Lets think about it with this example: if it takes a worker 2 hours to make product X, but then a new technology comes along which makes it only take 1 hour to make product X, then the value of labor has doubled.
Then the owner has a choice, he can either double all the salaries of his employees and have the same income for himself, or else fire half his employees and double his profit.
This example shows that unemployment is not a result of new technology, but of choices made by people who have the most power in a society.
"if it takes a worker 2 hours to make product X, but then a new technology comes along which makes it only take 1 hour to make product X, then the value of labor has doubled."
Wages are set by the supply and demand of labor, not by how much a product can sell for. The hypothetical new technology leaves the supply of labor unchanged, but the demand for the labor is reduced.
"Then the owner has a choice, he can either double all the salaries of his employees and have the same income for himself, or else fire half his employees and double his profit."
Have you actually pretended to be the owner in this thought experiment? Why would the owner double their salaries?
You owe it to yourself to take an introductory economics course, because your comment flies against everything that such a class would teach.
I'm done arguing with you, here is another comment for you to down vote. I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt that you wanted to have a reasonable discussion instead of being condescending and insulting, I guess I was wrong about that, what a shame.
Downvoting is disabled on threads a user participates in, so it wasn't me. My intent was to inform, not to insult. For the argument you made to be correct, textbook economics must be wrong.
Lets think about it with this example: if it takes a worker 2 hours to make product X, but then a new technology comes along which makes it only take 1 hour to make product X, then the value of labor has doubled.
Then the owner has a choice, he can either double all the salaries of his employees and have the same income for himself, or else fire half his employees and double his profit.
This example shows that unemployment is not a result of new technology, but of choices made by people who have the most power in a society.