The secret we are up against, automation will not make Manufacturing jobs.

[CK_John]

Nor will it build the middle class. We are in a change era never seen before.

On Nov 4 just a few days before the election Elon Musk said; "Robots will take your jobs, government will have to pay your wage".

Trump and his proposed team know this, they also know that only the top 10% of university grads will be needed.

It is time for the Dem leadership to let to people know that we entering a very difficult time that could bring back FDR programs such as the WPA, CCC, and we may have to lower Soc Sec to age 50.

[world wide wally]

1. I have to send my driverless car to the car wash then pick up some fast food I ordered with my app

Then I'm going out to look for a job

[CK_John]

4. Future of farming: Driverless tractors, ag robots.

Within the next decade, farming as we know it is expected to be revolutionized by the use of self-driving tractors and robots that can perform time-consuming tasks now done by humans.

Sales of major farm machinery have been in a continued slump amid weak prices for key crops such as corn and soybeans, but the ever-present need to control farm costs and increase output will eventually drive farmers to adopt autonomous technologies.

"They (farmers) are a pretty cautious bunch, which is understandable," said Kraig Schulz, co-founder and CEO of Autonomous Tractor Corp., a small private company based in Minnesota that is developing AutoDrive technology for tractors. Its technology is aimed at turning existing tractors into semi-autonomous machines.

Read More:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/16/future-of-farming-driverless-tractors-ag-robots.html

[Blanks]

27. Bulldozers and graders...

Can be operated by GPS. That technology has been around for quite a few years.

It's not all that difficult to go from the drawing board to the field.

[guillaumeb]

30. And small family farms will also be largely obsolete, or non-viable.

There are many existing jobs, and potential jobs, that would not require a degree. Weatherizing houses, repairing decayed infrastructure, and many others that could be living wage jobs. But capitalists know that there must be a certain level of unemployment to keep workers uncertain. Given that the top 1% has more wealth than the bottom 90%, the problem is wealth distribution.

[anarch]

2. universal basic income.... n/t

[Buckeye_Democrat]

20. That's about the only way such technology will help fulfill old sci-fi promises...

... of people working fewer hours and enjoying more leisure.

The people who own that technology, few of whom were technologically savvy enough to develop it themselves, don't care to be benevolent to the masses with greater automation and efficiency. All the benefits should go to them as the "owners" as far as they're concerned. Heck, the boards of corporations in this country are legally required to be that way! It's considered a protection for shareholders.

[Historic NY]

3. Somebody has to fix the robots, or at least service them.

(AI) will dominate us.

[CK_John]

5. That is the 10% doesn't help the 90%.

[stevenleser]

10. Other robots can do that too. nt

[LanternWaste]

6. This being as accurate as your predication

This being as accurate as your predication that automation and driver-less cars would be the fulcrum of the entire election. I like to play pretend as well...

[CK_John]

7. I said the candidate that brings up the issue would win, none of them did and none won.

[stevenleser]

14. Notwithstanding the OPs other predictions, which I have given them a hard time about as well

on occasion, I think this is a real thing that is coming.

I think it is going to cause a collapse of the current economic order.

What is wealth other than the ability to buy things that have a material and labor cost. If robots supply the labor there is almost no labor cost. Even most material costs have several layers of labor cost component built in by the time they hit consumers. Material costs would also go down.

If my robot(s) can build me anything I want, houses, cars, furniture, etc., and perform any services I need, I don't need a lot of money to have what would now be a very rich life.

[uponit7771]

8. We can shift the labor force and train people to be shifted with some safety net and STOP SELLING

... the bullshit ass'd fairy tale that someone can get out of high school and get a living wage job WITHOUT any vocational training

[CK_John]

9. Learn to weld (protect your eyes) but many high schools have drop

chop and arts.

[world wide wally]

12. Not too long ago, the education system was telling us that these jobs were not "equitable" .

Soon they will be among the "only" jobs

[HughBeaumont]

11. The Social Safety Net is going to be DISMANTLED, not exacerbated.

We have "Three Branches Bush on Steroids" now. There aren't even any Nixons or Reagans in this government.

Teabaggers aren't going to help the poor and un/underemployed.

This bunch straight up doesn't give a shit about the future and doesn't CARE. They live behind armed and gated walls. Might as well build an Elysium and hoard everything nice, because that's what it's going to eventually come down to.

[Calculating]

13. There are 3 main potential futures for mankind

1-We get our shit together and pay everyone a basic living income to make up for jobs lost to automation. People live together in peace and do what they love in life.
2-We fail to get our shit together, and we end up with an Elysium-like future as you suggest. The elites will live in heavily armed and walled off communities while 99% of mankind lives outside fighting over scraps.
3-We not only fail to get our shit together, but we actually regress and end up with a 'Mad Max' world as civilization crumbles due to extreme inequality and war.

Under Trump I see us headed towards #2 at best.

[stevenleser]

15. Only slight disagreement. I don't think that #2 is possible. #1 and #3 definitely are however.

Re: #1 I am not sure it will be a "pay" kind of thing. We haven't developed the kind of economic system we need to function where there are no labor costs and no need to earn a keep but whatever that system is, I don't think money as we know it will be involved.

for similar reasons, I don't think #2 will be a possible outcome. A fully automated society wont have elites or peasants.

#3 is unfortunately very possible.

[pangaia]

29. #3 to my mind is the most likely.

[moda253]

17. We are - and have been

We are - and have been living for some time in scenario #2.

[SubjectiveLife78]

18. #1 sounds way too good

Big world. 7+ billion people and growing. It is, and will be, a mix of the scenarios you mentioned, plus probably a few other ones.

[SubjectiveLife78]

16. Simplified, but the right wants to socially return to the 1950's

The left wants to economically return to the 1950's. Neither one will work.

