
Evidence That Robots Are Winning the Race for American Jobs - ptrptr
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/28/upshot/evidence-that-robots-are-winning-the-race-for-american-jobs.html
======
SomewhatLikely
Freakonomics Radio recently rebroadcast an episode on this topic:
[http://freakonomics.com/podcast/safe-job-
rebroadcast/](http://freakonomics.com/podcast/safe-job-rebroadcast/)

Part of the discussion that stuck in my mind: _" As all the people who left
being blacksmiths, and stable boys, and equestrians and carriage drivers ...
However, the birth of the automobile industry also gave rise to an industry
constructing roads, it also gave rise to the motel and travel industry. It
also gave rise to the fast-food industry. And so even though, in fact, net
employment in personal transportation declined with the advent of the
automobile, it gave rise to a whole bunch of new things that weren’t really on
anybody’s list that we could do now that we that we had this additional
leisure, additional wealth, and additional flexibility that came from not
having to spend so much of our time on transportation."_

~~~
throwaway2048
Yet nobody can identify where these millions of jobs for the 75%+ of the
population that is going to be made redundant are going to materialize from.

Thats a lot of faith to put in an idea that dosent even have an actual
conclusion.

~~~
moxious
This is flipping the burden of proof. That millions will be made redundant is
already a projection about the future, and those are notoriously terrible.

In the past when automation happened and jobs kept rolling it was due to the
invention of new industries. So of course no one can say where the jobs of
tomorrow will come from. Then again no one can really adequately explain why
"this time it's different" with automation. Ever since the luddites, people
have been projecting the death of work due to automation. Every time they're
positive that this time is different.

History suggests though that new industries will pop up to provide goods and
services that no one had the time to make in our pre-automation state of toil.
Human beings aren't going to stop being inventive, or stop wanting cool new
stuff.

~~~
sillysaurus3
A persuasive counter-argument, which convinced me, is:

Imagine a pair of horses in the early 1900's talking about technology. One
horse worries all these new mechanical muscles will make horses unnecessary.
The other horse reminds him that everything so far has made their lives
easier. Remember all that farm work? Remember running from coast-to-coast
delivering mail? Remember _riding into battle_? All terrible. These new city
jobs are pretty cushy, and with so many humans in the cities, there will be
more jobs for horses than ever. "Even if this car thingy takes off," he might
say, "there will be new jobs for horses we can't imagine."

But you know what happened: There are still working horses today, but nothing
like before. The horse population peaked in 1915. From that point on, it was
nothing but down.

There isn't a rule of economics that says "better technology makes more better
jobs for horses." It sounds shockingly dumb to even say that out loud. But
swap "horses" for "humans," and suddenly people think it sounds about right.

~~~
SomewhatLikely
I think more accurately in your analogy horses = those who derive their income
from labor. As automation increases, the returns to capital will accumulate,
whereas the returns to labor will decrease. But that capital will still be
owned by humans.

~~~
throwaway2048
0.1% of humans maybe

------
zebrafish
More of the same. Robots are easy to demonize in the US, especially for
liberals, because they shift the vitriol from foreigners who took our jobs to
machines who took our jobs.

None of these publications ever run with a solution to the problem. How about
increased funding for employee retraining programs? I could see high ROI from
that.

~~~
bsder
> None of these publications ever run with a solution to the problem. How
> about increased funding for employee retraining programs? I could see high
> ROI from that.

This is a good thing, and I agree with it. But, you are assuming an axiom that
is breaking down:

There are enough jobs for everyone at a wage capable of supporting a family.

That is no longer true.

Watching the current kerfuffle in the Central Valley of California has been
constructive. "We can't get people to do back breaking labor at $12 an hour
now that they got rid of the illegal immigrants! WAH!" Well, at $12 an hour,
which is below the official poverty level for a family of four, you are
probably better to work at a fast food restaurant which is less work and not
seasonal. So, nobody will work those farms.

Funny how _shortage_ always seems to go hand in hand with _below average pay_.
Funny how if the wage rises enough, there isn't any shortage anymore.

I guarantee that $20 an hour will find people to pick those fields.

> they shift the vitriol from foreigners who took our jobs to machines who
> took our jobs.

Your rhetoric is exactly the same as 100 years ago. I prescribe a trip to the
Johnstown Heritage Center:

[http://www.jaha.org/attractions/heritage-discovery-
center/](http://www.jaha.org/attractions/heritage-discovery-center/)
[http://www.jaha.org/attractions/heritage-discovery-
center/hd...](http://www.jaha.org/attractions/heritage-discovery-center/hdc-
features/america-through-immigrant-eyes/)

The real problem is that the gains from automation have flowed to a very small
number of people. If we don't figure out how to reverse that, we're going to
be in very big trouble.

~~~
sillysaurus3
_The real problem is that the gains from automation have flowed to a very
small number of people. If we don 't figure out how to reverse that, we're
going to be in very big trouble._

On the other hand, if we survive the worst effects, the world might come
closer to a post-scarcity society.

Once we escape the notion that working is necessary to be a member of what is
now called working-class society, we'll be better off. Those who want to live
on little can live on little. Those who want more can learn a trade to get
more. And those who have the most will support those who have nothing, because
the alternative is worse.

