Those workers don’t have direct access to profits. That’s how capitalism works. The money isn’t split between them. It goes to the owners pockets. That’s why AI is a thing.
I know that. My point wasn’t that automation will make companies behave differently, but that the maximum demand that can be forced upon a business by things like unions is increased if the pool of money they can demand from before the business can’t operate anymore is larger. What I said is applicable for economic systems beyond capitalism, for that matter, since it’s just a more specific way of saying that the average person can theoretically have more things when the average number of things made per person increases.
Oh ok. So we’re just fantasizing. Yeah I’d like gulliotines with billionaire names on them.
What do you think the percentage of companies with ‘things like unions’ are? Do you think companies with the resources to deploy AI like this have unions?
Edit: You’re literally describing trickle down economics. How’s that going for you?
I dont know the economic stats on what percentage of companies have unions, but theyre not exactly non-existent, I know people that work unionized jobs, a place I used to work for had one (not that I saw it do much, but I wasnt there that long), and the business I work for has them for some of the countries it operates in (mainly ones in Europe I think). They might not exactly be the norm in the US right now, but they’re not some fantasy either. And I would imagine most companies with one have the resources to deploy something like this if they have a use case where it would actually make any sense to. Maybe not train a leading AI model from scratch given the expense numbers I keep seeing reported on that, but that doesnt sound like what this kind of application requires.
Those workers don’t have direct access to profits. That’s how capitalism works. The money isn’t split between them. It goes to the owners pockets. That’s why AI is a thing.
I know that. My point wasn’t that automation will make companies behave differently, but that the maximum demand that can be forced upon a business by things like unions is increased if the pool of money they can demand from before the business can’t operate anymore is larger. What I said is applicable for economic systems beyond capitalism, for that matter, since it’s just a more specific way of saying that the average person can theoretically have more things when the average number of things made per person increases.
Oh ok. So we’re just fantasizing. Yeah I’d like gulliotines with billionaire names on them.
What do you think the percentage of companies with ‘things like unions’ are? Do you think companies with the resources to deploy AI like this have unions?
Edit: You’re literally describing trickle down economics. How’s that going for you?
I dont know the economic stats on what percentage of companies have unions, but theyre not exactly non-existent, I know people that work unionized jobs, a place I used to work for had one (not that I saw it do much, but I wasnt there that long), and the business I work for has them for some of the countries it operates in (mainly ones in Europe I think). They might not exactly be the norm in the US right now, but they’re not some fantasy either. And I would imagine most companies with one have the resources to deploy something like this if they have a use case where it would actually make any sense to. Maybe not train a leading AI model from scratch given the expense numbers I keep seeing reported on that, but that doesnt sound like what this kind of application requires.