3924 he admits the flaw in his entire argument , but still maintains his position . He criticizes technologists and other economists for being short sighted and presumptuous if they base their argument that there won ' t be jobs because they can ' t imagine jobs that can ' t be automated over the course of the next 100 years . Well I think they ' d argue back , as would I , that he is short sighted and presumptuous to assume that technology can ' t advance enough to make humans the horses of the 21 st century . His lack of understanding of technology is even more evident because he used a chair identification example from 2001 , meanwhile Google photos has been able to perform that task really well for a long time . for free . For basically anyone I did enjoy the part of his lecture where he demonstrated that income inequality and birthmarriage rates are going to promote a system where there is a growing amount of wasted potential talent in poorer families due to the continuing shift of the workforce into low skill jobs that require less education . Those low skill will lead to less marriages and weaker economic strength and ultimately less education potential for those kids . Its cool because it ' s a well crafted case for ' Idiocracy ', but unfortunate because it it ' s our reality and it promotes a cycle of poverty .