Slashdot Mirror


Only 25 Percent of Occupations In US Are At 'High Risk' For Losing Jobs From Automation, Study Finds

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz: Automation is coming, but not for everyone. Researchers at the Brookings Institution estimate just 25% of occupations in the US -- in production, food service, and transportation -- are at "high risk" for losing jobs from the advance of automation. "Automation is not the end of work," said Mark Muro, policy director for the Brookings Institution's program on urban economies and co-author of a study published Jan. 24. Most occupations will see specific tasks assumed by machines, but much of their labor will likely be enhanced, rather than fully replaced, through automation, the study found. That's because automation rarely replaces entire jobs, but instead handles specific tasks in occupations that often require hundreds of them.

To forecast the effects, Brookings researchers looked at thousands of specific tasks within each occupation, and the degree to which automation could handle them, coming up with a risk rating for each occupation. The workers most vulnerable are in transportation, production, food preparation, and office administration, which, combined, make up about 36 million jobs, or 25% of the total jobs in the US today. In these occupations, roughly 70% of tasks were considered routine and predictable, prime targets to be managed by machines. The most vulnerable were "packaging and filling machine operators" (100% exposure to automation), food preparation workers (91%), payroll and timekeeping clerks (87%), and light-truck and delivery drivers (78%).

5 of 205 comments (clear)

  1. Only? by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    WTF? Seriously, what the actual fuck. Do you have any idea what losing 25% of the jobs effectively overnight (that's what "at risk" implies) means? We're a winner take all, if you don't eat you don't work society.

    Those people aren't going to go quietly into the good night. Forget violence, a lot will start gunning for _your_ job. It'll be a race to the bottom like you've never seen before where the only winners will be the ones that own the robots pitting us against each other for their profit and amusement. You'll be lucky to make min-wage with a 4 year degree there'll be so many desperate workers.

    There's a reason I can get a competent programmer in India for $30k/yr instead of $120k/yr, there's too damn many of them. If you don't want your standard of living to go to hell now's the time to do something about it. And no, buying lottery tickets or hoping your gonna get rich off your MCSE doesn't count.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Only? by tsqr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's 25% of occupations, not 25% of jobs.

    2. Re:Only? by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Virtually 100% of the carriage making industry has been lost. There were 13,000 of those businesses in 1890, now they're pretty much all defunct. There's almost nobody who hand spins thread for a living anymore, either. That used to employ vast numbers of people, mostly across the South.

      Fortunately, there is literally no limit to the amount of work available for people to do, just a lack of people to be available to do it. Specific jobs have been being destroyed by automation for hundreds of years. Yes, the process has accelerated recently. Guess what, it hasn't had a noticeable effect on unemployment rates, rather it leads to increased wages over time as increased productivity as a result of more capital (automation) being able to be used by people to accomplish more.

      No, this time won't be different. The luddite fallacy remains a fallacy.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    3. Re: Only? by Monster_user · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Increased wages over time? When you have pressure from automation reducing the demand for labor and procreation increasing the supply of labor, it is hard to see how supply and demand would increase the value of labor.

      Automation frees up limited resources to improve profits for an increasingly smaller number. The value of automation is seen by the wealthy more so than the poor. For the poor it is an added expense, an additional pressure towards a minimum level of capacity to be competitive and remain employed. Because there is a sufficient supply of optimal labor, inefficient sub-optimal labor is unnecessary. Inefficient sub-optimal labor has a lower return on investment, if it has one at all, and thus has no economic incentive to fund the life towards automation and optimization.

      How much does it cost to automate your home? To replace appliances and devices with more energy efficient alternatives? To install double-paned or other more moder window types? To replace a vehicle with an energy efficient alternative, or one with greater capacity and accident mitigation technology to reduce the risk of damage. Can one afford to live within a city on the income provided by said city?

      We are raising the cost of entry while simultaneously lowering the return on investment.

      An Alaskan said it best when he said that he feels sorry for those of us on the mainland, because Alaskans can live off the land.

  2. Re:Now the hard question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Immigration is one of the biggest drivers of economic growth. Every capitalist knows this. Here's a short writeup at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative thinktank: http://www.aei.org/publication/how-immigration-boosts-american-economic-growth-and-innovation/