Technology does nothing to harm capitalism it only encourages national/private/individual investment in education and durable capital goods.
It may provide short frictional or structural unemployment but it won't matter because production as a whole will be more efficient.
Source: currently taking a class in labor economics, this is one of the scenarios we've discussed. Anyway, unskilled service sector jobs will still exist, so the unskilled labor class won't disappear.
ALSO WTF WHY AM I NOT APART OF THE OFFICIAL PMS CASTE CHAT
Yes.
Progress only means that capital which is freed up may then be employed in satisfying other, lower ordered ends.
Ala the law marginal utility. Which is why minimum wage laws are compulsory unemployment, and why they're silly, since the productivity of the economy as a whole goes up and thus the purchasing power of the medium of exchange.
And why things like the CPI and GDP are silly measurements, since they cannot measure the the essentially qualitative value of money to people, for they pretend there is an applicable quantitative aggregate where there is not.
ALSO YEAH WHY ISNT MAGIKARP IN THE PMS CHAT
@
Lizalfos
, I admire that you readily admit that you could be wrong. If you're interested in the point of view expressed above, read up about Carl Menger's theory of marginal utility, and the law of comparative advantage (incidentally not developed by David Ricardo, but instead an academic higher-up of his.)
Oh, and if any of you are interested in the most exciting story of an economist (mystery! intrigue! betrayal! assassination?! he may have fled to south america!), look in Rothbard's History of Economic Thought and go to the section about Richard Cantillon, the first REAL modern economist. ALSO SCREW ADAM SMITH