YangSupporter said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

YangSupporter said:

Actually Qman is right about automation not creating as many jobs I don't know if those numbers are accurate but it is a correct assessment. New jobs will be created but not in the numbers needed to employ everyone who needs a job.

---

Is there proof of qman's claim that 1000 jobs will be lost for every job created to build robots?  We have about 100 years of history to look at.

---

The new automation wave is going to be very different than in the past. In the past jobs were created for low skill workers in large numbers now the new jobs that result from automation will only go to the cream of the crop skill wise. For example the most common job in the United States is truck driver and retail worker both of those jobs are going to be automated within the next decade. All of those workers are not going to become computer programmers.

---

Technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years and it's just going to accelerate in the coming years.

qman said:

YangSupporter said:

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

YangSupporter said:

Actually Qman is right about automation not creating as many jobs I don't know if those numbers are accurate but it is a correct assessment. New jobs will be created but not in the numbers needed to employ everyone who needs a job.

---

Is there proof of qman's claim that 1000 jobs will be lost for every job created to build robots?  We have about 100 years of history to look at.

---

The new automation wave is going to be very different than in the past. In the past jobs were created for low skill workers in large numbers now the new jobs that result from automation will only go to the cream of the crop skill wise. For example the most common job in the United States is truck driver and retail worker both of those jobs are going to be automated within the next decade. All of those workers are not going to become computer programmers.

---

Technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years and it's just going to accelerate in the coming years.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

I read an article from the 1940s (1930's maybe?) that said automation would soon cut the workday in half.  Never happened.

I'm not saying it can't happen, just that people have been saying this forever. 

---

qman said:

Technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years and it's just going to accelerate in the coming years.

---

Then how do explain the current unemployment rate:

christopera said:

Yeah I’d like to see a citation for the claim that technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years.

Automated manufacturing has existed for like a century.

---

Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:

qman said:

Technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years and it's just going to accelerate in the coming years.

---

Then how do explain the current unemployment rate:

---

YangSupporter said:

Labor force participation rate is what matters and its abysmal in the US.

---

YangSupporter said:

christopera said:

Yeah I’d like to see a citation for the claim that technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years.

Automated manufacturing has existed for like a century.

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html

---

christopera said:

YangSupporter said:

christopera said:

Yeah I’d like to see a citation for the claim that technology has been a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years.

Automated manufacturing has existed for like a century.

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/21/upshot/the-long-term-jobs-killer-is-not-china-its-automation.html

---

That article doesn’t claim that technology is a net destroyer of jobs for almost 20 years.

Nobody disputes that technology displaces or replaces existing jobs, but that doens’t mean there’s a net destruction of jobs. For example the mechanized saw mill meant we could build structures at an increased pace. This meant a net increase in jobs. If your job was to hand scraper wood your job was lost. Just like if you are witch doctor you probably got replaced by real doctor and antibiotics. Times change.

---

YangSupporter said:

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate 63 percent is not good it means that there are structural issues with our economy. They aren't all students or retirees. The reason Trump won was we automated away millions of manufacturing jobs and most of those workers ended up filing for disability and those communities were devastated. The workers didn't retrain they gave up drug abuse and alcoholism are rampant in areas where automation decimated manufacturing work.

---

Quote:

What is the U-6 Rate?

The U-6 rate is the unemployment rate that includes discouraged workers who have quit looking for a job and part-time workers who are seeking full-time employment. The U-6 rate is considered by many economists to be the most revealing measure of a country’s unemployment situation since it covers the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed, underemployed and discouraged.

---

christopera said:

Have you ever worked with anything that is computer numerical control (CNC) or in a manufacturing environment such as line work?

---

ballsalsa said:

The irony of futurevautomation, in my view, is that when true AI comes along, the tradespeople will be much harder to replace than the programmers.  Everyone that L2 code will be in hot water

---

Yang talks about that automating a plumbers job would take technology we don't have yet. However automating truck driving and call centers are going to happen within the next decade. Also christopera I am doing research as I type to bring in some sources that show the job loss. I'll also read through the thread you linked