Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Robots Help Manufacturing Recover Without Adding Jobs

Posted by samzenpus on from the john-henry dept.

kkleiner writes "For the last 30 years, automation has enabled U.S. manufacturing output to increase and lift profits without having to add any traditional jobs. Now, in the last decade, nearly a third of manufacturing jobs are gone. As manufacturing goes the way of agriculture, the job market must shift into new types of work lest mass technological unemployment and civil unrest overtake these beneficial gains."

9 of 559 comments (clear)

  1. What year is this? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Informative

    These exact same fears were written about in 1980. There was a famous BBC TV programme about how robots and microprocessors would replace everyone.

    We already know the outcome.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:What year is this? by jcr · · Score: 2, Informative

      The median worker's income has stagnated or declined in the US over the past 30 years.

      That's not because of rising productivity. It's because of financial shenanigans.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    2. Re:What year is this? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2, Informative

      These exact same fears were written about in 1880.

      Even earlier: The Luddites were most active in the 1810s.

      Every wave of automation works the same way

      And every wave of automation creates the same fears from people that don't understand economics. If you believe the lump of labor fallacy, as most people do, then it is obvious that robots will displace humans. Of course, real economies don't work that way, but neo-Luddites and economic illiterates will continue to believe that poverty is caused by improvements in productivity.

    3. Re:What year is this? by blue+trane · · Score: 2, Informative

      This chart indicates productivity has increased, but the gains have gone to the 1% at the top:

      http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html?ref=sunday

    4. Re:What year is this? by Bobfrankly1 · · Score: 5, Informative

      But incomes went up.

      Yes, but for whom?

    5. Re:What year is this? by ultranova · · Score: 3, Informative

      Each automation wave brings stuff that was previously only found among the wealthy into the hands of the common man. I expect this time to see a boom in personal shoppers, wedding planners, interior decorators, home theater consultants, car shopping assistants, and a bunch of services I've never heard of because they're still only for the rich (all the ones I listed are already taking off).

      How will the common man pay for these, if the common man doesn't have a job? That's the real problem: at some point the service industry has to connect to manufacturing industry for manufactured goods to flow. And the less manufacturing jobs are left, the less weddings or home theaters the people working them require.

      I suppose the absolute best outcome of this would be a huge upsurge of cultural production (entertainment), but that would require a huge cultural change and lots of re-education as well.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  2. Re:mass unemployment due to policies, not automati by invid · · Score: 5, Informative

    Capitalism does not guarantee low unemployment. It doesn't guarantee a meritocracy. We are fortunate that new technology has previously created new jobs for people to apply skills that gave them value to the rich. But as automation approaches human capabilities in more areas, there will be fewer opportunities available for humans. For those who don't already own capital, eventually the only jobs available to humans will be in the entertainment industry.

    --
    The Moore-Murphy Law: The number of things that will go wrong will double every 2 years.
  3. It does not matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Even if automation does increase unemployment without creating new opportunities, that is no reason to stop. The correct response is not "lets halt science and engineering so that everybody can continue doing work that humans no longer need to do." That makes no sense.

    The correct response is, "now that fewer humans need to work, we can establish new socialist policies to meet their needs anyway."

    That, however, rubs red-blooded Americans the wrong way, meaning that the actual response is (and will continue to be):

    "Automate away! Anyone who can't adapt and find new work can conveniently starve to death or turn to crime and wind up in jail, where taxpayer dollars will provide for all their needs but breeding will not be an option, resulting in an eventual die-off of all non-essential humans."

    That's just how people do things around here, for better or for worse.

  4. Re:Increased leisure time by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Informative

    Most people spend their extra money on basic essentials: rent and food and health care, things that existed in the 1970s. Get outside of the sheltered bubble and look around at all the poor people in other neighborhoods. Sure they may have cell phones (usually not smart ones) but those are often a necessity of life also if you want to find and keep a job.