Unemployment could be solved tomorrow if we banned large trucks and mandated all goods be transported in little 3wheel delivery vans like they have in little Italian towns. But that would be bad for society as the price of everything skyrocketed to cover the inefficient delivery. Or we could tear down power stations and make people carry buckets of water up a hill to run a hydro electric plant. These are absurd scenarios yet illustrate the reverse of the problem.

Technology happens, and it is generally good for humanity. Only a pessimist can looks at the enormous progress made in productivity through automation, and then confidently declare that from this point forwards, things can only get worse.

Entirely new businesses requiring lots of people are yet to be created. Detroit didn't happen 'just at the right time', Detroit happened precisely because it could - labor was freed up from producing the food supply, and disposable income increased because the cost of food dropped through automation.

It might be uncomfortable - change always is - but the alternatives are horrifying, like regulating new tech away and forcing people to keep those jobs. I for one never want someone metaphorically carrying a bucket of water up a hill for me so I can feel superior about makign sure they are still employed.

I'm sorry, but where did this increased purchasing power come from? The people who traded their middle class job for slinging burgers? The purchasing power of the vast majority in the US has gone down over the last 60 years.

I'm not against automation. It is inevitable. But let's not pretend like it is just as inevitable that everything will work itself out.

The only concrete thing mentioned is that it might be time to re-evaluate social policies. Which honestly makes a LOT of sense.

Only someone who can't think outside of the current social framework would assume that means we try to lock things down the way they are.

Lets think about some other possibilities:

-Free basic housing (would go a long way towards giving impoverished people the flexibility to move where they need to be to work whatever new jobs pop up)

-Pay people to exercise (yes, I'm serious, we could reduce healthcare costs and several studies show that people who exercise regularly perform better in mental tasks. The same tasks that are likely to become more in demand)

-Provide a basic income (Enough money to allow single parents to reliably put food on the table for their kids and buy simple modest luxuries. This still allows those who want more to climb the social ladder, but doesn't completely screw those who by nature or circumstance are not as equipped to do so)

-Invest heavily in community centers and activities (people are considerably less likely to suffer depression if they attend more community events. Active participation in the community makes democracy more effective)

-Any number of other ideas that challenge our current pre-conceptions of how we should run our society.

-------------------

"Only a pessimist can looks at the enormous progress made in productivity through automation, and then confidently declare that from this point forwards, things can only get worse"

This is true, in general technological advances have benefited society, but unequal wealth distribution has almost always hurt it.

Right now automation and capitalization allow those with the resources to become more and more wealthy, and those without resources are increasingly unable to get a foot in the door. Technology isn't the problem, unequal wealth IS. The obvious answer to this is a change in social policy. But like you said: "It might be uncomfortable - change always is".

This will only be true when we're nearing singularity, and that IMHO won't happen for centuries yet. So there's still time to go.