So you're saying that each of the FTE robot builders make many robots, not just one?Those people aren't just making 1 robot or just robots. Critical thinking.
So you're saying that each of the FTE robot builders make many robots, not just one?Those people aren't just making 1 robot or just robots. Critical thinking.
I don't know of a single company that makes only 1 single item and then does nothing, closes their doors, and says, welp, that's it, good job boys, we put 3 welders out of work. Of course they make more than one robot, along with other products. You don't have to pay health insurance, PTO, FMLA, or workmans comp on a robot. So even if that robot costs slightly more than the wage of that person it replaces, the company that bought it is ahead.So you're saying that each of the FTE robot builders make many robots, not just one?
Good then, I think we're on the same page and agree that automation displaces more people than it creates in new jobs. Which, again to pop back to the beginning statement, seems obvious or the cost of the automation would be larger than the cost of the labor it displaces.I don't know of a single company that makes only 1 single item and then does nothing, closes their doors, and says, welp, that's it, good job boys, we put 3 welders out of work. Of course they make more than one robot, along with other products. You don't have to pay health insurance, PTO, FMLA, or workmans comp on a robot. So even if that robot costs slightly more than the wage of that person it replaces, the company that bought it is ahead.
We do not agree. It MAY, but it is not guaranteed. The jobs it replaces are probably overpaid (union) jobs. A cost savings companies replacing workers does not mean it costs that much to the company building robots. Each job is not equal in pay, so the number of jobs it replaces could be less than the jobs created, but the created jobs may be paid less than the jobs eliminated.Good then, I think we're on the same page and agree that automation displaces more people than it creates in new jobs. Which, again to pop back to the beginning statement, seems obvious or the cost of the automation would be larger than the cost of the labor it displaces.
Good then, I think we're on the same page and agree that automation displaces more people than it creates in new jobs.
Tell that to the blue collar workers that are no longer employable because they lack the ability to work modern jobs.No, that's just completely wrong. What automation does is free people up to do more productive work by making workers more efficient.
Nah. I'm arguing that automation displaces workers, will continue to do so and will sometime in the next generation or three replace the need for 70-90% of human labor. I'm arguing that the industrial revolution will continue into a technological revolution that is already making some classes of human labor less needed. And, most importantly, that the global economy has the wrong system of incentives and rewards for this reality.You are literally arguing against the industrial revolution.
For arguments sake, lets define automation. Is automation a cnc plasma cutter or any cnc mill? Before cnc mills there were bridgeports. Before those machines people would manually create complex parts or shapes, but it wont be as accurate, fast, or cost effective.Tell that to the blue collar workers that are no longer employable because they lack the ability to work modern jobs.
Nah. I'm arguing that automation displaces workers, will continue to do so and will sometime in the next generation or three replace the need for 70-90% of human labor. I'm arguing that the industrial revolution will continue into a technological revolution that is already making some classes of human labor less needed. And, most importantly, that the global economy has the wrong system of incentives and rewards for this reality.
I mean, it's 2025. You can't seriously be taking a position that the steady increase of automation, robotics and AI is going to be a job creator over the coming generations?
I am a blue collar employer. I will argue that part of the move towards more automation is the difficulty in finding skilled labor. Its been a societal shift and I have to figure out better more efficient ways to do the work. It just so happens the machines im acquiring do a better job. And Im able to do more with the same labor force. Adapt and move forward or die. If youre content sweeping floors in a factory and unwilling to figure out what else you might be able to do. Its not on automation when youre replace by the industrial version of a roomba. Theres a mechanic somewhere that's getting more work to fix that roomba and a company somewhere employing more people to make it.Tell that to the blue collar workers that are no longer employable because they lack the ability to work modern jobs.
We were a furniture company that started in 1976. All of our stuff came from China.
China tariffs put a lot of furniture companies out of business. we fought for exemptions for some of our products and got bits and pieces of help from the government but it wasn't enough.
I sat on a zoom call with a group of people crying and saying 'I am going to miss you" who had been working together for 20+ years. I got to tell them they no longer had access and where to send their laptops.
YES. These tariffs will 100% impact / close American companies. Anyone who hears, believes, says it is a tariff on a foreign entity and they are the ones who pay are misinformed.
