Is this the beginning of the end for the working class?

[jesmu84]

Let's assume for a second that automated driving becomes common-place. Where do all the semi-drivers go? There are already mechanics that know how to fix those "robots". There will be workers out of jobs d/t automation. Will our economy "create" other, new jobs to replace what automation takes away? Maybe. But as of right now, there are industries where humans could be removed and have nowhere to go.

[rocket surgeon]

C'mon Surgeon - you were there for the wheel.

lol!  good one brandy-fire too-you should of seen the look on our faces, crapped our loin cloths 

[Tugg Speedman]

In 1900 50% of all jobs were in farms.  In 2000 it was less than 2%.  Farms in 2000 produce 20 times the food than farms in 1900, with 4% of the workers.

Similar the US Auto industry is set to produce nearly 17 million cars in 2014, the most since 2005.  HOWEVER, the auto industry is going to produce the same number of cars this year but with 40% less workers than 2005!  More than 90% less workers than 30 years ago when they also produced 17 million cars.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics defines "large companies" as those with more than 1000 workers.  Currently all workers at large companies is a smaller work force than 1980, yet these companies produce 6 times more "stuff" than 1980.

More antidotes .... Reuters now has computer programs that write news stories, they produce more content  than ever with an ever shrinking pool of reporters.

Tesla is set to break ground on a massive $5 billion giga factory in Nevada.  When Elon musk was asked how many workers it would employ, he said hopefully zero.  Raw materials would go into receiving and the final product would come out of shipping and everything in between would be automated.

Finally I wrote this post using the voice recognition on my iPad.  Hardly had to type anything and I didn't need a secretary to do it.


Get ready for massive change!  

[jsglow]

The thing that I find challenging is that the rate of change is accelerating. Tomorrow's generation is going to need to be very nimble.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Maybe we should encourage manufacturing jobs again, or major pipeline to be built, etc, etc.  Many of the jobs lost have been lost because of whacked policies as well.  Let's not blame it all on technology.  People will adapt. 

You want a guaranteed job, become a mortician or someone that works in the tax industry of some kind.

[jesmu84]

Maybe we should encourage manufacturing jobs again, or major pipeline to be built, etc, etc.  Many of the jobs lost have been lost because of whacked policies as well.  Let's not blame it all on technology.  People will adapt. 

You want a guaranteed job, become a mortician or someone that works in the tax industry of some kind.

We had many. Then a large number got moved overseas where production was cheaper thereby lowering cost to consumers as well as increasing corporate profits. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too

[ChicosBailBonds]

We had many. Then a large number got moved overseas where production was cheaper thereby lowering cost to consumers as well as increasing corporate profits. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too

Yes, and a large number also went away because of onerous regulations as well....EPA, etc.  You can't forget those.  I spent my first two years out of college working in the engine oil testing industry with clients like GM, Caterpillar, Ford, Detroit Diesel, Cummins and I would travel the US and Europe as we tested various engine oil products on OEM engines.  We sourced parts from various foundaries, machine shops, large parts manufacturers like Delphi, etc.  Sometimes policies meant to achieve one thing, have a very negative impact on another sector.....and that's being kind.

[Tugg Speedman]

Maybe we should encourage manufacturing jobs again, or major pipeline to be built, etc, etc.  Many of the jobs lost have been lost because of whacked policies as well.  Let's not blame it all on technology.  People will adapt.  

You want a guaranteed job, become a mortician or someone that works in the tax industry of some kind.

That ship has sailed permanently.  ]

November 1941 (month before pearl harbor) total manufacturing jobs in the US = 12.81 million

August 2014 (latest data) total manufacturing jobs in the US = 12.16 million

We produce 15x more stuff than the month before Pearl harbor with less employees.  Restated, we had more manufacturing jobs 73 years ago than today.

As I noted above the US auto industry will make 17 million cars this year, same as 2005.  But it will do it with 40% less employees.

Things that are done with your hands are in permanent decline.  They are being replaced by robots and computers.  Things done with your brain will eventually be replaced too, but that is coming later.  Right now, as Elon Musk noted with his Giga factory, he's going to try and do it with zero employees.  3d printing and factory-less manufacturing means we are trying to make stuff with no people involved.  Don't bet against it.

[brandx]

Yes, and a large number also went away because of onerous regulations as well....EPA, etc.  You can't forget those. 

Blah, blah, blah.... let's listen to Chicos as he tells (AGAIN) us how the liberals are destroying the economy.

[jesmu84]

Blah, blah, blah.... let's listen to Chicos as he tells (AGAIN) us how the liberals are destroying the economy.