~~~
Neliquat
At current population growth, 'post-scarcity' will never come.

~~~
giggles_giggles
Even if it does come, there's no sense in designing policy as though it's here
or will definitely be here soon. In the modern day it's a utopian pipe dream
and history is replete with societies taken from bad or okay to positively
dystopic via utopian thinking.

~~~
sillysaurus3
The difference is that this time, there is no alternative. We'll be dragged
there, kicking and screaming.

Normally, it's easy to dismiss statements that are all-or-nothing
propositions. Usually the person making the statement lacks imagination. Isn't
there _some_ alternative?

Unfortunately, there seems to be a >90% likelihood that the answer in this
case is no:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU)

Once you accept that there is no choice other than giving people money to
survive, the focus can shift to accomplishing that goal rather than dwelling
on whether it might lead to economic collapse.

[http://blog.samaltman.com/technology-and-wealth-
inequality](http://blog.samaltman.com/technology-and-wealth-inequality)

> However, if we cannot find a new kind of work for billions of people, we’ll
> be faced with a new idle class. The obvious conclusion is that the
> government will just have to give these people money, and there’s been
> increasing talk about a “basic income”—i.e, any adult who wanted it could
> have, say, $15,000 a year.

> You can run the numbers in a way that sort of makes sense—if we did this for
> every adult in the US, it’d be about $3.5 trillion a year, or a little more
> than 20% of our GDP. However, we’d knock out a lot of existing entitlement
> spending, maybe 10% of GDP. And we’d probably phase it out for people making
> over a certain threshold, which could cut it substantially.

------
gregpilling
Robots Create Jobs.

I just purchased my second welding robot. It is a Miller/Panasonic PA-750S
with a 92" welding turntable. We make truck accessories with it. I bought a
made in Boston laser cutter at the same time, a 4000w IPG LaserCube.

All this new machinery lets us build in one (168 hour) week what we could
build in 2015. And it took only one lease payment down to finance - about
$8000.00, with another 59 payments of $8000ish to go - so I don't buy the
"only the super wealthy can buy robots" idea. Some people on HN have paid that
much for an office desk! These machines can make product to completely pay for
themselves in one month, if you can get the work for them.

By purchasing these machines, I was able to get some deals that would have
gone to China. Then I had to hire 4 new people to run them, and we had to go
to working 24/7 from only 40 hours a week before. All of this to make a
product that would not sell as well if it had to be priced at human weld
costs. The robots are at least 3x more productive than the human doing the
same part - if you have enough units to do. 30 minutes of change over time
between programs can waste any times savings.

So in my anecdotal experience, everytime I add another automated machine,
costs go down, prices go down, sales go way up, payroll goes up a little. I
have to keep hiring humans. and I pay them bonuses that they seem pretty happy
with. This doesn't count the machine manufacturers, their traveling support
staff, the leasing companies who lent the money, etc. etc.

I have friends with manufacturing companies in completely different industries
that have the same experience.

If anyone is in Tucson Arizona, you are welcome to come by. I will show you
how easy it is to program the robot. It will take me 20 minutes to teach you
how to make a basic weld.

~~~
dsp1234
_Some people on HN have paid that much for an office desk!_

I doubt many people on HN have paid $500,000 for an office desk

~~~
gregpilling
it was the $8000 down to get the machine I was referring to. The robot welder
was $2200 down payment, and the laser cutter was $5800 down. Modest amounts
for what they produce in goods, the machines can produce just an enormous
mountain of product. The $500k in machines can make $500k per month in stuff,
and you just have to make the $8k payment out of that.

Robots are for the little people too - not just MegaCorp.

------
dbcurtis
And I have evidence that robots create jobs, and I don't mean just my job. We
(Savioke) have customers telling us that our robot raises RevPAR, and that
their payroll is largely a function of RevPAR. Add robot -> increase RevPAR ->
add employees.

But of course I have chosen the "get a job building the robots" path, so you
can apply a bias filter to what I say if you like.

------
_rpd
Just the threat of a ban or tax on automation - much less the reality - will
cause manufacturers to plan new facilities outside the US. This sort of
scaremongering ...

> 'Why Are We Doing This to Ourselves?’ Readers Respond to the Threat of
> Automation

should be discouraged if the US desires to have any manufacturing capability
at all.

------
WalterBright
Ironic considering that I saw a recent documentary about the replacement of
typesetting machines and their operators with automation at the NY Times.

------
it
That may be true in the short term but those robots aren't going to repair
themselves or make more of themselves. Human beings will have to do that
unless someone comes up with a major breakthrough.

~~~
wvenable
This is ridiculous -- if the robots need more human repairmen than they
displace nobody would buy a robot. The entire point of robots is that they
require less human labor.

Software is no different; I've coded many applications that have eliminated
human labor. Obviously I still need to code them but the point is that the
overall labor is smaller.

~~~
avmich
Actually, some robots - like one going into Fukushima reactor, or crawling on
Mars surface - require quite a lot of people, which wouldn't be in the control
room had that robot not exist. So sometimes robots create new opportunities
which require more people.

~~~
mjevans
Exceptions rather than the rule.

The huge issue is going to be robots displacing the low level human jobs...

    
    
      * Burger flipper 1000
      * Fryalator 950
      * Pizza Kiosk 2000
      * Johnny Cab
      * ConstructUtron (builder of buildings, and welder of many standard joints)

------
faragon
American robots will make America great again, not protectionism, I guess.

