'Automating Jobs Is How Society Makes Progress' (qz.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz, written by Per Bylund, assistant professor at Oklahoma State University: Analysts discuss the automation of jobs as if robots are rising from the sea like Godzilla, rampaging through the Tokyo of stable employment, and leaving only chaos in their wake. According to data from PWC, 38% of jobs in the U.S. could become automated by the early 2030s. Meanwhile, a report from Ball State University's Center for Business and Economic Research warned that half of all American jobs could be replaced by automation. These prophecies of doom fail to recognize that automation and increased productivity are nothing new. From the cotton gin to the computer, automation has been happening for centuries. Consider the way automation has improved the mining industry over the past 100 years. Without machines, humans were forced to crawl into unstable passageways and chip away at rocks with primitive tools while avoiding the ever-present dangers of gas poisoning and cave-ins. Not only was this approach terrible for health, but it was also a highly inefficient use of skilled human laborers. With machines doing the heavy lifting, society was able to dedicate resources to building, servicing, and running the machinery.

Fewer people now do the traditional physical labor, but this advancement is celebrated rather than mourned. By letting machines handle the more tedious -- and, in some cases, dangerous -- tasks, people were liberated to use their labor in more efficient, effective, and fulfilling ways. Critics of automation miss the point. Nobody works for the sake of work -- people strive to create value, which helps pay our salaries and feed our families. Automation effectively opens the door for more new endeavors that will elevate our species to greater heights. Just as past generations turned away the mines for better careers, modern workers whose jobs are altered by automation will see their roles in society evolve rather than disappear.

Comments

Re: Finally, some sanity

[Anonymous Coward]

Yawn. Sing your song while on unemployment. Your tone will change.

Author in rarefied bubble since late 70's?

[Uberbah]

Critics of automation miss the point. Nobody works for the sake of work -- people strive to create value, which helps pay our salaries and feed our families. Automation effectively opens the door for more new endeavors that will elevate our species to greater heights. Just as past generations turned away the mines for better careers, modern workers whose jobs are altered by automation will blah blah blah blah

The US workforce has been on a downward trajectory for the last four decades. Not just because of automation, but it sure hasn't helped. The auto worker that loses his job to a robot isn't moving to a higher plane of enlightenment designing self-driving cars for Uber, he's going to be an Uber driver for far less money than he was making before.

Re:Fantasy

[Mashiki]

Pre-industrial revolution, the 40 hour work week was an absurd fantasy. A lazy slacker would only work 100 hours a week, and that was minimal subsistence living.

Not true on that. A lazy slacker might only work 60 hours/week when harvest/etc came up. Generally that minimal subsistence living most people worked 20-30hrs/week or less as there were other things that were required. Even people who were in highly skilled jobs could work less then 10hrs/week.

A 40hr work week was common even ~80 years ago, that's not really the last few decades by any stretch. If it wasn't for the fact there was basically a giant pissing match between workers, businesses and government it likely never would have happened anyway. On top of that the entire history of the 40hr work week stretches back to the 1860's, prior to that people simply worked the required hours for the job for the given day. That might be a 10hr day today, it might only be 2hrs tomorrow. A flat 40hr/week didn't exist.