Slashdot Mirror
Countries that Are Most Highly Invested in Automation (ifr.org)
A report by the International Federation of Robotics looks at the countries that are most highly invested in manufacturing automation. The countries with the ten highest densities of robots are, in order: South Korea (631 per 10,000 workers), Singapore (488), Germany (309), Japan (303), Sweden (223), Denmark (211), United States (189), Italy (185), Belgium (184), and Taiwan (177). Overall, the automation of production is accelerating around the world: 74 robot units per 10,000 employees (up from 66 in 2015) is the new average of global robot density in the manufacturing industries.
What is the definition of a "robot" here? Is it something that is more human or animal oriented? I'm sitting right next to a printer, which replaced a type writer. They are functionally the same, press ink into paper in specific patterns. Because it isn't a large mechanical beast pressing down keys to apply lettered ink to paper, is it no longer in the classification of a "robot", even though it uses mechanical gears to move the paper and print head around? This could be applied to all sorts of computerized mechanical devices all around us now. Where is the line drawn to build these stats? And as such, then the stats could easily be swayed larger or smaller to fit a given narrative that one wants to persuade the reader to.
We're a nation of specialists: scientists, engineers, programmers, etc. This means our manufacturing is heavily weighted toward bleeding-edge technologies which are very difficult to automate because they have complex construction and assembly, are relatively new, and are quickly replaced by newer versions. Our tool manufacturing is mostly automated already, but things like HPLC machines, DNA sequencers and such are high price low volume devices which have major overhauls in their design on an annual basis.
Robotic engineering is my field and I'm sure a lot, even here in /., still feel threatened by the rise of robots. You know, the "Robot will take our job and kill us all" mojo.
First, don't forget that mondialisation have cut a lot, LOT more occident job than robot. I'm sure everyone here know someone whose job have been lost after the plant have been relocated in China. In fact, the way I see it, robotisation will help to bring back more job lost to the chinese that we'll lose.
Second, robot "can't" do everything (well, not yet). Most industrial robot application are still hightly repetitive (read "boring") manual task. There's a lot of our customer that need to bring people from other countries because Millennials doesn't want to do them.
Third, robot still need worker. I had that plant where all riveting were done by employees with big machineries. Because of poor ergonomy and all the vibration, most workers had a lot of back pain problems avec a few dozens years. They were pissed to see us at first, but now everyone want his own robot so he can sit down and listen to the radio while he monitor the robot work. Futhermore, robot operator have higher salary than a simple manufacture worker.
Of course, I know I'm indirectly responsible that some people lost their jobs. There's that new contrat we just got where I met with my boss to share my concern that our client want the robots to fire a few people even if he say he won't. It's part of the job and I live with it thinking that I bringing more good than bad for the society.
Elok
Is one robot worth 100 workers? If so the 631 to 10,000 number seems significant.
My field is robotic and in the few dozen robot I've installed, none goes even near that 100 worker equivalent.
At best, at very best a robot barely replace 9 workers (3 worker, 3 shift a day). But it's usually more 1-2.
Elok
It is a shame then that we are not a well educated nation. Try sorting this this chart by various age cohorts. When it comes to tertiary ("college") education the U.S. is current ranked 7th overall. Not good for a nation of "specialists". But it gets worse. The oldest cohort, nearing retirement is 4th internationally. But the youngest is 12th, and since the ranking gets worse as you get younger, and all signs point to a continuing deterioration in support for higher education, we can expect it to be much worse, rather than better of even the same in another 10 years.
Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
If one robot is worth 100 workers, then it means automating your entire workforce would increase the standard of living by 100x.
Only if your entire workforce keeps working. Technology increases the output of human labor (the only cost). To increase the output of human labor by 100 times, you create technology whereby the effort of 1 human labor hour produces the same output as previously requiring 100 human labor hours.
If you make a machine which runs itself and keeps running without maintenance or other human input (like fuel), it's incurring no cost. If it runs forever, the output is infinite. On the other hand, if it costs 1,000 human labor hours to make it, it replaces 10 human labor hour per thousand hours of run time, and it runs for one hundred thousand hours, you're breaking even. Think about solar street lights with LED bulbs.
That's such a huge increase that all sorts of welfare and UBI programs which are currently mathematically unsustainable (without amassing debt), becomes roundoff error.
Actually, we can do that today, without raising taxes. Add in healthcare and the blunt plans there are something like a 0.9% tax cut on the rich, and no corporate tax increases; although you need to do a little adjustment there (see further down). The Dividend isn't really a UBI, but something new--related, though.
I shoved the payroll tax for retirement and disability benefits up to the top tax bracket and got 43.7% instead of 39.6%, along with a bit of a mess along the way for effective tax rate in total. The ETR is higher in 2016 at $50,000, in that model; that changes rapidly, moving upwards and narrowing the gap between 2016 tax policy (ignore the TCJA; I'm repealing that) and the model. You can repair it in 2016 by raising the top tax rate in total to 45% and adjusting the income tax brackets to be more progressive--really a crucial step to clean up the mess I've made in all this restructuring.
With OASDI staying on payrolls, two things happen. First, payroll taxes get backshifted into wages, so you don't get the wage boost (or price cut, depending on who you ask and how you look at it long-term) and employment increase (always) of reducing the cost of employing people. Second, you have that 0.9% tax cut on the top income earners, which you can reclaim to help fix the slight increase in ETR. By 2022 (earliest this can actually happen--Trump will veto), you can have that scenario without actually raising anyone's taxes.
So... Dividend alone: no homelessness, no hunger, increases available jobs (probably full employment?), decreases cost of welfare (make people less-poor), trivial to pull off without increasing taxes in 2016. With universal healthcare: A little tougher to do without tax increases in total on someone, although probably can pull it off in 2022. Shunt OASDI payments entirely onto the rich: likely 45% top tax rate instead of 39.6%, higher wages at the low end, and lower unemployment (if we're not hitting permanent full employment already).
This plan practically requires cutting working hours to avoid a labor shortage. I'm looking for a 7-hour work day or a 4-day work week.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
But i'd be willing to bet we're absolutely in a league of our own when it comes to debt for graduates.
USA USA USA!
Is one robot worth 100 workers? If so the 631 to 10,000 number seems significant.
My field is robotic and in the few dozen robot I've installed, none goes even near that 100 worker equivalent.
At best, at very best a robot barely replace 9 workers (3 worker, 3 shift a day). But it's usually more 1-2.
I think you're failing to take into account the benefits in certain scenarios. Aside from the fact a robot will not become sick, slow down, need maternity leave, workmans comp, disability, FMLA, or create a risk of a sexual harassment lawsuit (yeah, that last one can be very costly), the largest benefit automation can bring is for that shop that could only afford to run 8x5 before automation. After implementing automation they can run 24x7. In those situations that is a rather massive increase in overall output. You're not merely replacing 9 workers in that scenario.
Damn it, I picked up the wrong oil!