except automation is getting to the point where the new job will be automated from the get go.

This is supported by a lot of data.
The easiest to grok is the decrease in jobs, but the increase in GDP. creating more, with less. Easy to look up.

Oh good ol hornwumpus. WHen you argument fails, always falling back on the tried and true ad hom.

"Or do you not understand the concept of "Artificial Intelligence"?"

actually, you don't understand that term.

It doesn't men self aware. YOU can have specialty AIs that make decision in the fields of expertise and that's it.

You might want to move past the 1950's version of AI.

There are Chess AI's that are better then almost everyone on the planet. WHen was the last times chess AI demanded a Union?

" $7.26/hour income to sit and play games."

Thats disingenuous. It's mot like the get 7.26 an hour because they have no option.

Except the 2 dollars will spiral down, like wages always do when there isn't a minimum.

"ou decide that is too expensive, and replace the employee with an answering machine."
well then, raise your rates. If you industry can't handle you raising your rates, well then the answering machine is good enough after all. Meaning the value add of it being a actual human is too low to bother.

We put that 'burden'* on industry because thats where the money is.
Maybe we should just tax at 90% all profit earned over a billion dollars?
Society and economics ONLY work well together when money is moving.

It's not like that money isn't going to come back to the corporation again.
Income is important for industry to grow on the market.

*as if striving for a balances and healthy society is some sort of burden...

So?

ANother use for the free time would be for you to actually learn government economics.

The second assumes that productivity gains will continue without the incentive of paid work.

That would be robots. Automation has no need to be paid work.

unemployment is holding steady at about 23%. By the same methodology, unemployment was 25% during the great depression.

that's incorrect.

Unemployment, BY DEFINITION is the number of people who are out of work, but are looking for work. To twist it like you did is, at best disingenuous.

Do not use unemployment in any way as an overall indicator of people who don't have work; because for that you need to know intent and motivation.
You're way has no way to extract out the people who wouldn't be working no matter what the economy is like.

"If the government went back to enforcing a lower work week by removing exempt status for anyone who wasn't actually an owner or a supervisor who hires/fires/gives raises/can control working hours, unemployment would drop enormously and the abuse might stop."

Absolutely correct.

"..and hate technology."
Please explain how that jives with the last 150 years?

But to the point, since we design them, we can design then not to want those things. And an AI that's just like a human is pretty worthless.

AI does NOT mean 'self aware'.

An AI that specializes in air traffic control will only do air traffic control.

And how much an hour does 'creative' pay?

Can I get a job doodles on a pad and get my creative wage check?

Creativity is often fad based. WHat we need is a way to be able to get buy and get nice thing once in a while and work a 3 day week. then a 2 day week, then not at all.

I like that the more AI we do, the more people like you move the definition.

Also, the turing test is useless fro practical AI, becasue specialty AI is far more valuable then AI that's just like a human.

There are many computer systems that make decisions. THey are better in their specialty than humans, but are easily known as computers becasue they can
t tell you what the weather is like.

Entire global logistic system make decisions on their own.

Yes, and it's very likely some people at the time WHERE paying for food, just not in money like we know it. I wouldn't be surprised if there where people who where exceptional with tools, so there addition to society was improve spears.

What they couldn't imagine is that people would work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week year in and out.

Except we are running out of jobs, as shown by an increase in GDP and a decrease in average income.

I am sick and tired of idiots that claim everything will be fine even though the economics and data show otherwise.

BTW: The Luddites were right. There jobs DID go away. I say this because you probably know as much about Luddites as you do about economics; which is to say nothing.

Automation is getting so advanced, that you won't need anyone to make or bring ideas to reality. You will just order it.

Where do people go when farming is automated? construction? burger flippers?

People like you said the same thing about automotive robots. but a the end of the day a lot fewer people were needed to make cars.
All this is a good thing, we just need to realize the current capitalist system will collapse under the new pressure.

Most office workers do actual work for only 4 hours a day. This is a propped up system based on time in the seat and not actual work done.

Except automation started replacing more jobs then it created at the end of the 90s.

I wrote a piece of automation software that put 10,000+ people out of work in a year. Most the people where office workers approving loans. Most where 35+.

What, exactly did they go off and create? What new jobs were created? Office around the country were closed, so what happened ti the urtiary markets? Oh, it fell apart and never recovered.

You're examples are from a industrial age where there where a lot of open and variable resources, no global logistics, and mostly lead to MORE people being unemployed then employed based on volume of work.

Average income is dropping, but GDP is rising.

your example requires that an increase in consumerism to hold out, but that can not happen with income droppin, and debt climbing.