In my future robots can now do all the jobs poor people were needed for.

The rich realise they no longer need poor people, and they keep threatening to revolt thus scaring the rich people.

So how would politicians sell basically wiping out poor people to the general population? I realise it would be done in stages.

This is on our planet in the future.


closed as primarily opinion-based by Mołot, Renan, Burki, Ash, StephenG Jun 18 '18 at 14:50

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise. If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • $\begingroup$ They wouldn't. They'd just dump a ton of cyanide into the water supply, stock up on soft drinks, and wait. $\endgroup$ – F1Krazy Jun 18 '18 at 14:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Why would they even need to sell it? To whom? There will be rich people that, as you say, already want to do it, and people that would get killed, and no way in hell you will make them simply agree to that $\endgroup$ – Mołot Jun 18 '18 at 14:17
  • $\begingroup$ You know there have been times and places in our history where the poor didn't buy anything, right? Feudal Europe comes to mind. $\endgroup$ – Renan Jun 18 '18 at 14:20
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ While interesting, i don't think this is an acceptable question around here. I can't see how there could be a "correct" answer, only opinions or ideas. $\endgroup$ – Burki Jun 18 '18 at 14:36
  • $\begingroup$ @Burki L.Dutch has convinced me it is a dead end idea anyway $\endgroup$ – WendyG Jun 18 '18 at 14:38

You filthy rich entrepreneur don't need masses because they can do work.

You need the masses to buy whatever your company produces: mobile phones, fancy shoes, cork lubricant, dehydrated water, you name it...

The larger the masses, the larger your market for your products, and the more miserable their life condition the higher the appeal of your marketing on luring them into believing that drinking A makes them better.

Wiping masses out is something a sane politician would never do: it would shrink the market!

  • $\begingroup$ very very good point $\endgroup$ – WendyG Jun 18 '18 at 14:24
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @WendyG, I appreciate you accepted my answer, but you asked the question 24 minutes ago. If you wait 24 hours you give other users the possibility to provide their input and you might even get a better answer. $\endgroup$ – L.Dutch - Reinstate Monica Jun 18 '18 at 14:30
  • $\begingroup$ A customer base requires they actually be customers with resources to buy your products. In the absence of productivity, this motivation may hold for individuals (or individual corporations) wanting to capture a larger market share of the poor spending their welfare payments, but on the whole is a loss. If wealthy people as a whole want to shed the burden of the non-productive, this isn't applicable beyond some kind of collective action problem (everyone would be better off not carrying the parasites, but individual worries about the relative gain from the adjustment). $\endgroup$ – pluckedkiwi Jun 18 '18 at 15:10
  • $\begingroup$ @L.Dutch You made me realise you are correct, it is just a direction the rich wouldn't take $\endgroup$ – WendyG Jun 18 '18 at 15:16

An artificial underclass, the solution to all our problems.

Getting rid of the existing underclass won't be so easy, but you don't actually have to sell it to anyone, in fact selling it to them is exactly what you want to avoid. What you want to do is price them out of a future.

Houses nobody but the wealthy can afford, services and food that only the wealthy can afford. Healthcare and education only the wealthy can afford.

People will start migrating to look for a better life somewhere else. You don't have to reduce their numbers, just brush them under the carpet somewhere out of sight, you might want them again in case there's a future fashion for having real human staff instead of robots.

The only way to sell it to the population to assure each group that they're not actually the target of the current changes and that as long as they continue things will get better. There'll be some rough times along the way but it'll all work out in the end. Jam tomorrow.

Of course wealth is only relative, if there aren't poor people to be richer than, then nobody is rich.

  • $\begingroup$ the robots are waiting, and once human numbers are so reduced, they intend to take over. $\endgroup$ – WendyG Jun 18 '18 at 14:21

This can work, in its own creepy way, only if the robots produced everything the rich class needs. At that point, rich people, which are really a handful in the world, order other robots to wipe out useless poor human after useless poor human. They can order robots to be species-selective so not to disrupt the global ecosystem and make it flourish once again after 9/10 of world population is eradicated and what's left will never consume that many resources.


Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.