[Skittles]

19. explain how the left wants to economically return to the 50's

go ahead

[SubjectiveLife78]

21. Strong unions for one

Stop sending American jobs elsewhere. As though "American" jobs exist. A job is just a job. There wasn't anything inherently special, or exceptional, about America when it built the world's great middle class. Other than being the one industrial nation that wasn't being bombed in some fashion.

It's a global economy. America has about 5% of the world's population. Do we get to run the world? Should we have more access to resources than other countries?

Unfortunately, labor isn't that different than anything else on this planet. People want more for less. I know we're talking about people, and not a toaster or whatever, but if someone can get someone else to do this or that job for less money, that's probably where the job is going to go. If people can build machines and algorithms that do the job on a more consistent basis, without having to worry about time off, or food, or children, or whatever else takes away from production, then you won't be around too long.

A country like Germany is doing pretty well despite a globalized economy, but a country like Greece isn't. Since they're somewhat connected through the EU, there has been friction between those countries, as Germany is such an economic powerhouse that thrives on exports. That's going to hurt Greece, in some way. Physical reality is tough to break out of for us humans. It's always a give and take somewhere along the line.

[Skittles]

22. strong unions meaning what

they are bad or good?

heaven forbid someone should actually represent THE WORKERS

[SubjectiveLife78]

23. Unions work very well when place matters

They lose strength when it doesn't. They lose strength when more people are available to do whatever the job is, unless all those available to do the work can agree to not do the work. Which only gets more complicated when corporations can play various governments around the world against each other. All those small regional governments, acting in their own interests. They lose strength when the people that make up the union aren't needed, which gets back to the main point of the OP.

Not so much good or bad, but effective or not effective.

[Skittles]

24. Discussionist or the "free" republic sites may be more to your liking

we support unions here - unions are NOT the problem

off to Ignore because I seriously doubt anything worth reading will be forthcoming

[CK_John]

25. My OP is about the lack of jobs due to automation why are you

worrying about unions. If there are no jobs, there will be no unions.

[SubjectiveLife78]

32. Alright, you won't see it, but I'm not saying unions are the problem, or a problem

I'm saying they exist, and are most effective, within a context. If variables within that context change, the effectiveness of unions can change.

Good and bad are about morality. Are unions good or bad? Of course they're good, but that's not the interesting part of this discussion. I'm responding to mass automation potentially making people obsolete. At least in terms of employment. The economy is going to be something, but it's not going to look like the 1950's, when unions were at their strongest in the US, and you could walk out of high school, grab a job, buy a house, and take a vacation. I'm pro-guaranteed income of some kind. How we get to that point, that will most likely be messy. The messy part is the interesting part, because that's where we're going, and it's a larger existential question, rather than are unions good or bad.

[RAFisher]

26. Agree completely. I don't think the Democrats have a full answer either.

Sure social programs seem like it will help some. If we are looking at only 1/10 of the jobs now then what do these other people do? It's almost a philosophical question. I don't even know. It won't happen over night. But when more and more white collar people see their jobs lost to robots then what happens? When the entire trucking industry is run by robots what will all the truckers do? Redistribution of the wealth won't be a dirty word. It will be obvious to more and more people that their are not enough jobs for everyone. The option is to take welfare from the government or die.

[CK_John]

28. First thing we need to do admit we have a problem, and no politician will

touch it because there is no solution yet or because they will need to fund it.

People need to have a reason to get up, so I advocate a safety net, lower Soc Sec to at least 50yr old. Then start building up community centers with arts and crafts, chess clubs, bowling leagues, provide tools and small shops, etc.

Teach people how to play and relax and to develop hobby crafts that could provide some income.

People are working on this here is an interesting read:

The net result is that an increasing percentage of the population is no longer economically viable. What's more, this condition is not going to be reversed by regulatory, tax, and fiscal policy changes at the federal level, intended to prevent domestic U.S. companies from offshoring jobs, as is being proposed by President-elect Trump.

The labor cost arbitrage opportunities that allowed companies to reduce costs by offshoring have largely been exhausted as global labor rates have begun to flatten. I've written about this trajectory and the significant implications of it for several years, but there's been almost no public awareness of the issue expressed by government and business leaders.

A few high-profile folks, such as Tesla (TSLA) CEO Elon Musk, have discussed the impact of technological unemployment on the structure of the economy, but even he is apparently unaware of the immediacy of the issue. A deep thinker like Stephen Hawking, although aware of what the trajectory for technological unemployment implies for governments, economies and societies, does not seem to recognize the immediacy of the issue.

In the near term, monetary and fiscal policy makers are faced with how to deal with a bifurcated economy in which an increasing number of people can't participate and the financial rewards migrating to the shrinking number who can.

Read more:
http://realmoney.thestreet.com/articles/12/03/2016/no-overstatement-structural-unemployment-biggest-economic-threat

[True Earthling]

31. 7 million jobs lost since 1979...yet factory production has doubled

A study at Ball State University’s Center for Business and Economic Research last year found that trade accounted for just 13 percent of America’s lost factory jobs. The vast majority of the lost jobs – 88 percent – were taken by robots and other homegrown factors that reduce factories’ need for human labor.

“We’re making more with fewer people,” says Howard Shatz, a senior economist at the Rand Corp. think tank.

General Motors, for instance, now employs barely a third of the 600,000 workers it had in the 1970s. Yet it churns out more cars and trucks than ever.

Or look at production of steel and other primary metals. Since 1997, the United States has lost 265,000 jobs in the production of primary metals – a 42 percent plunge – at a time when such production in the U.S. has surged 38 percent.

http://nypost.com/2016/11/02/robots-are-taking-more-factory-jobs-than-mexico-or-china/