Economic system of the future

[Sir Og]

Let us assume that in the not so distant future all tasks that currently are performed by humans can be done cheaply by machines instead (robots with AI, etc.)

This essentially means that labour is no longer a factor of production. Is it possible for free market capitalism to continue functioning in such a system where the only income that people have is from capital or government redistribution?

Also as a special case it will be interesting to theorize what happens if there is still some demand for very specific skilled human labour.(lets say 10-15%)

I personally can't see capitalism functioning in this scenario.

[giblets]

Will robots be able to fill the demand for prostitutes?

[The Mad Monk]

You speak as if it is only a future possibility.

[Dauphin]

Let us assume that in the not so distant future all tasks that currently are performed by humans can be done cheaply by machines instead (robots with AI, etc.).

This process originally created the industrial revolution and mass production and so gave birth to capitalism in a modern sense (or perhaps vice versa).

[KrazyHorse]

The op demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of Say's law.

[giblets]

How does Say's Law prove that there will never be a situation where most of the labor force's labor has negligible value?

[giblets]

Let's say a human needs to be paid at least 2000 kilocalories of energy credits a day because they need that to survive, a robot costs less than that, and the robot can perform all tasks at least as well as the human would. How does Say's Law guarantee that the human will be able to find employment and survive.

[KrazyHorse]

Let's say a human needs to be paid at least 2000 kilocalories of energy credits a day because they need that to survive, a robot costs less than that, and the robot can perform all tasks at least as well as the human would. How does Say's Law guarantee that the human will be able to find employment and survive.

Because Say's law applies to food as well and there are limited alternate uses to which the non-labor substitutable factors of food production may be put.

[Main_Brain]

Well a robot-heavy society would have a high Demand for Energy so I guess while the Input for Foodproduction may be a Constant the Output could also be substituted as Biofuel.

[Aeson]

Because Say's law applies to food as well and there are limited alternate uses to which the non-labor substitutable factors of food production may be put.

If the robots run on methane we're ****ed.

[Soltz]

It might be similar to a 'slave' economy.

[Sir Og]

Will robots be able to fill the demand for prostitutes?

Yes. You can't tel a robot prostitute from a real one unless you cut it.

[Sir Og]

The op demonstrates a clear lack of understanding of Say's law.

Are you saying that because of Say's law there never can be a substitution of labour by capital. This doesn't make any sense.

[Dinner]

I vote for which ever economic system delivers the most number of hot nubile women to my bed chamber.

[Sir Og]

This process originally created the industrial revolution and mass production and so gave birth to capitalism in a modern sense (or perhaps vice versa).

In the OP scenario the resulting abundant cheap labour is very much useless wich was not the case in the industrial revolution.

People will have advantage over machines only in cases where being an actual human is demanded (e.g. gladiator fights were there is demand for actual blood and guts or if there is demand for other sports with human players)

Maybe I did not express myself clearly enough in the op. Capitalism can stil work IMO. But I don't think that the resulting concentration of capital and power will be acceptable for the remaining 99% of the population.

And the market economy should continue to work irrespectable of the fate of Capitalism.