Won't matter if you're trying to sell something that's 10x more expensive. That puts you solely in the "luxury" market which is very small. You're not gonna sell much. Even the richest guy in Bangladesh isn't going to buy your product...Well, if they sell outside the US, make it the best damn product that it blows other out of the water.
I think quality would have gone to crap anyway. Profit is what drives capitalism, and anything they can do to increase profits is going to be done.Quality has gone to crap once NAFTA and CFT went into effect. I have a fridge at the office that was built in 70's or 80's. I took it out when I moved in and use it here. It's still running. I've gone through three fridges at the house in that same time.
Exactly.Or cut costs, but doing that would require a massive overhaul of the entire economic system.
Or, we say that UBI will be the end of the world, we do nothing, and we get caught with our pants down when inevitably 80% of our workforce is unemployed and on food stamps and welfare which looks a lot like UBI. The only difference is that UBI would benefit the people who do work as well instead of paying people to not work. And by providing for basic needs, it would allow a bunch of new small businesses to start up.If you want to drive inflation through the roof, by all means implement UBI. Don't believe me? Look at what happened with COVID and the money that was paid out. All that's going to do is drive up costs because you're going to have low wage people say "F it, why work?" Now, you gotta pay more for those jobs to get people to work at them. Which then drives up the pay of the next tier of jobs, and the next, and the next, which raises the costs of...everything. Until the UBI isn't enough, so we have to raise it again, and repeat the process.
Not really:That's not what he said. What he said was that the argument that it takes more people to make robots than robots displace is obvious nonsense or the robots wouldn't be economically competitive.
Maybe, eventually, but probably not.A robot probably creates more and better jobs than it replaces
I call BS. When you don't have to have a job out of necessity, you can do a "job" that brings you great satisfaction that doesn't have to bring you a paycheck. That could be raising your kids. That could be volunteering at a charity. That could be creating and tending an amazing garden around your house, creating art in its various forms, or any number of other things.At an almost philosophical level I'm against UBI because I don't think it solves the emotional need for work. We all **** about jobs at some point, but money aside -- people with a job have higher life satisfaction and purpose than people without. A job really is more than a paycheck for most people, it gives a sense of earning, contribution and being needed. Inflationary effects aside of a policy like that, I'm not sure handing everyone money in their mailbox is going to fulfill that need and lead to a positive outcome. That's a whole lot of idle time for a whole lot of people, and idle time is not humanity's friend. And I don't think everyone is going to use that idle time for self-actualization and betterment of themselves and others.
There's no way it's that close at the end user. If there's only three robots, they won't need a full time maintenance position. Thirty, maybe. Three hundred, yes, probably more than one. Programmers, it depends how many widgets they make before switching to the next widget. And yes, the people designing and building the robots exist too... But all of those are likely higher paying jobs than the one the robots are replacing, and as has been stated already, if robots didn't save money we wouldn't use them, so I would be incredibly surprised if the net number of jobs created is more than half of what was replaced. It simply wouldn't make any economic sense at that point for the robots to exist.Perhaps my point wasnt clear. But the sum of jobs created in totality not just end user is way closer than you probably think.
If end user eliminates 3 assembly line welders, but adds a programmer and maintenance position, sure they're down one position. But upstream, the people designing and building the the automation are able to eat too.
This!But, that said, at the end of the day, I'm far more concerned that the proletariat are already being displaced and many don't have the intellectual capacity to do the jobs that replace them. Further, I'm very concerned that we're at the precipice of a 25, 50 or 100 year trend where human labor becomes unnecessary and we, as a global community, lack the economic structure to feed and house billions of people who don't need to waste 2040 hours a year toiling.
Totally fair. The term 'blue collar' is too broad to be useful for this discussion. I should have said unskilled labor. Which is all some people are capable of.I am a blue collar employer. I will argue that part of the move towards more automation is the difficulty in finding skilled labor.
Nah. I have tons of retired friends. I don't have a single one that says, "man, I sure wish I had worked longer".At an almost philosophical level I'm against UBI because I don't think it solves the emotional need for work. We all **** about jobs at some point, but money aside -- people with a job have higher life satisfaction and purpose than people without.
