Andrew Yang POTUS Candidate - "Self-Driving Cars Will Cause Riots In The Street"

[Tugg Speedman]

The robots are coming (which includes self-driving cars) and they are going to tear society apart.

Meet the modern-day Luddite Andrew Yang who is running for the Democrat nomination in 2020 to stop progress.

His 2020 Campaign Message: The Robots Are Coming
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/10/technology/his-2020-campaign-message-the-robots-are-coming.html?smid=tw-nytimesbusiness&smtyp=cur

All you need is self-driving cars to destabilize society," Mr. Yang, 43, said over lunch at a Thai restaurant in Manhattan last month, in his first interview about his campaign. In just a few years, he said, "we’re going to have a million truck drivers out of work who are 94 percent male, with an average level of education of high school or one year of college."

"That one innovation," he continued, "will be enough to create riots in the street. And we’re about to do the same thing to retail workers, call center workers, fast-food workers, insurance companies, accounting firms."

The insight about Trump carrying states with highest automation is very interesting and I would love to see some real analysis on that.

Alarmist? Sure. But Mr. Yang’s doomsday prophecy echoes the concerns of a growing number of labor economists and tech experts who are worried about the coming economic consequences of automation.

[Tugg Speedman]

To be clear, my intention was NOT (repeat NOT) to start a political thread.  Instead, this interested me because here is a guy that has a platform that the robots must be stopped before they destroy society. 

I'll bet this gets some traction.  No, he is not getting the nomination, or even winning a primary, but I would not be surprised if his message gets a thorough airing in the coming years.  Lots of people are afraid of technology and will find this message appealing.

Count me as thinking this message being overly alarmist.  History shows technology is it is a net creator of jobs, not a destroyer.

[NorthernDancerColt]

Politicians fear organized, debt-enslaved voters more than they fear automation-induced unemployment. Porter Stansberry is equally alarmist about how political pressures are creating an environment where complete debt forgiveness (student loans, credit card debt etc) is a distinct possibility. He terms what is on the horizon as a biblical-style "Jubilee", which will have the asset class running for their lives. Which begs, "How big are the trunks on these Googlecabs?"

[#UnleashSean]

Robots  will "Destroy" society  until we put a universal income.

[MU82]

To be clear, my intention was NOT (repeat NOT) to start a political thread.

Question for mods, you ban people here for political talk.  Why isn't this thread locked and Smuggles on a week's vacation from this site?

[jesmu84]

The concern with massive automation (like getting rid of truckers and all the associated business) is consolidation of wealth even further in the hands of the few (especially when the govt appears to be pivoting towards cutting assistance programs - which will be badly needed if millions are out of work due to automation).

[Benny B]

I have two buddies who are truck drivers, a 20-some year veteran in his late 50s and another in his mid 40s.  I have not spoken with the latter but the former feels like he has enough seniority and is close enough to retirement that technology won’t affect him.

We both agree that our other aforementioned buddy (and most of their peers) is probably better off going to CLC to get a diploma or certification as an HVAC technician; fortunately, he doesn’t own his rig, so he can walk away any time without the burden of a lease hanging over him.  Problem is, not of lot of his kin are in the same position, and there are still way more open positions for truck drivers than there are for either plumbers or HVAC specialists right now.

Riots in the street?  Not surprising from a political candidate trying to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt into the masses for the sole purpose of motivating manipulating them to vote.  Maybe if elections were compulsory, our political candidates would be more focused on vision and solutions than they are driving people to the polls.  Oh well, I suppose suppressing the vote of 40% of the population is more important than the betterment of society.

[Benny B]

Completely by chance, I happened upon an Oct 2017 report from the American Truckers Association this morning on this very topic (PDF available here: http://trck.ng/drivershortage)

tl;dr -- By the end of 2017, driver shortage in the trucking industry was expected to exceed 50k, and by 2026, the shortage could be as high as 174,000.  Incidentally, the 2026 estimate is based on current trends and does not account for any changes in regulations or technological advances (e.g. autonomous trucks).  In fact, it even cites autonomous trucks as a potential course of action to reverse the shortage.