To be fair, there are some regulations that are 1. dumb and 2. have unintended consequences. But there are still a ton of jobs that were taken away due to profit/bottom-line issues

[Tugg Speedman]

To be fair, there are some regulations that are 1. dumb and 2. have unintended consequences. But there are still a ton of jobs that were taken away due to profit/bottom-line issues

100% of jobs are taken away due to profit/bottom line issues.  That is the way it should be.

A job that does not produce a profit has another name for it .. charity work.

[reinko]

100% of jobs are taken away due to profit/bottom line issues.  That is the way it should be.

A job that does not produce a profit has another name for it .. charity work.

How do you define profit?   Just financial?

[brandx]

To be fair, there are some regulations that are 1. dumb and 2. have unintended consequences. But there are still a ton of jobs that were taken away due to profit/bottom-line issues

I agree with your points. But the majority regulation is there for safety or because of prior abuse. Do plane tickets cost more because of regulation? Of course, but would you trust your safety to a for-profit company whose margin would increase if they skimped on safety? Would you let your grade school kids walk to school if there were no regulations on operating motor vehicles? I could give a hundred other examples, but you get the point.

But greed also has a lot to do with the overall picture. Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries? Not exactly a profit/bottom-line issue. Huge profits would still be there if they sold "made in America" goods or paid their workers a living wage. You and I would not then be required to subsidize their health insurance with our tax dollars.

[jesmu84]

I agree with your points. But the majority regulation is there for safety or because of prior abuse. Do plane tickets cost more because of regulation? Of course, but would you trust your safety to a for-profit company whose margin would increase if they skimped on safety? Would you let your grade school kids walk to school if there were no regulations on operating motor vehicles? I could give a hundred other examples, but you get the point.

But greed also has a lot to do with the overall picture. Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries? Not exactly a profit/bottom-line issue. Huge profits would still be there if they sold "made in America" goods or paid their workers a living wage. You and I would not then be required to subsidize their health insurance with our tax dollars.

You may have misunderstood me. I absolutely agree with what you say here. But there is some regulation that is unncessary and some of it results in unintended consequences.  But yes, corporations will do whatever they can to increase profits for themselves, even if that means taking jobs out of the US or fighting against regulations that would result in the betterment of workers' lives.

[ChicosBailBonds]

That ship has sailed permanently.  ]

November 1941 (month before pearl harbor) total manufacturing jobs in the US = 12.81 million

August 2014 (latest data) total manufacturing jobs in the US = 12.16 million

We produce 15x more stuff than the month before Pearl harbor with less employees.  Restated, we had more manufacturing jobs 73 years ago than today.

As I noted above the US auto industry will make 17 million cars this year, same as 2005.  But it will do it with 40% less employees.

Things that are done with your hands are in permanent decline.  They are being replaced by robots and computers.  Things done with your brain will eventually be replaced too, but that is coming later.  Right now, as Elon Musk noted with his Giga factory, he's going to try and do it with zero employees.  3d printing and factory-less manufacturing means we are trying to make stuff with no people involved.  Don't bet against it.

We could do much more if we wanted, but the costs are too high in this country and whacky regulations (which drive those costs) mean the jobs go elsewhere.  Now before some idiot starts saying clean water and air and blah blah scare tactics at me, of course the American people want that.  The question becomes at what point does it go too far?  At what point does 5 parts per billion need to go to 3 parts per billion and has no recordable environmental impact but means a bunch of jobs are loss as a result.  Those are the questions that I believe should be asked and analyzed.

Of course, we could keep building choo choo trains that very few people will ride and cost an enormous amount of money to build and maintain....if one can get into that sector you have a chance on easy street for a while.

[Tugg Speedman]

How do you define profit?   Just financial?

Only way to measure it ... any other measure is just trying to argue that charity work is a job.

[wildbill sb]

We could do much more if we wanted, but the costs are too high in this country and whacky regulations (which drive those costs) mean the jobs go elsewhere.  Now before some idiot starts saying clean water and air and blah blah scare tactics at me, of course the American people want that.  The question becomes at what point does it go too far?  At what point does 5 parts per billion need to go to 3 parts per billion and has no recordable environmental impact but means a bunch of jobs are loss as a result.  Those are the questions that I believe should be asked and analyzed.

Of course, we could keep building choo choo trains that very few people will ride and cost an enormous amount of money to build and maintain....if one can get into that sector you have a chance on easy street for a while.

Oh my, more generalizations from the man from Orange Cty.  Time to return to the IGNORE button.

[Tugg Speedman]

I agree with your points. But the majority regulation is there for safety or because of prior abuse. Do plane tickets cost more because of regulation? Of course, but would you trust your safety to a for-profit company whose margin would increase if they skimped on safety? Would you let your grade school kids walk to school if there were no regulations on operating motor vehicles? I could give a hundred other examples, but you get the point.