I call BS. When you don't have to have a job out of necessity, you can do a "job" that brings you great satisfaction that doesn't have to bring you a paycheck. That could be raising your kids. That could be volunteering at a charity. That could be creating and tending an amazing garden around your house, creating art in its various forms, or any number of other things.
If I didn't have to have a job, I could play music a lot more than I do (which is about once a week at best). I could finish a lot of projects that would make my house better. I could spend a ton more time with my family and I could teach my own kids. All of that would be FAR more satisfying and fulfilling than moving people and/or stuff from point A to B, or helping companies sell more crap, or doing IT stuff. And I could take off and run with some of the ideas I've had to create products and make money that way too - I simply don't have enough time for a family and a side gig right now, but there's a lot I could do if I didn't have to work for someone else.
Nah. I have tons of retired friends. I don't have a single one that says, "man, I sure wish I had worked longer".
I'm sure there are some out there, but I don't know a single one.
There might be benefits to being busy or getting out of the house or having a social network. Traditional work does provide all of those to varying degrees. And I, even, mostly like my job. But there is a 100% chance I would find other ways to satisfy those needs in some fashion other than making my boss rich if I didn't need the money.
Not yet - Need to figure the cost of the robot per item of product to pay the people that built and maintain the robot. If the labor to produce and maintain the robot (or any tool) costs less than the labor to produce the product on a per item basis then cost of the item goes down. Another way of saying what Edfred said.So it takes 0 people to make a robot?
That. Would. Be. Amazing.But what if all you had was free time your whole life?
Take the 18 year old you, just finished high school, and now you get a check every month to do nothing. And the thing is there's no end date. It's not a gap year, or a 5 gap years. It's just what you can expect forever. No one is going to ask anything of you, nothing is expected of you, no one is asking for you to produce or contribute anything. Frankly society doesn't care what you do or don't do. You wake up when you want, plan your day how you want, do only what you want. You have no time pressure at all.
Wait, what? Why would my life be unstructured? I'm playing tennis mon/wed/fri. I'm hanging out with my friends interested geology a month or more every year in the canyons. I have time to read about any subject I want. I can hike around with my dogs.Who do you think is going to deal well with such an unstructured life where it would require significant internal discipline to live in a healthy, purposeful way?
Everyone will be the recipient of UBI at some point. Human labor will cease to have value soon. Whether soon is 25, 50 or 100 years is TBD, but the end of human labor is right around the corner. The assembly line was a hundred-ish years ago and was absolutely game changing in terms of the global economy. The robotics/AI revolution that we are about to enter will be no less game changing. As a global community, we can choose to by unburdened from the tyranny of work or we can choose to do unnecessary work. But it's a mistake to think that humans will be adding any economic value to the equation. The machines will be smarter, cheaper and better at our jobs than we are. And soon.Because I bet the people who would do best like that are your very smart, driven people. Incidentally, not those that are going to be recipients of UBI. But that's speculation.
Stop talking dirty to me.For a lot of the people who would utilize UBI, there is no work. It's just forever leisure time.
I am a blue collar employer. I will argue that part of the move towards more automation is the difficulty in finding skilled labor. Its been a societal shift and I have to figure out better more efficient ways to do the work. It just so happens the machines im acquiring do a better job. And Im able to do more with the same labor force. Adapt and move forward or die. If youre content sweeping floors in a factory and unwilling to figure out what else you might be able to do. Its not on automation when youre replace by the industrial version of a roomba. Theres a mechanic somewhere that's getting more work to fix that roomba and a company somewhere employing more people to make it.
I will be willing to bet your argument for the difficulty in finding GOOD fabricators is pay. Welders are easy to find. But there is a huge leap from welder to fabricator.
Sorry -- With respect I'm going to have to take the counter position to you guys.
I think you're able to say that because you've both had careers. Or you're referring to retired people who have worked for a long time and thus properly value their free time.
But what if all you had was free time your whole life?
Take the 18 year old you, just finished high school, and now you get a check every month to do nothing. And the thing is there's no end date. It's not a gap year, or a 5 gap years. It's just what you can expect forever. No one is going to ask anything of you, nothing is expected of you, no one is asking for you to produce or contribute anything. Frankly society doesn't care what you do or don't do. You wake up when you want, plan your day how you want, do only what you want. You have no time pressure at all.