Other interesting stats:

Average driver age in the OTR sector is 49; average age is even higher for LTL's and private carriers.

70.6% of freight tonnage in the US is carried by truck (i.e. shifting burden to rail, air, water, etc. would not be feasible).

43% of the cost of trucking is driver compensation.

6% of truck drivers are female; 38.7% are minorities (no mention of crossover between the two).

88% of employers feel they're getting enough applicants but not enough are qualified.

90,000 drivers/year need to be hired over next decade; 49% will replace retiring drivers, 28% will accommodate growth.  Of the remaining 23%, hires to replace disqualifications will outnumber those replacing drivers pursuing other opportunities 2:1.



Moral of Story: Mr. Yang should be using something other than smoke and mirrors to promote his UBI platform.  But UBI, like compulsory voting, is a legitimate solution for the betterment of society that will be sacrificed at sea as our elected leaders focus solely on advancing and preserving their own vessels.

[mu_hilltopper]

That is damn interesting, Benny. 

Interesting how .. I thought .. truck drivers were not well paid, working for scraps.  That may be true .. but with massive shortages, you'd think they could demand a pretty good wage.   (Which would hasten the advent of robot drivers, of course..)

[StillAWarrior]

The biggest question I have regarding the self-driving trucks that are surely coming is whether there will need to be a human present in the truck.  While I have no doubt that the technology will allow the trucks to drive themselves before too long, I suspect there will be a requirement to have a human present.  It will require less skill than driving, but I'd think someone will be there.

[#UnleashSean]

Completely by chance, I happened upon an Oct 2017 report from the American Truckers Association this morning on this very topic (PDF available here: http://trck.ng/drivershortage)

tl;dr -- By the end of 2017, driver shortage in the trucking industry was expected to exceed 50k, and by 2026, the shortage could be as high as 174,000.  Incidentally, the 2026 estimate is based on current trends and does not account for any changes in regulations or technological advances (e.g. autonomous trucks).  In fact, it even cites autonomous trucks as a potential course of action to reverse the shortage.

Other interesting stats:

Average driver age in the OTR sector is 49; average age is even higher for LTL's and private carriers.

70.6% of freight tonnage in the US is carried by truck (i.e. shifting burden to rail, air, water, etc. would not be feasible).

43% of the cost of trucking is driver compensation.

6% of truck drivers are female; 38.7% are minorities (no mention of crossover between the two).

88% of employers feel they're getting enough applicants but not enough are qualified.

90,000 drivers/year need to be hired over next decade; 49% will replace retiring drivers, 28% will accommodate growth.  Of the remaining 23%, hires to replace disqualifications will outnumber those replacing drivers pursuing other opportunities 2:1.



Moral of Story: Mr. Yang should be using something other than smoke and mirrors to promote his UBI platform.  But UBI, like compulsory voting, is a legitimate solution for the betterment of society that will be sacrificed at sea as our elected leaders focus solely on advancing and preserving their own vessels.

I would say some of the shortage is because of bad work conditions long hours and the looming threat of being replaced by Wally the robot. Just because there's a shortage doesn't mean your job isn't threatened by automation

[Spotcheck Billy]

The driver shortage is worse recently because construction is up since the housing bubble. Both jobs compete for much the same work force.

[Benny B]

I would say some of the shortage is because of bad work conditions long hours and the looming threat of being replaced by Wally the robot. Just because there's a shortage doesn't mean your job isn't threatened by automation

The driver shortage is worse recently because construction is up since the housing bubble. Both jobs compete for much the same work force.

Both true.  However, I would offer to the former that speculation of autonomous vehicles becoming a discussion of the actuality of it in the near-term - at least in the format of it replacing truck drivers - didn't really come into the mainstream until about 12-18 months ago, yet the driver shortages have been going on for some time now.  Frankly, the first "oh shiit" moments for Jimbob the Truck Driver et al began with the premier of Logan , and that was just shy of a year ago.