But greed also has a lot to do with the overall picture. Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries? Not exactly a profit/bottom-line issue. Huge profits would still be there if they sold "made in America" goods or paid their workers a living wage. You and I would not then be required to subsidize their health insurance with our tax dollars.

Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries?

Wow! this says more about you than this topic ... and most of it is not good.

[77ncaachamps]

Farming.

There is a future in farming.

Good luck, robots...

[ChicosBailBonds]

Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries?

Wow! this says more about you than this topic ... and most of it is not good.

That's how some people think.  They actually believe that minimum wage workers built Walmart and they would not be successful without those minimum wage workers.  Forget those that took the risk, created the jobs in the first place, etc, etc.   That doesn't mean the front end workers didn't make a big impact, of course they do, but it's always funny to get into the mind of someone that clearly knows nothing about economics, capitalism, management, labor relations, etc, and it shows every time.

I've said it time and again, MU should require every student to take several business classes because clearly too many are getting out into the open having no clue.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Oh my, more generalizations from the man from Orange Cty.  Time to return to the IGNORE button.

Choo choo........choo choo

The California High-Speed Rail Authority has already dramatically downgraded its ridership estimates for 2035. In 2008, it promised voters 65.5 million to 117 million riders in 2035. Now it predicts 19.6 million to 31.8 million riders in 2035.

The Reason Foundation study finds, however, that even if the system managed to equal European train ridership levels it would hit just 7.6 million rides a year. Thus, ridership in 2035 is likely to be 65 percent to 77 percent lower than currently projected.

As a result of these slower travel times, higher ticker costs and low ridership, California taxpayers should expect to pay an additional $124 million to $373 million a year to cover the train’s operating costs and financial losses, the Reason Foundation study concludes.

“The California high-speed rail project cannot be delivered at the cost promised to taxpayers, is based upon a business plan incapable of delivering on its legal requirements, and is justified by proponents based upon unachievable benefits,” Wendell Cox, Joseph Vranich and Adrian Moore, the study’s authors, write. “The CHSRA’s financing assertions are virtual fantasy and represent additional evidence that its April 2012 Business Plan sorely fails the test of what constitutes a credible business plan. The taxpayers and the state would be best served by its immediate cancellation.” - See more at: http://reason.org/news/show/study-california-high-speed-rail#sthash.eyWYF1zm.dpuf

[MUeng]

100% of jobs are taken away due to profit/bottom line issues.  That is the way it should be.

A job that does not produce a profit has another name for it .. charity work.

not a fan of confucius eh?

[Tugg Speedman]

How do you define profit?   Just financial?

not a fan of confucius eh?

Charity work is very honorable and necessary.  I both contribute to and engage in charity work.

But let's not confuse charity work with economically productive jobs.  The are different things.

[Sheriff]

I agree with your points. But the majority regulation is there for safety or because of prior abuse. Do plane tickets cost more because of regulation? Of course, but would you trust your safety to a for-profit company whose margin would increase if they skimped on safety? Would you let your grade school kids walk to school if there were no regulations on operating motor vehicles? I could give a hundred other examples, but you get the point.

But greed also has a lot to do with the overall picture. Is it right that the waltons are Billionaires on the backs of minimum wage workers here and child labor in other countries? Not exactly a profit/bottom-line issue. Huge profits would still be there if they sold "made in America" goods or paid their workers a living wage. You and I would not then be required to subsidize their health insurance with our tax dollars.

Your argument is over-generalized and antiquated.  Regulation to address the low hanging fruit of past deficiencies has been in place for years.  We have now reached the point of diminishing returns with a larger portion of tax dollars used to sustain bureaucratic inefficiency and incompetency.  Regulation is no longer the primary driver for industry.  Priority on safety and environmental stewardship is driven by interest in protecting employees as assets while keeping in mind that compensation claims, tort litigation and civil court penalties cost more to address than regulatory non-compliance.  Environmental and safety stewardship is highly visible in corporate annual reports with increasing attention from a larger proportion of investors.  Regulatory compliance is becoming the minimum performance expectation with internal policies based on international standards and best practices.

[brandx]

Your argument is over-generalized and antiquated.  Regulation to address the low hanging fruit of past deficiencies has been in place for years.  We have now reached the point of diminishing returns with a larger portion of tax dollars used to sustain bureaucratic inefficiency and incompetency.  Regulation is no longer the primary driver for industry.  Priority on safety and environmental stewardship is driven by interest in protecting employees as assets while keeping in mind that compensation claims, tort litigation and civil court penalties cost more to address than regulatory non-compliance.  Environmental and safety stewardship is highly visible in corporate annual reports with increasing attention from a larger proportion of investors.  Regulatory compliance is becoming the minimum performance expectation with internal policies based on international standards and best practices.

Of course it is. I try to keep posts short so there is going to be some generalization.

I have no argument with what you say in your post.