How will automation affect America?

I'm actually pretty scared considering I'm a mail worker cuck with no college degree.
Maybe we'll get unemployment as compensation or something

>>61594637
Weird to think being a NEET will become normal in the coming years.

>>61594609
you didn't learn history well bro.

industrial revolution in XIX century caused many jobs to vanish or marginalize. economy will always shape society, nothing unusal here.

>>61594683

The difference is that the industrial revolution mainly was a shift in where labor was required. It was horrific, sure, and not a pleasant situation, but it's much different than automation, which is the *elimination* of human labor.

So no, the comparisons are not apt. And even if they were, the industrial revolution saw, at least in Britain, pretty much near constant armed rebellions in the countryside.

The actual answer for what will happen is that we'll (At least in burgerland) see a continual reduction in the social safety net along with a continual increase in (mostly male) unemployment, so, a growing underclass that has no means to survive but crime which works well because we can do things that DO require manual human labor with these slaves once we toss them in prison.

>>61594682

It won't be, mainly because we're continually getting rid of social safety net programs that allow you to be a NEET if you don't have a rich family.

File: 61874822_p2.jpg (214KB, 600x800px) Image search: [Google]

214KB, 600x800px

>>61594609
1. There must be a major breakthrough in AI research for advanced automation to exist in fields that require high intelligence like McDonald's
2. When that time comes, the world economy is going to change dramatically and people will be freed from all labor very shortly. The governments will take care of the temporary disorder.

>>61594609
>How will Americans survive the inevitability of huge job loss where the job market is already slimmed down because of automation?

>the job market is already slimmed down
see that's it exactly

there doesn't need to be a job for everyone, but there is already a job for everyone
they just keep making up new jobs that aren't needed, where you're going to sit at a computer browsing facebook and then go to meetings

War because of economic imbalances and resource shortages.

>>61594738
i see your point, and i really agree to some extent but you seem to overestimate some utopian model of economy.

i like the case of brewery. 10 years ago we were close to full globalist model - huge factories owned by three corporations controling the market and production. production through automation - full technological process with little human ingerence.

do you know how much small craft breweries opened since then in US alone?

The first people it will heavily affect are truck drivers and taxi drivers. Self driving tech is already mostly road worthy, it will be a polished product in less than ten years, killing the hundreds of thousands of trucking, taxi, and uber jobs.

>>61594609
Somebody must check, operate and repair all that, right? The jobs will just shift and workers will have to be trained to do new functions.

>>61594759
Only if republicans stay in office
Bernie will save us in 2020

>>61595242
>implying
The new industries wont replace lost jobs anon

>>61595242
What you aren't considering is that instead of being 10 workers assembling something, you have 1-2 guys to maintain the machines that assemble it. That is 80-90% reduction in the workforce.

>>61595015

I'm not claiming the economy will be a utopia. I'm claiming it will be the exact opposite.

No employer wants to pay wages, so, as the price of automation comes down, eventually people will not be able to compete.

Combine that with American disdain for the poor and you have a recipe for a lot of starving people.

>>61595331
So we got a new industrial revolution?

>>61594609
Maybe jobs will shift into more services (like personal dick sucker) for those actually creating stuff, or elderly care, humanity is ahing after all. Until botnet in about 20 years replaces people there

>>61595015

craft beer is a fad though

>>61594609
America is mostly post-industrial and service, which are the two sectors least likely to be automated.

The job market for maintenance workers will greatly increase most likely. It's a market many people ignore if they haven't actually worked in a plant themselves, but the day to day upkeep of machinery like this is a big deal. It will probably still eliminate more jobs than it creates in that field though.

File: 1259320105496.jpg (44KB, 446x400px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 446x400px

>still discerning cars from signs for one of the most advanced tech companies
>robots can barely walk bipedally
>still no breakthrough battery tech
>omg the AI robots are going to take over

not worried at all desu.

>>61594609
Machines will still need to be serviced or repaired. Predicting that there will be a huge market in that need.

>>61596810
that's only for the people who went to college for that shit though.
Some fields like engineering, medicine etc will always be in demand no matter what.Not everyone has those jobs

>>61597742
You don't really think it's engineers performing upkeep on equipment like this, do you? It's some guy from the mid west working in a factory close to his small town for minimum wage.

>>61596705
If america continues to be service-led the debt will grow further. Shit aint gonna grow indefinitely, the bubble will explode.

>>61597789
If a factory wage cuck, can fix it, I don't see why an average normal consumer wouldn't be able to fix it either

>>61597855
>that's only for the people who went to college for that shit though
You implied you needed an education for this kind of maintenance. My point was that is not the case in the slightest.

>>61597881
Idk,.I guess it depends on the machine. I didn't mean like factory equipment.
Op said robots

>>61595242
There was always magnitude reduction of workers on several times across history. Total automation isn't here too soon but once machines start programing and building machines on their own humanity will either merge or be discarded.

