Whats is wrong with this statement?
"More developed technological methods of production means that the process of producing goods means less and less need for human labor. The “logic of capitalism” is to retard this technological development because its profits are derived from the exploitation of human labor. Marx posed this as the contradiction between “living labor” and “dead labor” (which tends to dominate under capitalism).
Under capitalism, the result of this logic is that working people are retrenched when new improvements in the means of production are achieved. On the other hand, under workers rule or socialism, new improvements in the means of production would mean that laborers would be able to spend less time working, earn the same or more money, and devote their time to leisure activity. Intellectualism will no longer be the property of the few."
In a word: Everything.
He is saying that advancements in productivity leads to increased unemployment. That is beyond inane. Wages are based upon productivity, technological advances cause rises in real wages, not unemployment.
The author views output as static, so to him an increase in productivity would cause an inversely proportional reduction in demand for labor. But output is not static, an increase in productivity would cause an increase in output. Labor, like other goods, is scarce. Labor saving technologies only come into existence because this is true. Labor saving technology increase the amount of goods a single person can create thus increasing the amount of goods every individual is able to consume. Some people may choose to work less, maintaing the same standard of living. While those who choose to work the same amount would enjoy an increased standard of living.
Ironically, it is only under socialism( and other forms of market breakdown) that output is stagnant and labor is in excess.