
Robots Rule at Swiss Factories as Strong Franc and Wages Bite - geodel
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-02-17/robots-or-exit-is-swiss-factory-choice-as-franc-and-wages-bite
======
brightball
Robots work really well for manufacturing. What they don't work well for is
repairs.

IMO, the natural progression that combats the impact of robots is to
transition from a "buy a new one" society to a "fix the old one" society.
There's an entire service industry there that mitigates waste, is better for
the environment, is entirely localized and isn't realistically ever going to
fit the "make the robot do it" line of work. 3D printers should make this even
easier.

The only thing that makes the current approach work is people not feeling the
cost of waste disposal due to free trash pickup. As soon as disposal's real
costs are actually attached to it you'll begin to shift people's mindsets to
products that are built to last instead of built to replace. Investing in a
purchase that's harder to repair than replace is one of the reasons for a lot
of the issues that we experience in society today.

EDIT: Apparently many European countries charge $2/lb for trash pickup but
recycling is free, just as an example on that note.

[http://www.wisebread.com/should-we-pay-2-per-pound-for-
garba...](http://www.wisebread.com/should-we-pay-2-per-pound-for-garbage-
disposal)

[http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/recycling.html](http://www.howtogermany.com/pages/recycling.html)

~~~
barrkel
We'd be better off with robotic dismantling and recycling than a repair
culture, IMO. Repaired items are never as good as new. I'd much rather a
future where my car was dismantled and rebuilt overnight by robots than
repaired overnight.

Things degrade and wear out at different rates. The clock starts at zero when
something is new, but when something breaks, the "mean time to failure" is all
over the place for the components. At a certain point, you don't really own
something old; instead, you're paying rent in the form of repairs. The
intermittent availability starts to become stressful; you're never sure when
the next thing will break or need repair, you can no longer rely on the thing.

IMO the whole recycling religion is an historical blip. There's no long term
need to focus on repairable, recyclable products; nor any need to separate out
rubbish types etc. This is a resource allocation problem, and with legislation
to embed the cost of dismantling and separation in the cost of something, I
think it'll disappear.

~~~
adrianN
You are aware that producing new things consumes many non-renewable resources
that could be saved by a simple repair? Recycling is only a distant second
when it comes to saving resources.

~~~
barrkel
Most non-renewable resources are for energy generation; I think economics
(i.e. price information) will solve this problem. The biggest challenge is
ensuring that externalities are priced in correctly, and in ways that aren't
politically corrupt or, too stickily protectionist for industries.

------
planetjones
It is no surprise to see many Swiss vocally supporting the 'Grundeinkommen' \-
which is a basic income for everyone. In the age of corporate greed (move the
jobs to cheaper locations) and automation (bring in the robots) Switzerland,
like every country, will have to ask itself 'what do humans do'.

The basic income is the solution in my opinion. Let all citizens live to a
basic level, but not too good a level that the incentive to innovate or do
more is gone. The basic income will, in my opinion, lead to a more
entrepreneurial society where risk takers are supported - and also a more
socially responsible and caring society, where people can donate their time to
help others.

~~~
ythn
> Let all citizens live to a basic level, but not too good a level that the
> incentive to innovate or do more is gone. The basic income will, in my
> opinion, lead to a more entrepreneurial society where risk takers are
> supported - and also a more socially responsible and caring society, where
> people can donate their time to help others.

You can never eliminate the poverty line. You can only shift it. Poverty in
the 1400s meant you lived in squalor with no utilities and no sanitization and
very few public services.

Poverty in 2017 means (for the most part) you have a small or shared condo
with running water, electricity, refrigerator, television, smartphone, access
to lots of public services (libraries, parks, hospitals, etc) and more. The
poor people of today have it better than kings of old, but very few people
hold that perspective.

Under UBI poverty will just get shifted to the new standard, but people will
only be temporarily happier with their new standard of living. The next
generation will be discontented with their standard of living. People will
complain that UBI isn't enough to live on, etc. How is the end game not
communism? Who gets to say: "stop complaining, UBI is enough for you." Won't
it be more tempting for the politicians to say: "You're right, this is
outrageous! The rich have oppressed you enough, we need to tax them more to
raise your UBI."

~~~
woofyman
I'm pretty sure the kings of old didn't go hungry.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunger_in_the_United_States)

~~~
valuearb
Pretty sure the kings of old would have been dumbstruck at what we consider
"hunger" when they see how obese our poor typically are.

