Massive Unemployment Incoming

[David_TheMan]

And there you have it folks.

This person seeks to suggest that additional workers have no effect. Ok.. But when pressed for a detailed step-by-step breakdown (one step at a time) we get 'tumbleweed'.

It's so obvious it is erm... obvious.. If you removed the American border and anyone could walk in i.e. created massive competition it would be negative and would result in a broad fall in pricing power for workers. Replace those interlopers with machines and nope, no effect according to some and even a positive effect according to others. It does not add up and even with the Hail Mary pass option of hitherto undiscovered 'productive' functions that the machines cannot do (although we said strong AI) we know that job-replacement-like-for-like does not scale globally and is even now not scaling in many parts of the West. Industrialization has been a boon for the world but we are not talking about tools here, we are talking about replacements, i.e. quasi-humans aka borderless immigration => loss of pricing power => lowering living standards UNLESS payment is not predicated on involvement (somewhere) in production. This last part is why some countries are already piloting a citizens (Universal Basic Income) payment. Yes already, because they see that this is a structural change.

And unlike some I can break it down step by step as to why this is the case. Bookmarked for 2021.

I provided you a study that showed outsourcing produced a net gain on employment.
I asked you did you read it.
You said you ignored it.

NOthing left to talk about.

 

[David_TheMan]

Yea you have no idea what you are talking about. I'm only an engineer in an innovation lab for a major multi national and my wife is only a MBA strategy consultant. What do I know. Seems like you trolling so to the ignore list you go

LOL
You can be an engineer, your wife can be an MBA.
You still have to back up your assertions, you salary claim is backed up with nothing.

Trying to post your resume when I never attacked you or your credibility but the substance of the argument seems telling.
That said you never responded when I asked what does it matter regarding AI development when it can be licensed? We have opensource AI research as well.
You talk about salaries and I can easily look up average salaries.
You talk about Amazon Go, and act like its unique and not just a specific market.

You have to do better than that when presenting a argument right? Yeah and you know that.

 

[LordOfTheManor]

No we aren't seeing machines compete with human intelligence at all.
We see machines able to work in fixed environments and limited parametrs function fasters and more directed than before, but in terms of general human intelligence AI is nowhere close to what the human brain does.

Machines always produce more than people, even simple machines, again this isn't new. You confuse the ability to produce quicker with a market demand for more of the product. That is a terrible mistake on your end. If the demand is the same, me producing it quicker just means I am ableto produce it quicker and lower my cost and make money at a higher margin, doesn't mean I will suddenly make more, its the market that determines what you produce not your technical capability to do so.

The World Bank doesn't write the rules of economics. The fact is this, if there is no benefit, economically, in eating the cost to make the switch to automation over continuing on with no automation or in the status quo, the status quo will be maintained. In the case that the price of automation falls in those undeveloped nations where it makes financial sense to do so it will happen, until it does it won't. This is axiomatic.

Everything you have said is fearful of new technology, its only an issue if you are concerned or fearful of it. This thread is about a video trying to make a argument aobut the dangers of new technology, I"m simply disagreeing with its contention. I've never told you, you should say anything positive or negative about new technology either. So I don't understand why you would try to act like I implied you did.

Its not naive to tell low skill workers that your industry is dying, learn something new or be jobless. No different than telling a company that made consumer grade film cameras that they need to adapt or be out of business, or companies that made horse and buggy carriages that they need to get out and find a new skill or they'll be jobless. Its reality. I don't see how it would lead to social or political unrest unless you had another entity involved offering those without jobs the ability to steal from those who are more productive, but thats another discussion.

They don't need general human intelligence to perform certain tasks, which is what we're discussing. I'm not talking about general intelligence, as we're not close to that.

Anyway, it sounds like you need to write Nike and explain to them why they're losing money by using automated technology in low-cost countries. They would be crazy not to hire you if you can prove that to them: Subscribe to read

Then, also explain to the workers how they need to use their non-existent savings and go to college to become coders.

You're arguing against something we can literally see before our eyes.

I'm not fearful of new technology. I'm addressing negative aspects of it. I'm critical of Lil Yatchy, but I like Rae Sremmurd. Do I hate modern rap or do I have a nuanced point of view?

 

[Uitomy]

Glad I’m becoming a photographer

 

[null]

I provided you a study that showed outsourcing produced a net gain on employment.
I asked you did you read it.
You said you ignored it.

NOthing left to talk about.

That is not the question. The question is NO net jobs losses locally. A net gain could mean outsourced jobs + 1 new local job which is not an improvement LOCALLY.

