Jobs , automation , capital

[CultureCitizen]

You're whining about the industrial revolution? It's over, get back to work.

Not whinning. Just asking questions which is how science usually makes progress.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

of course its not an issue. We could create 20 millon jobs tomorrow by shipping 20 million illegals home or 300 million by making the wheel illegal.

Wow Baiamonte, I took you for a liberal... I thought you were in favour of free movement of commodities across countries, labour being one of them.

no dear, conservatives believe in countries with borders, the USA being one of them.

Why change the subject. Do you want to make the wheel and automation illegal?
Do you have the character to learn from this experience or do you want to be a liberal all your life?

 

[CultureCitizen]

You're not listening. The automation trend started in the early 1960s. Yet unemployment varied up and down over the next 30 years. It was a slow process but there wasnt massive unemployment as a result.

And yet salaries have stagnated over the past 30 years. Automation is not to be blamed for this situation completely, other factors, as job offshoring and illegal immigration have played their fair share in this situation.

Now , my opinion on what may happen:
Simple manual jobs will cease to exist, as well as some which require specialized skills . Some others, related to education , entertainment, healthcare , prostitution, arts , r&d, and strategic planning will remain.
Education will become a must to get a job (luckily most upper education will be almost free and available online). People with no qualifications will live on food stamps.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Simple manual jobs will cease to exist,

so will the genius liberal tell us when Foxconn, Walmart, McDonalds, Military etc etc will have no more simple manual jobs?

 

[The Rabbi]

You're not listening. The automation trend started in the early 1960s. Yet unemployment varied up and down over the next 30 years. It was a slow process but there wasnt massive unemployment as a result.

And yet salaries have stagnated over the past 30 years. Automation is not to be blamed for this situation completely, other factors, as job offshoring and illegal immigration have played their fair share in this situation.

Now , my opinion on what may happen:
Simple manual jobs will cease to exist, as well as some which require specialized skills . Some others, related to education , entertainment, healthcare , prostitution, arts , r&d, and strategic planning will remain.
Education will become a must to get a job (luckily most upper education will be almost free and available online). People with no qualifications will live on food stamps.

Salaries have not stagnated. That is a lib talking point and long debunked. What you are seeing are people starting off on the low end and moving up. More people entering the workforce than leaving = lower averages. No one is making what he made 30 years ago.
What is a simple manual job? Bricklayer? Floor sweeper? Those arent especially simple and they arent going anywhere.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Salaries have not stagnated. That is a lib talking point and long debunked. What you are seeing are people starting off on the low end and moving up. More people entering the workforce than leaving = lower averages. No one is making what he made 30 years ago.

Would you share your sources ?

 

[gipper]

Technological advances have done great things for mankind. Now if we could limit or eliminate government, new technologies might solve most of our problems.

 

[The Rabbi]

Salaries have not stagnated. That is a lib talking point and long debunked. What you are seeing are people starting off on the low end and moving up. More people entering the workforce than leaving = lower averages. No one is making what he made 30 years ago.

Would you share your sources ?

What, in your mind, does this chart demonstrate?

 

[HenryBHough]

Automation will come into play whenever the price of human labour exceeds the value of that labour.

At each step what I'll call "n%" of jobs will be obsoleted by less expensive automated processes. However at that time something like one-tenth of the lower (not necessarily minimum wage) paid jobs will be replaced by higher paying jobs demanding more advanced technical skills. Skills which will require focused education; underwater basketweaving grads need not apply.

On the one hand the too-obvious solution is to reduce the overall population by, for example, executing the redundant.

That fails, though, in that a lower population consumes fewer goods.

So, what to do?

At a young age separate those with the ability to learn into two groups. One very small group with aptitude for management. They get assigned to universities where they are further winnowed, the best being afforded higher degrees ultimately becoming a very highly paid management class. These people are assigned a value of 4 so, in elections, each one casting a ballot counts as four votes but ALL four for the same candidate.

Those who graduate in higher skills, for example chemists, become 3's.

Those who were selected out of the university stream but complete educations leading to competence to maintain the automated systems become 2's.

Those who failed to display any aptitude at the first selection stage are sterilized, given housing and are supplied with the basic necessities of life with no work requirement at all. The just get their ATM card charged up ever week as though they had worked. This class, the 1's, are also allowed access to alcohol and narcotics without limit. For any accident not related to use of those substances they are given free medical care. For all other problems - free hospice care.

It's a "from each according to the abilities; to each according to their needs" regimen which should immensely please liberals coupled with limiting factors (the 1 vote and sterlization) that should make it palatable to conservatives.

Now who would be first to sign up?

Liberals?

Conservatives?

 

[CultureCitizen]

Simple manual jobs will cease to exist,

so will the genius liberal tell us when Foxconn, Walmart, McDonalds, Military etc etc will have no more simple manual jobs?

At different times.
McDonnalds - The least complex : 15 years.
Foxconn - 20 to 25 years.
Wallmart/Military - More complex, lots of logistics involved : 40 years.

 

[CultureCitizen]

What, in your mind, does this chart demonstrate?

What the title says : The evolution of non-supervisory incomes compared to the consumer price index.
Probably this is more appropiate , though it doesnt go back to 1970.
So, from 49K to 52K , 6% in 30 years. I'd say it's quite stagnated.