Meanwhile while we transition to a post human era, higher production means it needs markets. There is no reason to produce high amount of goods without consumption. This will increase basic goods availability, like now but much more. 200 years ago a king you not have some basic amenities we all have for cheap.

Still I strongly believe in the end machines will succeed humans, at least as a more efficient entity.

>>61594782
Nigger they are already replacing fast food workers with robots today
Governments are all going to be blindsided by a sudden lack of low skill jobs because they are going to slowly be removed
Some low skill jobs will always remain because people prefer to interact with people, but we're in for a bit of a shakeup in the coming years

You guys have no idea, I'm literally right now considering buying two machines to replace 3 FTE staff in my factory, and one other to make a two person job into a one person job, it's happening

It'll pass my pocket up nicely since o own 25% of an industrial automation firm and invested heavily in Boston Dynamics and a few kiosk companies when they were dirt cheap. Can't wait for the liberals to push $15 minimum wage through.

File: eaZrosc.png (363KB, 5000x5000px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 5000x5000px

1/2

This might sound funny but automation (full automation meaning that robots assemble the product from start to end) will have to worst effect to Africa.

This might sound stupid but not so much when you think about it more.

Europe, North-America and Australia/NZ are already very rich and their economy is still growing every year even tho they have been losing manufacturing for 70-80 years now. Most of the 100 biggest companies by market capitalization are European, North-American or Australia/NZ (tho there's also about 20 Asian companies). Ten biggest companies by market capitalization are all American companies.

How is this possible? Well it turns out that designing, innovating, researching, investing and providing financial services (banking, hedge funds...) is actually more profitable than manufacturing in a long run. Also Singapore and Hong-Kong are good examples of Asian countries doing this (they have basically zero manufacturing but are still very wealthy and well developed).

Also both China and India (two biggest players in Asia) have a huge brain drainage and money drainage as wealthy and well educated people move to more developed and stable Western countries. So much so that China made laws last year which restrict transferring money out of China and couple weeks ago started to ban Bitcoin as wealthy people tried to transfer their moneys using crypto currencies.. Example over 70 of last "unicorn" startup companies (estimated worth over one billion) have been founded in Americas but almost half of those 70 companies were founded by person of Asian origin. Those companies will pay their future taxes to United States of America. Those companies are listed and traded in United States stock exchanges, not in Asia. Still Asian countries have lifted them selves out of the 3rd world countries using manufacturing with cheap labor.

File: Wojak.png (8KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 512x512px

2/2

But now even Chinese companies have started to automate processes as full automation is behind the next door and is ALWAYS cheaper than humans. No matter how low wages you pay.

So Asian countries made it before full automation came a thing. But now the time is running out. Full automation is very close and the machine learning boom is only accelerating it.

THIS IS ALREADY HAPPENING! This can be already seen as the process of exporting jobs to Asia is slowing dramatically and as Chinese companies have started to automate and there's has even been big lay offs in China. Example Tesla has build huge factories to USA and Europe which are over 90% automatized. It's more profitable for Tesla to use robots and clean energy in USA and Europe than moving your manufacturing to Asia.

BUT WHAT IF full automation happens in a big scale BEFORE Africa gets into game? Even human slave is bigger money drainage than a robot in a long run. At that point it doesn't matter anymore how low wages you are ready to work for as a robot does it without wage, without food, without sleeping... over and over and over again, ten year straight.

Africa has a huge over population problem and Africa is extremely poor. The only way they could get out of that is by the same route as the West once did and as Asia did in last 50-100 years. By manufacturing. But that train may have already gone... That option isn't available anymore.

And the funny thing is that I think international organizations (UN, EU...) know this. They know that Africa doesn't have way out of poverty through cheap manufacturing like the West and East had.

AND THIS IS WHY they have started to talk about Universal Basic Income, climate change refugees... this kind of thing. As they know that Africa would be in a same situation 100 year from now without Universal Basic Income and without Africans flooding developed countries as they can't survive in Africa with as big as populations like they now have.

File: 1489653624947.png (31KB, 720x644px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 720x644px

>>61598701
>>61598718

Also I'm Singaporean fag so this won't effect my life in anyway as we don't really accept any refugees nor do we support Universal Basic Income.

>>61598766
refugee is a very specific status. The united states does not accept unskilled economic migrants willingly. Europe is fucked though we have an ocean separating us from Africa

>>61594782
>mcdonalds
The Nips have restaurants that are entirely automated.

>>61594609
The poor will be sterilized or killed. Anyone who lacks the skills for the new world will be thrown out in the streets and massacred. Otherwise they'll riot. A world of partial automation can't work with an uncivilized, unskilled, and angry population.

>>61599029

No need, just give them cheap alkohol and drugs, they'll kill themselves in a generation or two.

