Slashdot Mirror
Fear of Robots Taking Jobs in the Short Term is Overblown, Says General Electric CEO (qz.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: "I think before we go to the phase where it's only robots at every bench, we are going to go through a phase of smarter workers," General Electric CEO Jeff Immelt told reporters on March 30. GE has been investing heavily in futuristic manufacturing techniques. Immelt said that in Lafayette, Indiana -- where GE Aviation is ramping up production for portions of its new fuel-efficient LEAP aircraft engine -- "we're going to add workers, but probably not as many as we would have twenty years ago" and each worker will be "higher value, smarter, more productive." [...] So if phase one is smart workers, what's the next? "I'm not that smart," Immelt said. "I don't know exactly how many phases that we're going to go through. But I think we're going to be in phase 'smart worker' for a fair amount of time. I really do. I think we're better off as a country focusing on the smart-worker phase than going right to 'robots are evil.'"
...says company that makes robots for assembly lines.
What's next, an article by Wall Street about how regulation is not needed in the banking industry?
What a lot of people don't seem to get is that if a substantial fraction of labor gets displaced, market forces will tend to devalue *all* labor.
Yes, maybe *my* job is safe, but my pay doesn't have to stay high.
Suppose all truck drivers are replaced with automation. That's 1M more people on the job market. Yes, maybe they can't do MY job, but, with no alternative, they'll try to get educated and move up the labor food chain.
And with more people in general chasing ever fewer jobs, there'll always be someone willing to do any given job for cheaper--including mine.
Arguably this has already happened significantly. Do you realize that the share of corporate productivity that goes to labor has shrunk in half compared to 1973?
That if labor got the same share of productivity today that it had in 1973, that we'd all have 2x the purchasing power? I'd love to be paid 2x the purchasing power. I'd be done with my mortgage, be completely unworried about retirement and paying for medical care, etc.
I welcome automation replacing labor, but we have to find a way to distribute the resulting wealth such that the people who own things have don't have ALL the wealth and so that the people who can no longer make ends meet in a depressed labor market can live decent lives.
--PeterM
That's exactly what a robot would say if it had killed the CEO of general electric and taken his place.
Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
Please please please tell me you work as either an English teacher or an editor for a news paper or magazine.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The word you are looking for is "artisinal", as in "hand crafted locally sourced organic free range gluten free artisinal 3mm x 16mm screw"
I read the internet for the articles.
Umm, I don't know may be adjust your world view? And realize no person is better than another and everyone is entitled to basic food, shelter and healthcare.
What a lot of people don't seem to get is that if a substantial fraction of labor gets displaced, market forces will tend to devalue *all* labor.
Yes, maybe *my* job is safe, but my pay doesn't have to stay high.
To be fair, Jeff Immelt is simply speaking from one of the basic fallacies. He probably learned it at management school, and hasn't spent even a moment in critical thought about it.
Specifically, modern economics assumes infinite consumption which implies infinite need for work. "Infinite consumption" comes from either the Malthus'ian idea that human population will grow exponentially until resources run out, or the idea of "always wanting more", as in bigger house, more cars, more land, more toys, etc.
Personal consumption has limits, and industrialized nation population *doesn't* grow without bounds, and productivity keeps going up, and you start to realize that the job pool is finite, and any reduction in jobs puts stress on the people who need to find jobs to live.
The US is at about $50,000 per person in production, and that's a huge amount. Note that this is per person, and not per working person. We have enough wealth in this country to let everyone live comfortably with only half our workforce - and productivity keeps going up.
It's a fallacy of modern economics, it's unsustainable (labor versus shrinking job market) and something has to give eventually.
Whether we transition to a different system that lets people enjoy our production, or whether civilization crashes and burns, depends on people like Jeff Immelt.
Specifically, whether Jeff Immelt, and other like him, can unlearn modern economics and help transition us to a different model.
how do you distribute that wealth from automation without making it feel like stealing?
Education. Progressive taxation is clearly not theft, but it could certainly feel that way to someone is simply doesn't understand the benefits of a more equitable society.
I would say it is analogous to the stroboscopic effect which can make tires appear to be spinning backwards. The only way to help someone understand why the tire seems to be moving backwards is to educate them about this optical illusion. The same goes for educating the populace about the benefits to society of having wealth better distributed.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
Well, he's a modern business executive, so about a month. "Long term" is next quarter.
Imagine a guy who was a coal miner. Then the coal mine closed.
So he became an auto assembly line worker. Then was replaced by a GE robot.
So he became a truck driver, because those trucks aren't going to drive themselves.
The GE guy is saying that we're going to go through a phase of smarter workers. Okay, the mythical guy I just described might not be that smart. And it's not his fault. And he made rational choices. What's he going to do?
Free clue: if only the smart people will be employed, there are going to be a bunch of angry dumb people with torches and pitch forks. Something to consider. It will be a lot worse than angry ignorant Trump voters who uncritically believe whatever their dear leader promises. A lot worse. When it's over there may not be any operational robots left. Or high tech workers.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
By realizing you either distribute a portion of it willingly, or the people with nothing left to lose will distribute all of it.
And, of course, trucks could be driving themselves under certain circumstances over the next several years.
When I was young, it was possible for most white men of low skill but good work ethic to make a decent living for their families. That's pretty much over. Now that I'm old, I work in manufacturing, and when I'm on the shop floor the odds are I can't see another human being. One will pop by from time to time to do something with the computer-controlled machinery.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes