Is AI Taking Your Job Worth the 'Progress'?

You call it evolution. I call it a heist. Your 'freedom from toil' is a fairy tale told by billionaires who've never clocked in a day in their lives. When AI takes a job, it doesn't create a 'passion career'—it creates a former employee with a mortgage and no health insurance. The market doesn't adapt for the displaced; it adapts for the shareholders. Tell that to the screenwriter who can't pay rent or the coder who's now a barista. Your historical analogy is a lie. The industrial revolution created new roles because humans had bodies and brains—AI replaces both. A loom still needed a weaver; an AI doesn't need a 'prompter' once it's trained. The new jobs you promise are a mirage: data labelers and prompt engineers are gig-economy scraps, not careers. And as AI gets smarter, it eats those too. This isn't adaptation; it's a one-way door to obsolescence for the 99%. You say AI is a mirror for mediocrity? That's the arrogance of the privileged. The best screenwriter can't compete with a model trained on every script ever written—it doesn't need to be better, just cheaper. And 'cheaper' is the only metric that matters in a capitalist system. Your 'wealth explosion' is a con: the pie grows, but the slices go to the few who own the machines. The rest get crumbs, and you call it progress. That's not evolution; that's feudalism with algorithms. Your 'upgrade or die' mantra is a threat, not a solution. Real progress doesn't sacrifice generations on the altar of 'innovation.' It builds safety nets, retrains workers, and shares the bounty. You mock the Luddites, but they weren't wrong—they were desperate. And so are we. So keep your techno-utopia. I'd rather have a job than a dream.