Edit: I don't want to make this sound like I don't care about hunger, clearly
kids should not have to go hungry in our present day society. Its on us to
provide the poor with avenues and incentives to work and earn living wages.
Adults who refuse to work help themselves, well hunger can be a needed
incentive.

~~~
cuecue
I don't see how that's a relevant argument. People who are hungry and people
who are obese both lack mean to attain proper nutrition. Stress, obesity and
debt is the new hurt, hungry and poor. unfounded opinions are the new not
knowing something. Everything is different, yet the same. Downvoting is just
regular stupid, if you can't make an argument for your opinions but instead
try an hide others arguments you're just plain old stupid.

------
kogus
I read this as "human employees are hard to find, and really expensive, so we
automated".

Which I think also means "unemployment is low and wages are high".

So.. this is a good thing?

~~~
gohbgl
Yes, it's a good thing. The Swiss are among the wealthiest people in the world
because of their high productivity. But "robots take our jobs" makes for a
nice headline.

------
Havoc
The whole robot revolution thing only sunk in for me when my dad (owner of
elec co) mentioned that they got a contract for installing lighting in a
factor that is on a timer.

Turns out they need the lights off 6 days a week (robots) and 1 day on (humans
doing maintenance on robots). That whole concept of they don't even bother
lighting it really hit home in terms of yeah really no humans anymore.

~~~
dan_quixote
It's literally referred to 'lights-out manufacturing' in the automation
industry.

------
Animats
There's a business opportunity here in the US. It's now clear that the current
administration intends to deport every illegal immigrant they can identify.
This will reduce the pool of cheap labor in specific industries. That creates
an opportunity for automation.

\- Fruit picking for difficult crops. Abundant Robots has a good demo system.
What they don't have is a technology ready to be deployed. This is an area in
which YC could be active. To finance rapid deployment, FSA loans [1] could be
used.

\- Floor care. This should have been automated by now. The Roomba and its
friends just aren't good enough at cleaning. What the world needs is a good
$3000 industrial strength floor cleaning robot. The technology exists [2] but
is too bulky. Here's the Swiss version.[3] And the advanced R&D version, which
is not practical yet.[4] This technology is here, almost. Commercial cleaning
needs to become one well-paid person and a crew of robots. This is within
reach, and now there's an incentive.

\- Lawn care. "Mow, blow, and go" should have been automated by now.

\- Commercial dishwashing. Pre-inspection, sorting, vision-guided aiming of
pressure wash jets, and post-inspection is needed. A robot at the Baxter level
should be able to do this.

[1]
[https://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=GRANTS_L...](https://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?navid=GRANTS_LOANS)
[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngDiT6_FA3A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngDiT6_FA3A)
[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtS9oAhEg9A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtS9oAhEg9A)
[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzznru0BDzk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hzznru0BDzk)

------
nkrisc
Humans can do lots of things robots can't currently do: they can create
thoughtful art, write meaningful stories and journalism. They can take care of
and raise children. They can easily tailor instruction to individuals, and
more.

What do all these roles have in common? They aren't usually valued very highly
by society. It seems a lot of people want to work the jobs the robots are good
at and not do the ones humans are best at.

~~~
thenomad
_What do all these roles have in common? They aren 't usually valued very
highly by society._

Artistic work is valued very highly by society. J.K. Rowling is a billionaire.
Notch, creator of Minecraft, likewise. George Lucas is a billionaire 5x over.

 _It seems a lot of people want to work the jobs the robots are good at and
not do the ones humans are best at._

A very large number of people _desperately_ want to do artistic work, enough
to keep doing it on less than minimum wage and/or in terrible working
conditions for decades or their entire lives.

The problem is not that artistic work, per se, isn't valued. The problem is
that artistic jobs in the 21st century suffer from a truly vicious power law
curve, and a comparatively small number of people can create most of the art
and storytelling most people will consume, and thus reap most of the rewards.

~~~
jlg23
I'd argue that the average monthly income of artists is lower than that of
software developers. Same for workers in care.

~~~
thenomad
The average monthly income of artists is _massively_ lower than that of
software developers. It's probably lower than that of janitors.

In the UK a professional author, on average, earns below minimum wage, for
example.

[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11550871/Just-...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11550871/Just-
one-in-ten-authors-can-earn-full-time-living-from-writing-report-finds.html)

Again: power law curve. A very small number of authors create something that
becomes a massive hit. They get extremely wealthy, because society really
values their work.

Most - and by "most" I mean 99.99% - don't.

I'd call it an "inverse square law", but the distribution is _so_ uneven that
most artists would be tearfully grateful if it suddenly changed to only be
equivalent to 1/x^2 .

