Does greater automation mean capital holders will continue to win bigger and bigger?

David and I kind of touched on this topic here: http://www.politicalfray.com/showthread.php?t=3443


Today, Krugman posted about something similar (I usually wouldn't link to him because of all the partisan bs [this post is no different] but the point is good so please bear with me on that): http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/08/rise-of-the-robots/

I think it is an interesting question, especially with its implications on the economy and how future policy should be set. Any comments?

tecoyah said:

Yes...automation has been, and will be the future of manufacturing. Yet, there are many humans required to create the computer, machinery, code, and on and on...I do not see robotics as the end of labor. It has certainly changed the game, but not replaced it.

Click to expand...

I think that is a different topic than what I was trying to get at. My question here was whether capital owners will find it easier and easier to make money and get richer while unskilled labor basically gets squeezed out.

Even with the necessity of skilled labor (which presumably only exists until complete AI is achieved), everyone probably can't become skilled- which is another issue. Or maybe this is just fruitless worrying like what was common leading up to and through the industrial revolution. We shall see.

Some very good commentary here, especially in the comments: http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worth...d-technical-change-vs-low-interest-rates.html