 

[The Rabbi]

What, in your mind, does this chart demonstrate?

What the title says : The evolution of non-supervisory incomes compared to the consumer price index.
Probably this is more appropiate , though it doesnt go back to 1970.
So, from 49K to 52K , 6% in 30 years. I'd say it's quite stagnated.

No. It indicates that wages have more than kept up with price increases.
This is the problem arguing with people. They cant read and interpret a graph and you end up teaching them what their own graph says.

 

[Old Rocks]

OK, worms eye view from a steel mill. If you do not have a trade or valued skill, expect little in the way of wages. And if your job is simple and physical, expect to get replaced by a machine. For those with trades and skills, best continue your education through whatever means possible. College, community college, on the net. Because the technology is advancing rapidly, and you will find yourself left behind if you do not catch up.

Now the reality of employment. If you continue your education as a trademan, and your company does not reward your increase in skills, move on. Just as they owe you nothing but the pay for the work you have already performed, you owe then nothing other than competant work for the pay you recieve. If they do not recognize your contributions, move on to a company that does. Recognition in the way of compensation. That is the only real contract between labor and corperations.

 

[CultureCitizen]

What, in your mind, does this chart demonstrate?

What the title says : The evolution of non-supervisory incomes compared to the consumer price index.
Probably this is more appropiate , though it doesnt go back to 1970.
So, from 49K to 52K , 6% in 30 years. I'd say it's quite stagnated.

No. It indicates that wages have more than kept up with price increases.
This is the problem arguing with people. They cant read and interpret a graph and you end up teaching them what their own graph says.

Man , you must be a politician. How else would you claim that stagnation is growth.
In the same period of time the per capita gdp ppp has more than tripled from 5T to 16T.
Guess where all that money has gone.
Let me give you a tip

Now that is what I call growth.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

.
McDonnalds - The least complex : 15 years.
Foxconn - 20 to 25 years.
Wallmart/Military - More complex, lots of logistics involved : 40 years.

worthless idiotic liberal BS! No one cares about your foolish childlike guesses. Does the fool liberal have stockmarket predictions too? Why not tell us why you're liberal as opposed to a conservative? If you always think about stupid things you will always be stupid.

 

[CultureCitizen]

worthless idiotic liberal BS! No one cares about your foolish childlike guesses. Does the fool liberal have stockmarket predictions too? Why not tell us why you're liberal as opposed to a conservative? If you always think about stupid things you will always be stupid.

First you ask for a guesstimate and then you call it worthless idiotic liberal BS.
Can you make up your mind? Assuming , such thing exists.
If you want me to answer those questions, then start another thread and stop spamming this one. This thread is not intended to cover those topics. Off with you.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

worthless idiotic liberal BS! No one cares about your foolish childlike guesses. Does the fool liberal have stockmarket predictions too? Why not tell us why you're liberal as opposed to a conservative? If you always think about stupid things you will always be stupid.

First you ask for a guesstimate and then you call it worthless idiotic liberal BS.
Can you make up your mind? Assuming , such thing exists.
If you want me to answer those questions, then start another thread and stop spamming this one. This thread is not intended to cover those topics. Off with you.

you idiot liberal, you said there would be no jobs because someone invented the wheel and thus destroyed billions of jobs!! How stupid is that?

 

[The Rabbi]

What, in your mind, does this chart demonstrate?

What the title says : The evolution of non-supervisory incomes compared to the consumer price index.
Probably this is more appropiate , though it doesnt go back to 1970.
So, from 49K to 52K , 6% in 30 years. I'd say it's quite stagnated.

No. It indicates that wages have more than kept up with price increases.
This is the problem arguing with people. They cant read and interpret a graph and you end up teaching them what their own graph says.

Man , you must be a politician. How else would you claim that stagnation is growth.
In the same period of time the per capita gdp ppp has more than tripled from 5T to 16T.
Guess where all that money has gone.
Let me give you a tip

Now that is what I call growth.

There is no stagnation. You are measuring unlike things.

 

[CultureCitizen]

There is no stagnation. You are measuring unlike things.

Ok rabbi , there is not a complete stagnation, but a 6% real growth in 30 years is a really, really slow growth.
Plus, this is the median income. If we break it down by income we get a clearer picture:

Negative growth if you are in the bottom 60% .
Slight growth if you are in the 60-80% range.
Significant growth above that.

Neoconica - America For The New Millennium Zero Hedge

 

[The Rabbi]

There is no stagnation. You are measuring unlike things.

Ok rabbi , there is not a complete stagnation, but a 6% real growth in 30 years is a really, really slow growth.
Plus, this is the median income. If we break it down by income we get a clearer picture:

Negative growth if you are in the bottom 60% .
Slight growth if you are in the 60-80% range.
Significant growth above that.

Neoconica - America For The New Millennium Zero Hedge

You're just not getting it here. You're looking at statistical phenomena, not real people.

Let's put it this way:
You have two kids. One is 4', the other is 3'. OK so your household kid height average is 3.5'. The next year the older one is 5', the younger one is 4' but you've had a baby, who is 1.5' long. So now your household kid height average is 3.5. Does that mean that your kids have stagnated in height during the year?? Better see a doctor.
Same thing with wages.