Christophe wrote:Yes I dared not say so directly!
But there are still (hopefully) a limit to the destruction of human activity must still be able to find customers ...
May be why the low income returned to the charge now? Without that policy openly admit the real reasons ...
The universal income is just an adjustment maneuver allowing the system to continue to exist, and those for two reasons:
1) As you mentioned we must consume if the current economy collapses.
2) If a certain level of non-employment is reached, there is a real risk of social implosion.
The UK has come to "plug" its two issues.
The problem is today that has the time, most politicians, business leaders and other decision makers are still convinced that automation creates more jobs than it destroys (20 / 30 years late!).
This assertion was accurate in for over a century: new technology brought new jobs without (too *) destroy old. The balance was then clear to the
"more machines".
But it was not counting on the contribution of IT (early 90 years) and the emergence of intelligent system (end 2000).
The era of
big data should do the cleaning in many companies, in particular because of
phenomenon of monopolization ** one hand and instability of economic markets on the other.
*The
Luddites had at the time (early 1800) lead to violent clashes between artisans and manufacturers.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddisme** The economic monopolies logic for merging into ever larger entities for an internal reorganization, which resulted in mass layoffs, to optimize performance ....
Automation is clearly their objectives.
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.