🚀 go-pugleaf

c2xrib@kocrsv01.delcoelect.com (rex i beard) writes:
>[...] today and for the foreseeable future we need more than "two guys
>in a garage" for the computer industry. We *need* all those farmers.
>and we *need* all the people to build cars. *Some* of them can be replaced
>by mechanization. But I ask you, "Why aren't they replaced right now?
>The answer, It costs *more* to mechanize these jobs than it costs to
>have people doing them. The reason we don't have elevator operators all
>over is because human beings are valuable and they are better used some
>place else.

I'd turn your argument around and say that it costs *less* to have a person
do the jobs than it does to mechanize them.  This restatement means the same
thing on the surface, but it emphasizes that if people become more expensive
you'd be better off mechanizing.  As people become more costly (NOT necessarily
"more valuable") then more jobs will go the way of the elevator operator.
If "they are better used someplace else" then it's a supply-and-demand kind
of situation.  If you want more people to apply, offer more money.  At some
point, you're better off with fewer people and more technology.  The scarcity
of people doesn't prevent you from producing something that people will pay
for.

= === ===   === = = =   === === === === =   = === =   = = ===   = = === =
Alan Anderson                               | Ignorance can be fixed,
(I speak AT, not FOR, Delco Electronics)    | but stupidity is permanent.