Who do you think is going to deal well with such an unstructured life where it would require significant internal discipline to live in a healthy, purposeful way? Because I bet the people who would do best like that are your very smart, driven people. Incidentally, not those that are going to be recipients of UBI. But that's speculation.
Frankly, I think the best model is the sabbatical model. Every five years in your career take 12-18 months off. Enjoy yourself. Travel. Go flying. Volunteer. Spend a great year with your kids. Then go back to work and pick a new challenge. That way you don't backload all the things you want to do until you're retired. But that presupposes there is work to go back to. For a lot of the people who would utilize UBI, there is no work. It's just forever leisure time.
Skilled labor and cheap labor are not the same thing. You can have one, you can have the other, but you can't have both.
I am a bit of a case study in this as I came into some passive income and bailed out of a decently paying but soul crushing programming job over a decade ago now. A lot of people told me I'd be miserable without a job and I can say without hesitation they were wrong. I was so miserable in my job that I was starting to feel physically ill and rotten(probably from sitting a desk all day with no exercise and minimal mental stimulation). I'd have to be desperate before ever going back to that. Now every now and then I daydream about what if I'd stayed in another 6mo or a year and put that extra money into another investment but that's pure fantasy. I was at my breaking point when I punched out- most people would have switched careers or jobs but I did what I did with zero regrets. I do still work in a sense, I have a small IT business going and do some odd jobs here and there on top of doing a whole bunch of labor intensive stuff that doesn't actually make money. Right now I'm working on a CPL with the aim of becoming a CFI and bringing in some avgas money but as far as anything like a regular structured day job- nope, never again. No interest, hated it, do not want to repeat.
I do not know why our culture has this idea that you should just be working all the time. Why would any sane person want to live like that? People in other countries take multi-month or even year sabbaticals all the time. Why should someone applying for job have to explain a "gap in their resume"? Why should that even be a negative thing? Sure, a person should pull their own weight and not be a drain on society but man the traditional employment model just isn't for everyone and most people don't live to work. We work to live.
The quality of a product is determined by the accounting and legal department, not the worker in China.I think quality would have gone to crap anyway. Profit is what drives capitalism, and anything they can do to increase profits is going to be done.
First world problem. For much of human history, people worked to survive. If you didn't work your ass off, you starved.
You never lived on a farmActually not so much. Farmers back in the olden days worked very hard during planting and harvest times but had long periods of relatively idle time between seasons. Hunter-gatherers did exactly that. This whole daily work routine is an industrial age invention and doesn't really make sense if you think about it. With our modern technology and productivity levels we should really be working less but instead we're working more.
I absolutely did, I grew up on one. I was more thinking of pre-mechanized feudalism type eras but it applies. We were very busy certain times of year for sure and there were lots of days when we had to deal with emergencies that took all day or happened at the most inconvenient possible times under the most unpleasant circumstances. But much of the year we just put out hay for the cattle in the morning and that was it... sometimes when the grass was growing well enough for sufficient grazing not even that. We were always 'on duty' in a sense and going away for any period of time required finding someone to look after the animals but we absolutely had a lot more downtime than a modern day 9-5 office job. It's just that what wasn't downtime was often a lot more intense.You never lived on a farm
I absolutely did, I grew up on one. I was more thinking of pre-mechanized feudalism type eras but it applies. We were very busy certain times of year for sure and there were lots of days when we had to deal with emergencies that took all day or happened at the most inconvenient possible times under the most unpleasant circumstances. But much of the year we just put out hay for the cattle in the morning and that was it... sometimes when the grass was growing well enough for sufficient grazing not even that. We were always 'on duty' in a sense and going away for any period of time required finding someone to look after the animals but we absolutely had a lot more downtime than a modern day 9-5 office job. It's just that what wasn't downtime was often a lot more intense.
But what if all you had was free time your whole life?
He's taking the opposite stance. People who have had jobs have a drive to do SOMETHING. People that have never worked, will never have that drive. Why would they? I mean if you want examples, look at the welfare system, and how it is gamed so they don't have to ever do anything except collect a welfare check. 99.9% of people on welfare don't do anything that was mentioned in their utopia.and what would you spend money on? no one else is working either.
