Robots won't steal all jobs because human needs are endless

I recently had a discussion with Brett Scott on Twitter about machines taking over jobs in which he stated that:

One reason why companies like to replace service staff with self-service interfaces is that this strips away all non-commercial interaction

Brett Scott (@Suitpossum) 25 juli 2017

I felt that was a good thing because I don't go to a store for non-commercial interactions, I have those plenty, plus there is really very little emotional value in someone handing me a hamburger and wishing me a nice day.

Brett however seemed to fear it would create emptiness and inequality, which is a commonly held believe.

I think Rosie, the hamburger cashier, could be out having all sorts of valuable non-commercial interactions if we let machines take over her job. Here is the reason why:

1. Increased production equals increased prosperity
2. Human needs are endless

Not so long ago 95% of all people on earth where sweaty farmers carrying heavy tools over large fields. Then at one moment on a sunny afternoon someone said 'Bruh, let's have steam engines and shit and, like, not do all this, but have those machines do it for us!' and so they did. And because of that genius on that sunny afternoon employment in agriculture is now less than 3% worldwide.

Now did the other 92% go out of jobs? No, silly you, because human needs are endless. Now that the supply of nutrients was so large, the price of nutrients became so low that people started trading it for the silliest of things like being a social media influencer.

There is no reason that people will stop wanting stuff from other people. When production and thus wealth increases the silliness of what will get you paid grows linearly.

I love people and I dont want them to do scripted insincere things.

Joey van Koningsbruggen (@Koningsbruggen) 25 juli 2017