Spencer Greenberg Wealth creation is not zero sum. If you become...
· Comment — Archer T. Ships replied to his own comment. · View on Facebook · Markdown source
Spencer Greenberg Wealth creation is not zero sum. If you become wealthier, it doesn't mean that someone else becomes poorer. Everyone can become wealthier simultaneously. Most of my ancestors were farmers in 1929 (as was 26% of the labor force). Nowadays, less than 2% are farmers. Yet food is more abundant and cheaper than ever (in terms of hours of labor required to buy it). Unemployment hovers around 4.5%, despite the fact that so many farm jobs have been "lost". And the median personal income in 2023 was $45 K vs $13 K in 1929 (constant 2024 dollars). Why didn't people become impoverished? After all, didn't 93% of farmers lose their jobs to machines? As technological advances made farming more efficient, fewer farm workers were needed, it's true. But as food became cheaper, more money was available to spend on other goods and services. For example, only wealthy women could afford getting their nails done in 1929. As food (and other goods) became cheaper, more women had enough money to get their nails done regularly. And there were more women with free time to work in nail salons. We also created goods that previously didn't exist at all (jet aircraft, cell phones, internet, etc). "Poor" people in the US today enjoy wealth that was unavailable--at all--to rich people in the 1920's. Economic principles don't change just because AI/robotic technology improves. As robots produce goods more efficiently, that will free up time and money for other goods / services. Humans will both consume and provide many of those new services.