Quote:
Originally Posted by heehaww
I wasn't even talking about restricting freedoms. Someone ITT was saying we should pay poor people to produce more babies so that they can help in the labor force. Meanwhile we're about to have millions of people losing their jobs to machines.
But I'm not automatically opposed to a restriction on freedom. What good are freedoms if you're shoulder to shoulder with everyone and barely have anything to eat?
So you don't care about people's freedom to have as many kids as they want, since you are trying to curb population growth?
You realize that when machines take over 1m jobs, the economy has expanded and the total number of jobs also goes up, right? I mean you can make a similar argument about bigger trucks or more powerful trains, bigger airplanes that carry more passengers/cargo, etc. if you consider the amount of stuff they produce as static, all those things cost jobs, but in reality people continue to consume more, do more, create more products, create new jobs. I mean, you get that, right? Right?