Ask Lemmy

26932 readers

2071 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected]

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

244

Where are all those price cuts thanks to AI implementation m (self.asklemmy)

submitted 8 months ago by filister to c/asklemmy

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

So many companies cut their workforce as much as 10-15% citing that those jobs can be fully automated by the use of AI but I am still waiting to see any meaningful price cuts of their products from the said companies, etc.

Otherwise this will mean that they are doing this just to increase their profit margins and please their shareholders and don't care about their customers or workforce.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 25 points 8 months ago (2 children)

If you were to follow Adam Smith to the letter, it will Eventually® get cheaper: lower production cost leads to increased supply, and unemployment leads to decreased demand. Both forcing the prices down.

In practice, though, there are at least two problems with this reasoning:

The hand of the market has Parkinson's. Sure, it might "eventually" put things in place, but before that the hand will keep shaking things up and down, while people still need to live.
Smithsonian supply and demand assumes an infinitely competitive free market. There's none - and specially not in this current situation, where you got oligopolies everywhere, and plenty services+goods have huge natural costs of entry.

In those situations I'd simply ditch Smith and look at Marx instead.

[–] disgruntledbroad 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

This. The invisible hand doesn't work if monopolists buy control of all the fingers.

I think Smith would probably prefer playing ball with Marx over whatever this hellscape is

[–] AbsurdityAccelerator 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Got any book recommendations on this topic?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Capital. It's the biggest and best for a reason.

If that's too daunting, read Wage Labor and Capital as well as Value, Price, and Profit. Both combined are far shorter than 1 volume of Capital.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Cowbee already answered it. But really - I recommend going straight to the sources: The Wealth of Nations and The Capital. Preferably in annotated versions, specially for Marx as it's a bit harder to digest (sadly I can't recommend a specific one as I didn't read either book in English).