@BhagwaanUvacha I think the problem is that you assume one corporation's goal is the same as an industry's. But it is not. A business firm wants to make profits, but it does so only by offering more value than competitors. It all really hinges on that value, and the (expected) value produced is
@BhagwaanUvacha what justifies the cost. So costs are chosen because they are expected to contribute to value. This is why we don't see increasing unemployment as a result of technological advancement (other than as temporary transition pains). For example, some 90% or so were employed in
@BhagwaanUvacha agriculture, now only low single-digits are--yet those produce a lot more food. It means a large part of the population were liberated from hard work that didn't create much value to instead be used in other production processes where they create more value. So you cannot equate
@BhagwaanUvacha the object of one actor (or firm) with the system outcome. Those are two levels of analysis. It's the same in evolution, where any one individual might be weeded out while the species improves. (I'm not saying this is how the market works, but it's illustrative of the workings on
@BhagwaanUvacha different levels). So the market economy doesn't create unemployment, but rather is a discovery process in which "we" find better uses for scarce resources. And as consumers' wants are endless, this means we can always find new uses for resources. And the ultimate resource is
@BhagwaanUvacha human labor. So we will run out of jobs only when we no longer can think of anything to do that can potentially satisfy someone's want. (And that's a fiction.) As for your point about officers of the State pursuing their own interest, yes absolutely. That's the basic (and very
@BhagwaanUvacha important) insight of public choice. The problem here, though, lies in the different nature of business and government. Business has self-interested leaders trying to "get as much as possible," but the way to do this over time is to provide valued services to others. But if you
@BhagwaanUvacha act within the State, you not only can but automatically do rely on the State's apparatus of force. Meaning: you can gain benefits by forcing the cost upon others. This logic is very different from business: it is a zero-sum game whereas the market is positive-sum. Not the same.