To the latter, the report addresses this... and notably, calls out the construction industry three times.  But in doing a little math in the margins of the report, the number of drivers being lost to other employment, at most, accounts for only 8% of the shortages on a forward basis.  In other words, for every driver lost to the construction industry, at least 6 more are being lost to retirement.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Completely by chance, I happened upon an Oct 2017 report from the American Truckers Association this morning on this very topic (PDF available here: http://trck.ng/drivershortage)

tl;dr -- By the end of 2017, driver shortage in the trucking industry was expected to exceed 50k, and by 2026, the shortage could be as high as 174,000.  Incidentally, the 2026 estimate is based on current trends and does not account for any changes in regulations or technological advances (e.g. autonomous trucks).  In fact, it even cites autonomous trucks as a potential course of action to reverse the shortage.

One of my clients is a very, very large trucking company (think top 3).  Going forward, though, they think of themselves as a logistics company that will happen to also transport goods.

The C-suite tells me that they believe that in more than 5 but less than 10 years their fleet will be autonomous and their drivers, two-thirds of their workforce, will be largely gone.  Across trucking, it will equate to ~2M middle class jobs.

I'm not sure that we can say that in the future--now, really--technological advances will create more jobs than they destroy.

[#UnleashSean]

I'm not sure that we can say that in the future--now, really--technological advances will create more jobs than they destroy.

I'm sorry I am confused on what your saying. Are you saying that technological advances WILL create more jobs? Because automation is basically the science of how not to have a human do it.

[Benny B]

I'm sorry I am confused on what your saying. Are you saying that technological advances WILL create more jobs? Because automation is basically the science of how not to have a human do it.

I had to re-read it too, but I don't think there's any argument that both a) automation is technology, and b) automation kills more jobs than it creates; however, I wouldn't be too quick to throw the entirety of technology into the net-negative bucket.... after all, if not for the technology of the personal computer, how many of those jobs would even exist in Cupertino these days?

Answer: As of October 5, 2011, none.

[mu03eng]

I'm sorry I am confused on what your saying. Are you saying that technological advances WILL create more jobs? Because automation is basically the science of how not to have a human do it.

Automation frees up human capital to do other higher order things. Transformation is a chaotic process which will hurt some but with only one exception have we seen disruptive change that was a net negative (dark ages). Jobs are to be had and darn near plentiful if you can figure out how to change with the times/automation.

Simple example, I can learn to do calculus by hand....or I can have the calculator do it for me and spend that learning time on figuring out how/why to apply it to something useful.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

I had to re-read it too, but I don't think there's any argument that both a) automation is technology, and b) automation kills more jobs than it creates; however, I wouldn't be too quick to throw the entirety of technology into the net-negative bucket.... after all, if not for the technology of the personal computer, how many of those jobs would even exist in Cupertino these days?

Answer: As of October 5, 2011, none.

Sorry, I probably could have been a lot clearer.  Historically, like your example of the PC, technological advances have been net creators of jobs.  I don't know if that is the case going forward. 

Perhaps that is due to the accelerating roll out of automation as you elude to, but we seem to be in a cycle of destroying a lot more middle class jobs than we are creating.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Automation frees up human capital to do other higher order things. Transformation is a chaotic process which will hurt some but with only one exception have we seen disruptive change that was a net negative (dark ages). Jobs are to be had and darn near plentiful if you can figure out how to change with the times/automation.

Simple example, I can learn to do calculus by hand....or I can have the calculator do it for me and spend that learning time on figuring out how/why to apply it to something useful.

You are far more optimistic than I am.  The people being obsoleted now can't do calculus by hand, or even with a calculator.  I think a good portion of them are incapable of doing higher order things.

[GGGG]

You are far more optimistic than I am.  The people being obsoleted now can't do calculus by hand, or even with a calculator.  I think a good portion of them are incapable of doing higher order things.