But you keep dodging this point because you have no answer. You keep repeating that canard because rather than address my question directly you are drawn to answer one of your own imagining. one which is simple enough for you.

AGAIN: that is not my question. my question was about no LOCAL net losses.

Did you read 'war and peace' .. I guess not and I am not going to insist on it because it has ZERO relevance.

Answer the question or will we get more dancing around the topic ...

 

[David_TheMan]

They don't need general human intelligence to perform certain tasks, which is what we're discussing. I'm not talking about general intelligence, as we're not close to that.

Anyway, it sounds like you need to write Nike and explain to them why they're losing money by using automated technology in low-cost countries. They would be crazy not to hire you if you can prove that to them: Subscribe to read

Then, also explain to the workers how they need to use their non-existent savings and go to college to become coders.

You're arguing against something we can literally see before our eyes.

I'm not fearful of new technology. I'm addressing negative aspects of it. I'm critical of Lil Yatchy, but I like Rae Sremmurd. Do I hate modern rap or do I have a nuanced point of view?

I was just clarifying your claim that AI /computers are intelligent as people. They aren't. They are great in very specific tasks and functions and I think that needs to always be emphasized.

I don't need to write to NIke for anything. You are the one confused. I would only suggest you read and understand what is written, instead of doing a speed read and interjecting your own ideas and ignoring what is written.

If a worker doesn't have savings that is his/her fault and no one else but his/her fault. On top of that skill development is always the onus of the person who wants the skill, so trying to remove them from the process and make them almost non-actors in their own life is a strange argument to make.

What am I arguing against that I can literally see before my eyes? Tell me what you are talking about.

There are no negative aspects of technology, you can always chose not to use it if you want.

You can be critical of whatever music you want, I don't care, if someone has a debate with you about the topic and they disagree, if that person is just voicing their disagreement, trying to say you have a right to have your opinion and to not like a artist is irrelevant. They aren't saying you can't, they are just discussing their difference of opinion. Same here.

 

[David_TheMan]

That is not the question. The question is NO net jobs losses locally. A net gain could mean outsourced jobs + 1 new local job which is not an improvement LOCALLY.

But you keep dodging this point because you have no answer. You keep repeating that canard because rather than address my question directly you are drawn to answer one of your own imagining. one which is simple enough for you.

AGAIN: that is not my question. my question was about no LOCAL net losses.

Did you read 'war and peace' .. I guess not and I am not going to insist on it because it has ZERO relevance.

Answer the question or will we get more dancing around the topic ...

Didn't say it was the a question you asked, it was a provided to you in response to a statement you made. You said you ignore it, and I think I know why.

You have provided no point to dodge, I literally told you I have no want to engage in discussions on loaded questions, which are logical fallacies. If that bothers you that is on you.

I know what your question is and I addressed the fallacy of your question.

Did I read "War and Peace" ? No.

Posting pictures isn't a substitute for engaging in logical and rational discussion.

 

[Kyle C. Barker]

I gotta ask. Why do some of you say shyt like this when it's clearly not the case? On top of that, the replacement of unskilled labor jobs STILL thrusts millions into unemployment.

The only way the American Western economy as you know it has been able to flourish is BECAUSE of "unskilled labor". What do you think happens when cashiers, burger flippers and fry cooks have been replaced by automation? There are people - young and old, black and white - who rely on those jobs to (barely) sustain themselves. What exactly do you think happens when tens of millions of them are out of work? You think the low IQ busboy at Denny's is somehow capable of going into engineering?

And what happens when the market gets flooded with "skilled" workers who possess the necessary degrees? Imagine there are 1M jobs in a particular sector yet there are 10,000,000 candidates all vying for a slot. What then? They can't all be employed so what happens to them?

I noticed you mentioned learning trades as a solution meanwhile half the trades you listed are on their way to being replaced within our lifetimes.

The medical field is often the first to glom on to new tech so sonographers and lab techs will largely be out of jobs. Automated trucks are already a thing and will become even more so over the next few decades. Plumbing remains one of the most unskilled, "skilled" labor jobs out there and it's hardly irreplaceable thanks to robotics and a lot of welding can also be done by trained robots if given the time (which isn't much).

Everything you've said here speaks to you either being an upper middle class cac or an out of touch negro. Neither of which puts you in a position to speak on these things with any authority.

