Quote from: Rassah on December 31, 2013, 06:54:47 AM

Quote from: giantdragon on December 31, 2013, 03:57:42 AM

Quote from: Rassah on December 30, 2013, 11:02:13 PM

Sold to whom? If robots end up making it so that no one can afford to pay for anything, then robots are not the most profitable option, is it.

Already discussed in another thread - robots don't require health insurance, social security taxes, can work 24/7 in cold dark rooms therefore at some point they will be cheaper than human workers no matter how low wage they receive.

No no, I meant, if I was in a capitalist system, why would I make robots and things if there is no one who is able to afford those robots and things because they don't have a job or make too little money?
At some point this will have to hit some equilibrium, where I don't make any robots, or robots that can make things, if no one can afford those things. Actually, that's pretty much the constant equilibrium in capitalism: you only make things people can buy. And if the things you make put people out of a job, and they can no longer buy your stuff, well, then you stop making those things. It's like the bitcoin mining difficulty. You keep adding more hardware and keep mining until difficulty makes it unprofitable, and then you just sit around and wait until difficulty comes down, or price and profit margin goes up.

It's just like cars

Because you can drive it doesn't make it where large scale shipments disappeared Robots like cars would just make work easier and better