------
Quequau
Or you know, the costs have fallen and the flexibility & capability automation
has improved.

~~~
mjn
Yeah, articles that focus on wages as the primary driving force (or here,
wages plus currency movements) are missing the main picture. Changes in wages
do make a difference at the margins, but only the margins: a 15% wage change
in one direction or another simply speeds up or slows down the schedule of
automation being rolled out, but it doesn't make previously completely
infeasible things feasible. Tech developments, on the other hand, can produce
order-of-magnitude improvements in costs and capabilities, which swamps these
smaller currency/wage movements in terms of making things feasible and
economical to automate.

------
joe_the_user
The chart of job growth in manufacture shows a series of dips and rises ending
with a small dip in 2015 [1]. Call me skeptical but I can't see this
supporting the claim that automation is reducing manufacturing employment in
Switzerland - especially if the world financial climate is bad, this small dip
could even represent postponed hiring. And the big thing is automation is not
something that appeared in 2015 - in a factory setting, people have been
trying to apply it forever. The simpler description would be "due to extremely
high currency, some swiss factories close - and automation continues as
usual".

Maybe automation is ultimately going to eat all jobs. The claim that automated
jobs inherently generate more jobs is another unsupported "received idea" imo.

That said, a steady-state scenario would be where each year, a factory is
automated more, maintains the same workforce and produces more and better
stuff, and the world consumes that larger amount until the whole world has all
the stuff they need.

That doesn't look like where things are headed but it isn't obviously
impossible even if the policies of Trump don't seem like well-thought-out
approaches for bringing them about.

[1]
[https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/idKGEW3NsEy...](https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/idKGEW3NsEyI/v2/800x-1.png)
\- same article

------
runeks
No wonder robots rule in Swiss factories when corporations can issue bonds at
negative interest rates.

When the rate of interest is 7%, paying wages or a salary can be significantly
cheaper than buying expensive equipment, because of compound interest. A
10-year bond at 7% interest is 40% more expensive than one at zero percent.

The Swiss central bank is creating an environment where corporations have no
choice but to automate - it's simply too expensive not to. If they don't do
it, their competitors will.

------
csours
> “We ask ourselves ‘can we avoid this process altogether?’ When not, we ask
> ‘can we fully automate it?’ This is what we try to do,” Lindner told a
> conference in Zurich in November. “We are really trying to automate not just
> our production sites but also our back office.” - Ricola CFO

------
delegate
Robots everywhere are a good thing (tm).

Why hire people when you can cut costs by 100x and deliver more stuff of
higher build quality ?

However nobody except the owners benefit from automation (savings are
profits), while slowly generating a huge unemployment problem outside the
factory walls.

The governments or companies themselves should quickly step in - not just
through some sort of universal income, but through making automation public.

In other words, robot schematics and software should become public and open
source and companies should be highly encouraged (tax benefits etc) to open
source all their software and build schematics.

~~~
nradov
Government can't legitimately force robot designers to give away their IP.
That would eliminate the economic incentive for designing new robots. And
having an industrial robot would be useless outside the context of a fully-
equipment modern factory anyway.

How would you even define what the terms "robot" and "automation" mean in
legal terms anyway? Almost everything man-made object around us is automation
in some sense.

------
geodel
Sometime back there was an account of how good is work-life balance in
Switzerland. Now it seems Swiss will also face economic forces which spared
none.

~~~
surfmike
This jist of this article is that companies need robots for manufacturing
_because_ the Swiss have it so great in their non-manufacturing jobs. Having
low unemployment, high wages, and a strong currency is an enviable situation
for a country.

edit: P.S. For the record, they currently have a 3.5% unemployment rate.

~~~
pif
> Having low unemployment, high wages, and a strong currency is an enviable
> situation for a country.

Concerning the strong currency, Swiss National Bank disagrees with you :-)
They tried to buy as many euros as possible in order to keep Swiss franc from
getting too strong, until they gave up. Ant then Swiss export started to
suffer a lot more!

~~~
tonfa
> until they gave up

Wasn't it mostly due to EUR losing ground against USD (due to QE?)? (at which
point it didn't make as much sense pegging the currency only against EUR, I
wonder why they didn't peg against a mix of currencies). In any case the SNB
doesn't seem too concerned now, at least there's no peg anymore.

------
chrismealy
Full employment and high wages drive technological progress. When labor is
abundant there's little incentive to invest in technology.

------
sschueller
This is not a surprise, Switzerland also makes a lot of precision robots used
in manufacturing. ABB is probably the largest in Switzerland.

------
skookumchuck
I prefer to repair rather than replace, but sometimes you get really punished
for it. Try to replace the heating element in a dryer, or the circuit board in
a furnace. The costs are so high you might as well replace the whole thing.

On the other end, my car is designed to make it easy to replace components,
and they're cheap, too.