So what do you do?  Do you block technological progress for the benefit of the few at the detriment of the many?

[jesmu84]

So what do you do?  Do you block technological progress for the benefit of the few at the detriment of the many?

UBI

[Tugg Speedman]

That is damn interesting, Benny. 

Interesting how .. I thought .. truck drivers were not well paid, working for scraps.  That may be true .. but with massive shortages, you'd think they could demand a pretty good wage.   (Which would hasten the advent of robot drivers, of course..)

Most of the studies I've seen say that long-haul trucker is about the worst job in the United States ... low pay, barely move at work (no exercise), eat crappy food, away from home a lot, boring.

43% of the cost of trucking is driver compensation.

And this is the stat which is going to lead to driverless trucks.  Can cut almost half your cost by getting rid of the driver.

The biggest question I have regarding the self-driving trucks that are surely coming is whether there will need to be a human present in the truck.  While I have no doubt that the technology will allow the trucks to drive themselves before too long, I suspect there will be a requirement to have a human present.  It will require less skill than driving, but I'd think someone will be there.

Correct, they will need a person in the truck initially.  Eventually no.

Also, the long term thinking is if long-haul driver assisted trucks can drive between say 10PM - 6AM can they allow them to go faster than the posted speed limit.  Again they are heavily driver assisted so they are safer than human only.  And if they stay off the roads between, say, 7AM - 7PM we all benefit without that traffic clogging highways.  But, in the future, you might see caravans of self-driving or driver assisted truck screaming down the interstate at 3AM at 100+ MPH each truck taking turns breaking the wind like a tour de France peloton.

[mu03eng]

You are far more optimistic than I am.  The people being obsoleted now can't do calculus by hand, or even with a calculator.  I think a good portion of them are incapable of doing higher order things.

The majority of the people who are being "obsoleted" are people that had almost no actual skill sets (calculus metaphor was a....metaphor, not literal). They are people who were physically performing activities with little to no actual intellect or training involved and very likely getting to retirement age anyway. With technological advancement hard things get easy(limited training/intellect) and new things are found that are hard to do(requiring higher education/intellect).

Example: Think of the ipad, my grandmother can't really use it but my two year old will easily in the next year if we let him.

[#UnleashSean]

The biggest question I have regarding the self-driving trucks that are surely coming is whether there will need to be a human present in the truck.  While I have no doubt that the technology will allow the trucks to drive themselves before too long, I suspect there will be a requirement to have a human present.  It will require less skill than driving, but I'd think someone will be there.

My best guess. 3-5 years from now automation is accessible but still slightly rare. Like seeing electric or hybrids. Human must be in driver seat and being attentive.
6-12 years - Common sight. 50% of cars are automated. Laws are relaxed as to attentiveness.
12-18 years - automation is almost a given. Still some drivers who want to drive themselves(kind of like manuals) attentive driver laws are completely removed. Cars are being made with seats facing inwards instead of towards windshield. Those who do not yet have driver licenses will never recieve them.
20+ Human driving is illegal.

[Tugg Speedman]

I had to re-read it too, but I don't think there's any argument that both a) automation is technology, and b) automation kills more jobs than it creates; however, I wouldn't be too quick to throw the entirety of technology into the net-negative bucket.... after all, if not for the technology of the personal computer, how many of those jobs would even exist in Cupertino these days?

Answer: As of October 5, 2011, none.

Not true, new technology typically creates more jobs than it kills.  It easy to see jobs that go away, hard to imagine the new jobs it will create.  So, it leaves one with the impression that it kills jobs.

See Northwestern's Bob Gordon at this MIT conference
http://futureofwork.mit.edu/

Examples

13,000 taxis in NYC.  Uber/Lyft/Ridesharing has killed about half the taxi jobs.  But it has also created over 50,000 ridesharing jobs in NYC.  Uber is a net creator of jobs.

