Automation isn't bad, but letting people work directly towards their own obsolescence while somebody else profits is.

It's the most literal form of "a race to the bottom".

And how is a business supposed to get investors if they don’t profit? Investors will just invest in a different organization that will profit.

The point is blaming a business for trying to lower costs and stay competitive is asinine. If the problem is people aren’t qualified to do work or are unable to feed/house themselves, that is for the government to address since they have the power to tax. No individual business can solve this problem.

Go ahead and let the businesses profit. And if you need to tax 90% of the profit to provide a minimum standard of living for your citizens then so be it.

The point is: don't let your employees/workers dig their own graves. The least you can do is wait for somebody else to dig them if you think it is necessary.

If I waited for my competitors to outdo me, I wouldn’t be in business for long. This whole forum constantly talks about how you companies fail when they get comfortable and stop innovating. Part of innovating is to anticipate where the market will be and make moves accordingly.

If you can't continue your business while being ethically correct, you choose a different line of business.

There is nothing unethical about automatic processes and reducing your costs. Just like people are not unethical for choosing to pay less for tomatoes at one store than another, a business operator is not unethical for choosing to pay less for a certain task to be performed because they were able to automate it.

There is no reason a business has any responsibility to its employees outside of paying them for services performed in accordance with labor laws.

> There is nothing unethical about

Yes there is. Work is not just writing a paycheck and be done with it. It's more than that: it's working together towards a future that is better for all parties, in a sustainable way.