Bill Gates says a 3-day work week where ‘machines can make all the food and stuff’ isn’t a bad idea::“A society where you only have to work three days a week, that’s probably OK,” Bill Gates said.

  • @1984@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    59
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think it’s unavoidable that humans won’t have enough work in the future since more and more stuff get automated.

    I also think the evil people at the top knows this and are no strangers to starting wars to get rid of millions of people, when there is no capitalistic benefit for them to exist.

    • Cethin
      link
      fedilink
      English
      141 year ago

      Their goal isn’t to get rid of people. It’s to have more people. That’s why abortion band and stuff are pushed. More people in this system means more people trading their lives to give profit to the owners. Unless there’s an actual threat of revolution, more people is useful to them.

      • @1984@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yeah but my point is, more people may not mean more profits in the future. Depends on what can be automated.

        So basically im saying there are two ways to increase profits, either reduce costs (salaries) or increase sales. It’s possible that in the future, the equation becomes that it’s possible to reduce costs very very much by reducing employees to almost nothing, but someone needs to buy the products for it to be a profit, I agree.

        It just seems so primitive what we are doing now. We should build societies where humans are happy, but capitalism is the opposite, and other systems seem to suck also.

        Those star trek societies are only possible because they can generate items from thin air…

        • Cethin
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The “other systems” historically have been sabotaged. For example, Cuba had basically no ability to trade externally because the US wanted them destroyed. They’ve been fairly successful despite this though.

          For another example, the Guatemala coup occurred when a new democracy formed and elected a leftist who destributed land to the poor and implemented a minimum wage. The United Fruit Company (Chiquita now) was using the land and cheap labor for their banana empire, so they lobbied to have the US overthrow them. They did, and Guatemala ended up with a dictatorship, which also genocided the natives while the US did nothing to stop them.

          There are plenty of other options. Capitalists are just scared of them, so they push the myth they always fail. Instead they fail because they kill them.

          • @1984@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            41 year ago

            Yeah it makes sense. They want to protect what they have built now, all based on interest rates and everyone borrowing money they have to pay back their entire lives by working.

      • @jaybone@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        41 year ago

        And more competitions for resources. Which means the owners of those resources (landlords, corporations) can drive up the prices. Kill off all the poors and then there’s no demand to rent your apartments or buy your shit. No demand drives prices down and therefore profit down.

    • @Blapoo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      I wonder what happens when the work is done and all jobs are successfully automated away. It makes very little sense how a stable world could exist where 10 guys own EVERYTHING.