Want to go sking in the winter? who is operating the ski trails, etc?
Want to go flying? how would you get to do that?
perhaps I don't understand your hypothetical proposal.
I’m not at all sure we’re ready for UBI yet, although down the line if automation gets far enough maybe it will need to be a thing. Who knows.OK, so the thought of the pro-UBI people is that EVERYONE wants to be on UBI and not work. That's getting paid for how exactly?
Speaking of gaming the system. Today a customer drove his late 90's jeep....with antique plates. Was his daily driver.He's taking the opposite stance. People who have had jobs have a drive to do SOMETHING. People that have never worked, will never have that drive. Why would they? I mean if you want examples, look at the welfare system, and how it is gamed so they don't have to ever do anything except collect a welfare check. 99.9% of people on welfare don't do anything that was mentioned in their utopia.
And this is why I have a job after leaving full-time as an engineer. I teach computer science at a local university, average age of our students is 27. Many of my students are returning to learn more or changing careers.I am a blue collar employer. I will argue that part of the move towards more automation is the difficulty in finding skilled labor. Its been a societal shift and I have to figure out better more efficient ways to do the work. It just so happens the machines im acquiring do a better job. And Im able to do more with the same labor force. Adapt and move forward or die. If youre content sweeping floors in a factory and unwilling to figure out what else you might be able to do. Its not on automation when youre replace by the industrial version of a roomba. Theres a mechanic somewhere that's getting more work to fix that roomba and a company somewhere employing more people to make it.
I will be willing to bet your argument for the difficulty in finding GOOD fabricators is pay. Welders are easy to find. But there is a huge leap from welder to fabricator.
My argument was actually the reverse. I think people would, on the whole, be positively miserable if they lived like that.and what would you spend money on? no one else is working either.
Want to go sking in the winter? who is operating the ski trails, etc?
Want to go flying? how would you get to do that?
perhaps I don't understand your hypothetical proposal.
…However, I do question why with all the technological progress and increase in productivity we’re not enjoying the fruits of that with more time off.
My boss knows my goal is to work less every year while making more money. My goal is to work myself out of my job through improved efficiency so that when I’m done, my headcount won’t have to be replaced.
To do that I look for efficiencies; how can I standardize, template, and automate repeatable processes to produce a specified product, service, or result.
I’m at the point now where a standard, 40-hour engagement is down to six actual hours of work. That lets me serve more clients. In the white space, I coach the other teams involved in our overall production process on areas they can standardize, template, and automate.
Last year establish our cost baseline at ~$10M. This year we’re on track to actually produce more widgets of the same quality and save about 10% in direct costs.
With the coaching work I’m doing this year, the other teams are finding opportunities to become more efficient which will build on the cost savings next year. Yes, there’s a point of diminishing returns, but a lot of our processes are manual, low hanging fruit. In essence, we’re fat but working out more and starting to eat better.
When we’re down to a healthy size and routine, the company (and our customers) as a whole will be better off.
I feel this same way. But then if I won the Powerball I'm either buying into an NHL team and/or buying a multiple ranches and going hunting and fishing in perpetuity. Elk season is over. Dammit, now it's bear season. And hey wouldn't you know it, after that its mountain lion season.My argument was actually the reverse. I think people would, on the whole, be positively miserable if they lived like that.
Not because of the lack of material items available for purchase (in this hypothetical world, robots have taken jobs and still make all "the stuff", so you can still go flying, get AVGAS, go skiing, etc). I think people would be miserable because work actually gives us more than we think.
It's not just about a paycheck -- people like being needed and knowing they can contribute something meaningful. If the message from society becomes: "actually you're not really needed, here's a check" -- I don't think the outcome is some StarTrek-like Utopia where everyone pursues a path of self actualization and perfects their hobbies and lives happily ever after. My hunch is we get much higher incidence of alcoholism, drug overdoses and suicide.
Buying a 195, a Staggerwing, a D18, and something that burns jet A and has a real toilet.I feel this same way. But then if I won the Powerball I'm ….