Are those 'terrible' machines really putting those people out of work? Or are they getting rid of a really dull job that we shouldn't be torturing people with?
If you have a job in your department that can't be done by a Democrat, then abolish the job.
Will somebody please tell me what they do with all the Vice-Presidents a bank has? Why the United States is the biggest business institution in the world, and they got only one Vice-President and nobody has ever found anything for him to do.
Contemporary industrial society is now characterised more than ever by "the need for stupefying work where it is no longer a real necessity."
Any job that can be done by an illiterate can be done by a machine.
What happens if you're the guy who's been on the show ten years and is highly paid but they have nothing for you to do is that they bring in other people, and you become a supporting character to those people.
Even for the people in the bank into which the other banks are merging, they also have a lot of apprehension. There is always an apprehension that opportunities will go down. There are apprehensions of displacement. Many of these apprehensions are unfounded.
Growth should take care of the fear of job losses. People will be challenged to do different things. For people who are not up to it, purely based on objective assessment, that's a different issue, which, you do it anyway.
