Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-11-2015, 02:59 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,198,402 times
Reputation: 9840

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goinback2011 View Post
The question is, how will society organize itself if a much smaller percentage of people can find employment in a workforce dominated by robots?

Why do you assume that a much smaller percentage of people can find employment in a robotic age?

If anything, some jobs will be eliminated by robots, but some jobs will be created by the new robotic sector. In theory, a robotic age will actually generates more wealth for a larger population ranging from lower to upper middle class.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-11-2015, 03:17 PM
 
4,231 posts, read 3,540,570 times
Reputation: 2207
Actually AI will rule the world.

As a matter of fact i'm counting on it.

Intelligent machines will make much more sense than billions of stupid and useless people.

I'd welcome robots to take the jobs of FOMC folks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2015, 07:37 PM
 
24,530 posts, read 18,093,858 times
Reputation: 40216
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
Why do you assume that a much smaller percentage of people can find employment in a robotic age?

If anything, some jobs will be eliminated by robots, but some jobs will be created by the new robotic sector. In theory, a robotic age will actually generates more wealth for a larger population ranging from lower to upper middle class.
.
Nope. Automation will be an enormous multiplier of capital for the top 0.01%. If you think we have a wealth and income stratification problem now, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. It's fairly easy to predict a huge backlash against this akin to the Luddites (English craft weavers in the early 19th century) burning the new textile mills that put them out of work. It's also fairly easy to predict an inevitable march towards Social Democracy. If most people are displaced by automation, they still vote. I hope they automate lawyers and politicians first. I could support that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2015, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Oregon, formerly Texas
10,022 posts, read 7,178,188 times
Reputation: 17121
I was watching a Twilight Zone episode the other day predicting that computers would start doing people's jobs. That was in the mid-60s. People have always worried about technology taking away jobs.

A lot of you are forgetting that we live in a democracy. If people don't like it they will push back with their votes.

I think the era we're in today is similar to the 1860s and 1870s. At that time there were unfocused complaints about the state of affairs - stagnant wages, jobs destroyed & replaced by machines, immigrants... but not much got done for the next 30 years because they were disorganized. Fast forward 30 years and the progressive movement was more organized and went into full swing to curb the power of corporations, bring some control to the system etc....

If computing tech DOES take too many jobs - well those robots will be the ones producing gdp. People will push back and start voting for candidates that will use what those robots produce to help people.

I welcome it. If robots do the crap jobs then we all get to chill or work on something worthwhile. A lot of people have nostalgia for factories. Why??? Those jobs sucked. It's better that machines do them. When people do them it causes them a monotonous life, health problems and an early death. My grandmother died of lung cancer at age 69 because she breathed in refuse from the thread factory she worked in for 30 years. They didn't even hire her full time every year and she never moved very far up within it. What was so great about that?

Let's look at a job that's been automated - elevator operator. What have we lost by that job becoming automated? Was elevator operator some kind of stepping stone to a better life? No. I worked fast food for a number of years when I was young. They were crap jobs and NO ONE CARED they were on my resume. I had one interviewer chuckle once that I had them on my resume at all. My response was "well, that was the job I had while in school" - he didn't care, he cared about my more relevant experience. I won't cry when they automate fast food jobs.

Last edited by redguard57; 08-11-2015 at 09:06 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2015, 09:17 PM
 
45 posts, read 40,125 times
Reputation: 79
People self select to leave the work force with little prompting. Kids don't start working real jobs until after college. Our grandparents/ great grandparents started working at the mill or mines at about 16-18 so we lost almost 6 years labor for each college grad, more if they got more education. Many people apply for disability some who could have worked if work was simple like assembly line work but not smart enough for tech jobs, give it to them and they will quit working. Offer new parents a year of leave or one parent 2-3 years off and they will leave the work force. So if we get people to work from say 25-55 that is only 30 years and some would opt out for welfare or disability. I worked from 7 to 65 so nearly twice what they would need to work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2015, 04:23 AM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,198,402 times
Reputation: 9840
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Nope. Automation will be an enormous multiplier of capital for the top 0.01%. If you think we have a wealth and income stratification problem now, you ain't seen nuthin' yet. It's fairly easy to predict a huge backlash against this akin to the Luddites (English craft weavers in the early 19th century) burning the new textile mills that put them out of work. It's also fairly easy to predict an inevitable march towards Social Democracy. If most people are displaced by automation, they still vote. I hope they automate lawyers and politicians first. I could support that.
People who predict robots will take over almost all human jobs don't understand why we need robots in the first place.