My favorite ... the invention the spreadsheet killed off the "bookkeeper" but created far more jobs as "financial analysts."  The spreadsheet was not a killer of jobs or the accounting industry, it was a creator of jobs and fundamentally changed what an accountant does.

Wall Street Journal
August 2, 2017
We Survived Spreadsheets, and We’ll Survive AI
History shows technology fuels new kinds of jobs in addition to the ones it renders obsolete
https://www.wsj.com/articles/wesurvived-spreadsheets-and-well-survive-ai-1501688765

Then along came personal computers and spreadsheet programs VisiCalc in 1979, Lotus 1-2-3 in 1983 and Microsoft Excel a few years later. Suddenly, you could change one number—say, this year’s rent—and instantly recalculate costs, revenues and profits years into the future. This simplified routine bookkeeping while making many tasks possible, such as modeling alternate scenarios.

“You could play the what-if game. You know, what if I did this instead of that?” accountant Allen Sneider, the first registered buyer of VisiCalc, told NPR’s “Planet Money” in 2015 for a retrospective on spreadsheets.



The new technology pummeled demand for bookkeepers: their ranks have shrunk 44% from two million in 1985, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Yet people who could run numbers on the new software became hot commodities. Since 1985, the ranks of accountants and auditors have grown 41%, to 1.8 million, while financial managers and management analysts, which the BLS didn’t even track before 1983, have nearly quadrupled to 2.1 million.

Just as spreadsheets drove costs down and demand up for calculations, machine learning—the application of AI to large data sets—will do the same for predictions, argue Ajay Agrawal, Joshua Gans and Avi Goldfarb, who teach at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management. “Prediction about uncertain states of the world is an input into decision making,” they wrote in a recent paper.

----------

Tellers were not killed by the ATM, we have more tellers now than ever.  E-commerce is not killing retailing jobs, we have more e-commerce jobs than we lost in brick and mortar retailing.  Again, it is hard to imagine the new jobs automation creates, easy to see the jobs it displaces.

Wall Street Journal
September 5, 2017
Workers: Fear Not the Robot Apocalypse
Automation commonly creates more, and better-paying, jobs than it destroys. A case in point: U.S. retailing
https://www.wsj.com/articles/workers-fear-not-the-robot-apocalypse-1504631505?mg=prod/accounts-wsj

Those fears have repeatedly proven baseless. James Bessen, an economist at Boston University School of Law, has found in numerous episodes when technology was supposed to annihilate jobs, the opposite occurred. After the first automated tellers were installed in the 1970s, an executive at Wells, Fargo & Co. predicted ATMs would lead to fewer branches with even fewer staff. And indeed, the average branch used one-third fewer workers in 2004 than in 1988. But, Mr. Bessen found, ATMs made it much cheaper to operate a branch so banks opened more: Total branches rose 43% over that time.  Today, banks employ more tellers than in 1980 and their duties have expanded to things ATMs can’t do such as “relationship banking.”

---

Retail is easily the largest U.S. industry now facing digital disruption and yet there is strong evidence e-commerce hasn’t reduced overall employment and has likely added to it. It is true that thousands of stores have closed. Between the end of 2007 and the middle of 2017, brick-and-mortar retailers lost the equivalent of​ 140,000​full-time jobs, according to a forthcoming report ​by Michael Mandel, chief economic strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank. Electronic shopping jobs rose by only 126,000 in the same period.

But, Mr. Mandel notes, that excludes many jobs at fulfillment centers such as Fall River, which the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics​tends to count in warehousing and storage. He notes that Kentucky had just 3,213 e-commerce workers in 2016 according to the BLS, yet Amazon employs more than 12,000 there. Warehousing ​has added 274,000 ​jobs ​nationwide since 2007. Mr. Mandel argues all of ​those are attributable to​fulfillment centers and that thus total e-commerce employment has grown 401,000, nearly three times ​the ​brick-and-mortar drop. Mr. Mandel finds that fulfillment centers pay on average 31% better than brick and mortar stores in the same