LordOfTheManor
Pro
It isn't fundamentally different, because today you can still move to other fields. Also mechanization put people in fields where they were outperformed and largely put them in fields where they still were outperformed but they put them in control or trained them how to use the machinary. Same principle in play here.
What you are talking about now isn't seriously challenging anything, there is literally no difference in what is happening now and what happened then. Same process occuring more advanced machinary.
Automated will hit underdeveloped countries, when it makes financial sense to do so. As long as its cheaper to hire more people and continue along the status quo than it is to make the switch, there is no monetary gain to make from making the switch. This applies for domestic producers and international producers that go to these countries, its a cost benefit trade off whether to make the jump
They can't move to other fields if that field is also affected. Previously you've said the busboy should just become a bricklayer, then I posted a video of a bricklaying machine, which is 3 times more effective than the fastest bricklayer. This makes me believe our disagreement stems from the fact that you don't see the extent of this change.
You're not addressing my point - if a machine works 3 times faster than an average worker, it's likely financially beneficial for a global product-based company to make that switch. More product is being made, faster
Something not being discussed...what happens when prisons expand their contracts with industries and our manufacturing, call centers, construction sites, maybe everything is manned by prisoners? I guess everyone else van compete to be co's or cops huh?