Why Automation Will NOT Destroy Jobs: Jason Unruhe Debunked

In this video on why automation will not destroy jobs, I cover the argument for the demand for consumers as well as on scarcity. Jason Unruhe doesn't comprehend why with the market ever changing that it isn't a case that automation would just wipe out the labour force and there would be no human labour left.

He doesn't seem to comprehend that if it weren't for the people, the automation would not exist. This argument and myth has been around for more than a century, the same claims about the industrial revolution, but if that were the case during that most innovative time period, how come thousands, upon thousands more jobs were created than that of what was lost?

It's like I have explained before, of course jobs would be lost from the agrarian economy, this is because they transferred across to the industrialised economy working in factories, it's no different to what happened over a 100 year time period from the 1870s to 1970s where Britain was on a long transitional time period moving away from the manufacturing-driven based economy to the consumer-driven based economy.

Jason Unruhe just makes the baseless assumption that the technology will then grow to a point it will be unstoppable, but as has been seen from the past, when certain A.I. robots have come out and said wrong things they found "offensive" like Sophia, they reprogrammed it, it's almost controlled in many regards. I would imagine it would be much similar to that of self-driving cars.

Like I have questioned, who will regulate the regulators? Just like who will regulate the automation, and so long as there is a demand from consumers, innovation and entrepreneurship, there will always be a demand. As I pointed out, when one part of the market becomes highly productive, it frees up resources and labour in other parts of the economy. The market is ever changing.