What do you mean by “jobs that people need”. We keep getting these generic claims that automation is destined to be some kind of social disaster yet we’ve had a history of technological developments and inventions which have mechanised and automated previously manual labour, right through from the move from hunter-gathering to farming. Each of those have led to significant societal shifts but they’ve all been ultimately managed and accommodated. On what basis are you suggesting the next example will be any different?
Increased reliance on automation is not an either/or dichotomy, but it does have ramifications that can be negative, such as putting some people out of work, although it does also create new jobs as well.
Here in the States, economists well know that automation has changed the dynamics with our work force, with some being positive but some being negative. It's a double-edged sword.
Therefore, it's how we handle the problems that we inadvertently create that's important, and one negative by-product that we're seeing is that it creates problems for those who don't have the education to move forward, thus causing a split in the middle class with some going down, plus leaving the lower class in the dust as well.
And one by-product of that is the disparity of income within our society whereas the wealthier are really benefiting while the poor and lower middle class is being left in the dust. Wide disparities of income tend to make society less stable, and is considered to be one of the greatest threats to any society as was testified to in Congress back at the beginning of the Great Recession by Alan Greenspan, who said that this was the single greatest threat to our society.