Good post. He also mentioned truck driving which is also in the crosshairs of automation as well

 

[David_TheMan]

Good post. He also mentioned truck driving which is also in the crosshairs of automation as well

It will be years before a automated trucks are on the road without human backup. ENough time for people to have careers in the field to atleast save money and start looking at other fields

 

[Wild self]

People have this "I got mine, fukk you" mentality. You really want to live in a society where 80% live below the poverty line and 20% are STEM zombies who work 60+ hours per week with no human skills?

We need BASIC INCOME!!!

 

[Afro]

How long would u recommend to stay in help desk ? And what would be the next step after that?

I have no idea what my niche would be.

You stay in Help Desk until you can pass more certifications.

(IT) Information Technology Certifications | CompTIA IT Certifications

You want to get into Networking? Follow the path :Net+, CCNA, CCNET etc.

Some folks stay in Help Desk and love it. But it gets your feet wet in everything IT. Customer Service, Printers, Computers, Networks, Servers, etc.

You'll have certain parts of IT you like and that would be your niche. If you enjoy Help Desk and get enough certs and experience you can become a Help Desk Manager.

That isn't going anywhere because people will always need help.

You like to program? Become a programmer.

You like to make web pages look nice? Front End Dev.

I recommend you take the time and do alot of research. Try taking a short coding course. Disassemble and reassemble your computer.

You'll know what you like and dislike when you get to it.

 

[null]

Didn't say it was the a question you asked, it was a provided to you in response to a statement you made. You said you ignore it, and I think I know why.

You have provided no point to dodge, I literally told you I have no want to engage in discussions on loaded questions, which are logical fallacies. If that bothers you that is on you.

I know what your question is and I addressed the fallacy of your question.

Did I read "War and Peace" ? No.

Posting pictures isn't a substitute for engaging in logical and rational discussion.

Dodge again but I know why you do it.

The point is that outsourcing does cost LOCAL job functions (which is negative) and nothing you have said in all its glorious randomness refutes that. Not your link and not your musings.

FACT: If you outsource N jobs, N jobs are lost. N replacement 'equivalent' or better jobs will not be created as a result of the outsourcing. HENCE: a local NET ('job') loss for the local population. If this were not the case a country (with a wiling partner) could out/insource itself to full employment.

Now given that that we have established that outsourcing causes local jobs loses we note that remote workers have a similar relationship with local workers as fully-autonomous strong-AI machines do.

The most important of these factors are that

i. They are independent (largely) - so as they look after themselves to a large extent and will not create a large quantity of local jobs.
ii. They are competition . They can offer more for less in many circumstances and this creates an oversupply of workers and downward pressure on incomes.
iii. The benefit of their labor flows largely to industrial owners (principally) rather than the common man as the common man is no longer as irreplaceable in production pipelines and in capitalism the corporation is charged with seeking shareholder value which means they are driven to reduce costs where sensibly possible.

step.by.step

 

[David_TheMan]

Dodge again but I know why you do it.

The point is that outsourcing does cost LOCAL job functions (which is negative) and nothing you have said in all its glorious randomness refutes that. Not your link and not your musings.

FACT: If you outsource N jobs, N jobs are lost. N replacement 'equivalent' or better jobs will not be created as a result of the outsourcing. HENCE: a local NET ('job') loss for the local population. If this were not the case a country (with a wiling partner) could out/insource itself to full employment.

Now given that that we have established that outsourcing causes local jobs loses we note that remote workers have a similar relationship with local workers as fully-autonomous strong-AI machines do.

The most important of these factors are that

i. They are independent (largely) - so as they look after themselves to a large extent and will not create a large quantity of local jobs.
ii. They are competition . They can offer more for less in many circumstances and this creates an oversupply of workers and downward pressure on incomes.
iii. The benefit of their labor flows largely to industrial owners (principally) rather than the common man as the common man is no longer as irreplaceable in production pipelines and in capitalism the corporation is charged with seeking shareholder value which means they are driven to reduce costs where sensibly possible.

step.by.step

There is no dodge and you and I both know that.
I showed you reality examples, and simply told you I"m not playing in your logical fallacy.

Seems you don't like the truth and don't have the ability to logically argue your point in a non fallacious manner. Thats on you though.

 

[null]

It will be years before a automated trucks are on the road without human backup. ENough time for people to have careers in the field to atleast save money and start looking at other fields

due in 2020

 

[null]

There is no dodge and you and I both know that.
I showed you reality examples, and simply told you I"m not playing in your logical fallacy.

Seems you don't like the truth and don't have the ability to logically argue your point in a non fallacious manner. Thats on you though.