Originally posted by monochrome Disruptive, deflationary change. Thousands of workers will go on unemployment and will be unable to buy basic things, which will put more people out of work - which will ..... well, you get the point.
That is the Luddite argument. When Ned Ludd destroyed the mechanical knitting machines that were going to put textile workers out of a job, that is what he argued.
Cameras put a lot of portrait painters out of business. If we destroy all the cameras we can restore the portrait painting business. Wages for skilled painters will go way up. Digital cameras are even worse than film cameras because they made photography even cheaper and more accessible for people with less money.
We should go back to making everything by hand! Screw automation and machines. We can all get minimum wage jobs then. Destroy the internet!!! It has destroyed wages for millions of people.
Advances in technology have made us richer and while low paying jobs have been lost, new higher paying jobs are created. Someone has to design and build these machines. Someone has to write the software that controls these machines. Someone has to fix/maintain/install these machines. Smartphones destroyed the pay phone industry, but they also created thousands more jobs writing applications and designing support technology that never existed before. Better paying jobs.
I was in grad school with a guy who would have been a 3rd generation textile worker at a mill owned by Russell Athletic, but his father had the foresight to make him to go to college. He got his BA in textile engineering and the mill closed 3 months before he graduated. He ended up going to get his PhD in Economics.
Anything that empowers people to be more productive and generates less waste or consumes less resources is a good thing for society.