We use robots because labor cost is high. That's it. It's that simple. Robots are there to save us money. You use a dish washer at home because it's too expensive to hire someone to come wash the dishes for you and no one will come work for just one hour at your home washing dishes anyway.

When there comes a time when most people are displaced by automation.... guess what? Labor cost will come down, and then it becomes cost effective to hire humans over robots. So even if that day comes, it will quickly be replaced by an economy where labor is attractive again.

Second, buying a robot inherently requires a large up front cost, it's like buying a commercial grade grill or other business equipment. Hiring a person requires small up front cost.... it's just an hourly wage. If you're a small business owner just opening a restaurant, why would you spend all that money on a robot? Why not just hire a human waitress at least until your business thrive? So humans will always have a niche even in the worst case scenario.

Third, an economy where most people are displaced by automation.... is an economy with OVER 50% unemployment!!!!!!! Think about it, this is not sustainable. In such an economy, even the very rich would have trouble making money! If there is a robotic industry, most of it will collapse and the robot market will crash.

It is impossible for robots to take over the world with ONLY the very rich and corporations adopting. As with ALL things technology, it's the middle class and below who drive the market share. That means for robots to take over, the MAJORITY (the 99%) would have to be adopters - which means it'd be highly impossible for the robots to displace the very people who are using it.

What robotics will actually do, is create more jobs related to robotics. Some jobs will be displaced, more jobs will be created.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2015, 07:21 AM
 
24,530 posts, read 18,093,858 times
Reputation: 40216
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
People who predict robots will take over almost all human jobs don't understand why we need robots in the first place.

We use robots because labor cost is high. That's it. It's that simple. Robots are there to save us money. You use a dish washer at home because it's too expensive to hire someone to come wash the dishes for you and no one will come work for just one hour at your home washing dishes anyway.

When there comes a time when most people are displaced by automation.... guess what? Labor cost will come down, and then it becomes cost effective to hire humans over robots. So even if that day comes, it will quickly be replaced by an economy where labor is attractive again.

Second, buying a robot inherently requires a large up front cost, it's like buying a commercial grade grill or other business equipment. Hiring a person requires small up front cost.... it's just an hourly wage. If you're a small business owner just opening a restaurant, why would you spend all that money on a robot? Why not just hire a human waitress at least until your business thrive? So humans will always have a niche even in the worst case scenario.

Third, an economy where most people are displaced by automation.... is an economy with OVER 50% unemployment!!!!!!! Think about it, this is not sustainable. In such an economy, even the very rich would have trouble making money! If there is a robotic industry, most of it will collapse and the robot market will crash.

It is impossible for robots to take over the world with ONLY the very rich and corporations adopting. As with ALL things technology, it's the middle class and below who drive the market share. That means for robots to take over, the MAJORITY (the 99%) would have to be adopters - which means it'd be highly impossible for the robots to displace the very people who are using it.

What robotics will actually do, is create more jobs related to robotics. Some jobs will be displaced, more jobs will be created.
.
Your analysis is a bit lacking.

Let's consider an example. 30 years ago, machinists were highly paid. It took years of training and quite a bit of skill to operate machine tools like lathes. Today, we have CNC machines (computerized numerical control) that have replaced that skill with automation. The operator merely hits the button and the machine perfectly performs the task that used to require a high paid operator and is 10x to 100x more efficient. A CNC operator is paid far less money than a machinist and it takes far less of them to produce the same amount of product.

A McDonalds franchise owner isn't going to invest in an automated machine to replace minimum wage burger flippers. It's not cost effective. The jobs that get automated are the high skill jobs where employees command much higher wages. There is still a huge pile of manufacturing done in the United States. It has been automated as much as possible to keep labor costs low. China passed the United States as the #1 manufacturing economy in the world during the Great Recession. The US is still a very strong #2 with about $2 trillion in output compared to China's $2.5 trillion. The erosion of high paid manufacturing jobs has pretty much equal parts automation and offshoring as contributors.

