since 1992. I sometimes think there are a lot of people who just can’t imagine a life where you just go it alone, without a paycheck. Who do you think signs paychecks? Well, people like me, who’s been self-employed since 1992. There were times I signed paychecks totaling $200k per month. But, now, I’d probably rather lease a “slave” at a fixed monthly cost of like $300-500, no healthcare other than standard maintenance, and no retirement (goes to the scrap heap when it’s done or obsolete).
Where do you think paychecks come from? Do they fall out of the sky? Why can’t you sign them too? And if you could, then you’d be able to lease 4 bots at the price of one entitled female, who might sue you, who thinks she’s a 10.0.
This isn’t rocket science now, nor is it going to be.
Why can’t you lease a robot, once they come? And what is materially different, that you couldn’t possibly use it to help you generate values you can trade with other humans in a human-economy of value exchange?
Do you imagine the coming robots that will be in place because minimum wage laws have made them cheaper, are going to suddenly take over the economic world?
…For months and I guess at least a couple of years, I have been reading various hand-wringing pieces from various intellectuals and wisdom gurus, where, we’re in the shit, because robotics and artificial intelligence are going to render all jobs—except theirs—obsolete.
I call it Neo-Ludditism.
In the plainest terms, humans create tools, then they trade tools. Then, they trade the products of their tools.
Humans are tool makers and traders. Between bouts creating tools to trade, they use them to create values and trade those, too.
Who’s going to buy all these robots and the AI, and with what?
It’s really easy to fuck with these hand-wringers, once you focus on essentials and ask pointed questions about the economies that buy all this futuristic utopianism. Are you telling me you’re going to develop, produce it, and then give it away? Who’s going to maintain it, and upgrade it? What, you don’t want to sell a 2.0 version?
Is that how Henry Ford saw getting two cars into every garage? Do you you wonder if there weren’t the same sort of “futurists” around at the time, wringing hands about how many people would be job upheaved by the advent of the automobile?
Your cars in the future will be robots themselves. They’ll talk to all the other robots, negotiate and collaborate, and you’ll race down the freeway at 70 mph with 2′ separation because it’s not really a hard problem if you take stupid brake and red-light humans and and the human traffic-jam cascade out of the equation.
My point is crazy simple. Humans have always made tools to help them do more with less, and while human slavery was an immoral digression, it nonetheless provides insights into what’s possible with quasi-intelligent robotics. So far, the tools humans have made have essentially done that—do more with less—and far from ever shutting out the human race, have instead offered it it more opportunity at literally every turn.
Yet, today, we have hand-wringing, Neo-Luddites, endeavoring to make you afraid and very afraid, with each contracted paid piece they write for $10-20K or more in each publication you see it.
They are getting paid to scare you, are willing to do it, and it’s an easy sell for a typical whore.
Don’t fall for it. Brightest future is always ahead. It’s simple human nature.