Raw LLM Responses

The breadtube commie argument is "I get paid the value of three widgets an hour for operating a machine that produces three thousand widgets an hour" The -pilled argument is "own your own widget machine and get rich paying people in widgets" And in my view the reality is all human social debt relationships are an effort to benefit personally from the financialization of things that people shouldn't really be able to take personal credit for in a system equivalent to their own labor. -putting an equation on the price tag between your contractual contribution to society and what you benefit from staying with the group is always squaring the circle and both parties will forever argue semantics over whose contribution is more meaningful. I don't think the dirt I shovel with my hands should be measured by the same system as a machine the size of a battleship but "capitalism" (really just monetary systems) reduce everything to fungible units like animals boiled down into stock. Why would I compare how much water I can spit out of my mouth to Niagra falls? Why would I compare the dirt I could pick up to a landslide? If people can build a machine to do something powered by a natural resource, how can my labor be compensated as a proportion of a force of nature? There is a basic drive of wealth to reduce every obstacle to a value that can be overcome with greater wealth, but that's irrational if you think about it. If you had "infinite money and infinite prosperity" to compensate people with as a reward for working for you, that would not magically enable them to achieve things that they could not have on their own- the resource would have to already exist within the system. I think both as consumers and producers modern people try to take credit for the deluge of resources that are available to be harnessed in the present world that have been unlocked by technological infrastructure progress, and we have gotten to an emperor has no clothes moment where all we know how to build with all our power are monuments to our own hubris like the wonders of the ancient world. The easiest thing to imagine is an ai agent that serves as a supervisor/parole officer for every person on earth, and follows them around every minute of every hour of their life prompting them and directing them in their personal and professional life. Like instead of filling out a legally binding paper document, the state would assume sole proprietorship of ai and you would have to render your bureaucratic participation in society through the AI. Pay your taxes through it, comply with the public school system or the baggage limits of the airline, show compliance through it. Then your tax burden will be for the sake of supporting the infrastructure of the AI, and the state will derive it's mandate to rule through the claim of competence and impartiality people assume of the machine. I don't know what else seems logical except the full automation of a totalitarian state, so long as there remains a class of people no matter how small- like the kims in north Korea - who seem to benefit from the perpetuation of the status quo. The best analogy I can think of is building a dam to generate electricity by holding the population trapped behind it and forced to go through it.