The point isn't that there won't be jobs. The issue is high paying middle class jobs. With automation, unskilled and semi-skilled workers can be hired to operate automated production equipment at a fraction of the compensation and with a huge multiplier to the capital invested in the automation equipment. The 0.01% of the population with all the capital keeps getting richer. The middle class keeps eroding.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2015, 11:11 AM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,198,402 times
Reputation: 9840
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Your analysis is a bit lacking.

Let's consider an example. 30 years ago, machinists were highly paid. It took years of training and quite a bit of skill to operate machine tools like lathes. Today, we have CNC machines (computerized numerical control) that have replaced that skill with automation. The operator merely hits the button and the machine perfectly performs the task that used to require a high paid operator and is 10x to 100x more efficient. A CNC operator is paid far less money than a machinist and it takes far less of them to produce the same amount of product.

A McDonalds franchise owner isn't going to invest in an automated machine to replace minimum wage burger flippers. It's not cost effective. The jobs that get automated are the high skill jobs where employees command much higher wages. There is still a huge pile of manufacturing done in the United States. It has been automated as much as possible to keep labor costs low. China passed the United States as the #1 manufacturing economy in the world during the Great Recession. The US is still a very strong #2 with about $2 trillion in output compared to China's $2.5 trillion. The erosion of high paid manufacturing jobs has pretty much equal parts automation and offshoring as contributors.

The point isn't that there won't be jobs. The issue is high paying middle class jobs. With automation, unskilled and semi-skilled workers can be hired to operate automated production equipment at a fraction of the compensation and with a huge multiplier to the capital invested in the automation equipment. The 0.01% of the population with all the capital keeps getting richer. The middle class keeps eroding.
Do you have any idea how many jobs are needed to support the CNC machines? From the engineers who designed them, to the lawyers who patented them, to the manufacturers who make them, to the advertisers who have to market them, to the sales teams who have to sell them, to the shippers who transport them, to the technicians who service them, to the retailers who sell parts for them, and all other administrative jobs associated with this machine?

For every CNC machine out there, it has literally hundreds of people behind it to get it from drawing to the shop. Yes, a niche high skill job is replaced, but think of all the other high paying jobs that are created. That's what automation does! People only see the jobs being replaced, they don't see all the jobs created.

Furthermore, once a company automated, that company will need to upgrade/service the CNC machines periodically. Thereby, keeping the flow of innovation and making the high-paying jobs associated with this CNC machines necessary.

This is why the most prosperous economy tends to be highly technologically advanced!!-- Because technology creates high paying jobs. You will never see a third world country with a population of manual laborers take over us as the #1 economy.
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2015, 01:36 PM
 
48,505 posts, read 96,644,082 times
Reputation: 18304
In time we will need Robots in many skilled position as there are like 5 million unfilled jobs. Skilled position are doing every well in the world economy in US. Nothing really can be done for lack of need for pure labor which US workers wouldn't take anyway. The economy can't pay for what is not needed in world market because consumer wouldn't pay the price in end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2015, 03:00 PM
 
24,530 posts, read 18,093,858 times
Reputation: 40216
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
Do you have any idea how many jobs are needed to support the CNC machines? From the engineers who designed them, to the lawyers who patented them, to the manufacturers who make them, to the advertisers who have to market them, to the sales teams who have to sell them, to the shippers who transport them, to the technicians who service them, to the retailers who sell parts for them, and all other administrative jobs associated with this machine?

For every CNC machine out there, it has literally hundreds of people behind it to get it from drawing to the shop. Yes, a niche high skill job is replaced, but think of all the other high paying jobs that are created. That's what automation does! People only see the jobs being replaced, they don't see all the jobs created.

Furthermore, once a company automated, that company will need to upgrade/service the CNC machines periodically. Thereby, keeping the flow of innovation and making the high-paying jobs associated with this CNC machines necessary.

This is why the most prosperous economy tends to be highly technologically advanced!!-- Because technology creates high paying jobs. You will never see a third world country with a population of manual laborers take over us as the #1 economy.
.

Once again, very poor analysis.

The way you are describing it, more money is spent buying automation equipment than the manufacturing company would save in labor costs. Nope. That's not how the math works. You're replacing an army of highly skilled machine operators with 10% of that staffing level and you pay those replacements 50 cents on the dollar since they're not anywhere near as skilled and are so much easier to replace.

I'm a career development engineer and I've spent my career in tech startups. You grossly overestimate the number of tech jobs required to implement and do sustaining engineering for something like a CNC machine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top