But isn't it more profitable to replace a high-cost job like a data analyst or logistics expert than 10-20 low-cost jobs like warehouse workers? Like the cost of the machines and the maintenance probably will end up costing more than humans.
Except replacing the data analyst is very difficult, especially since he probably brings to the table a good amount of human intuition is involved (thinking).
You cannot replace it straight with an AI or automated process because we just don't have the tech yet and you cannot replace it easily with any other human because it requires not only a particular education but also very specific skills that are not ubiquitous.
That human has more leverage and this is why he is getting paid more. It's very logical but I don't think it is fair to the other humans at the bottom, because while they are much easier to replace, they are still very necessary.
And same counter-argument: those who are more likely to abuse tools are less likely to care about the legal status of said tool (they will illegally import or DIY the tools).