>>61599068
Sounds like you've given it some thought you racist

>>61595522
Except if companies aren't paying people's wages, who's buying their shit products? It's in companies own interest to have a large amount of people work disposable income, and automating everyone's jobs will have a negative effect on them as well

>>61598701
>>61598718

/thread

>>61594782
>(((governments)))
They'll probably just slaughter everyone they deem useless

>>61599250
This is where capitalism finally breaks down

>>61598718
Very interesting analysis. But then why do they care about the fate of Africa? I really have a hard time believing it's truly for humanitarian reasons.

>Guys, what's one problem we aren't going to have in the future? The poor, and the disabled: CAUSE WE'RE JUST GONNA KILL EM'

>>61599481
this was something I was pondering as a thought exercise some time back

some people talk of a new way of living in the future. maybe people going back to the land.

in the past, it was centralizing of things (in particular capital) to mass produce things and distribute them (agriculture, or tech gadgets for instance)

maybe we'll go back to doing things at home again (3D printers, grow your own food, produce your own solar generated electricity for your house and car, filter your own water) once the tech becomes available. you won't need to work for someone else, but you'll need to work for yourself to live.

>>61599895
overpopulation is already a problem. there aren't enough jobs to go around. not everyone can be an engineer, and not everyone should be. and we'll always need people to pick up garbage. euthanasia may be legalized once they realize trying to keep vegetables alive into their 90s doesn't make sense for the species anymore. food, energy, clean water wasted

the age of abundance and generosity towards life will give way to the age of austerity

You have to be really fucking gullible to think that automation is going to become a major source of labor any time soon. Name one industry where automation will replace over 50% of the jobs that are currently being done by humans in the next 60 to 70 years.

>>61600231
Truckers

>>61600295
60 to 70 years

>>61599250
very few executives have the luxury of that kind of thinking
they are judged on profits today

>>61600325
Truckers.

Self driving vehicles already exist and work remarkably well. Trucks that only need to stop for gas and not to sleep will provide deliveries much fast and reduce the cost to employ the trucker. They will be the largest victims in at least 15-20 years.

>>61600355

>mfw executives don't even know that by outsourcing and automating they are fucking their own national customer base in the butt by doing this en masse

Endgame: TV advertisements all feature products under $1 ( that's all the masses can afford ) or products for hundreds of thousands ( rich elite and poor, aspiring to be rich, class )

Mfw there is no middle class anymore. Just peasant class and billionaire class.

>>61600374
>They will be the largest victims in at least 15-20 years.
All those drive-ins and other things created to help truckers in their long but journey? I would say they are also screwed

>>61596738
It's surprising how much /g/ went down in inteligence.

Full automation will come in 100 years or later.

>>61594637
you'll get a new job cleaning robots and other things.

>>61600011
According to numerous scientists the population is said to peak at 11bil and regulate from then on.

>>61600011
>>61599975
I do worry that I might live long enough to think of these years as when energy was cheap and life was easy. I think things very well could get like that Black Mirror episode where pedaling a generator is the main way to earn food, but the arcologies aren't as nice to live in.

>>61600487
That's untenable in the United States, it would result in armed rebellion

>>61602454
Are you so sure it would be a successful armed rebellion?

>>61601635
>will come
Nice lack of agency there, bro. What makes you think that an elire class would want or allow something that would make them so much less elite?

>>61601635
You can't even spell on a computer

>>61600374
>Stop for gas

Trucks don't pump themselves

>>61599975
>>61600011
Overpopulation is a problem because of urbanization, because of insourcing in the West and in general immigration. Vast swathes of the earth are uninhabited.

Overpopulation, globally is a problem because nations that produce abundant foodstuffs in particular export excess foodstuffs as donations or food aid to countries that cannot or will not develop meaningful agricultural programs

>maybe we'll go back to doing things at home again (3D printers, grow your own food, produce your own solar generated electricity for your house and car, filter your own water) once the tech becomes available. you won't need to work for someone else, but you'll need to work for yourself to live.

I think we need to push strongly against urbanization, one issue you have is current tax systems are inherently unfair and based towards conventional income. You can't do any of that shit effectively because if you live within 2 hours of a city you owe (in the US) several grand worth of property and school taxes.
And the idea of multi-generational mortgages/home loans sickens everyone.

Tldr there are entire industries that do not need to be urbanized, Tech is principle among them. Job location is bullshit, most would be fine making 6 figures in the countryside where their dollar had much, much more spending power

>>61602589
To further iterate on overpopulation, the root and absolute negative of Globalization has been that there are many regions/countries that are overpopulated well above their current population capacity to produce food and fresh water

>>61602613
That much is true.

>>61602589
>Trucks don't pump themselves
Pic related
>I think we need to push strongly against urbanization
You mean, challenging the very fabric of civilization, as a structure of society, as a mythos, and as a moral imperative? I unironically agree.
>inherently unfair and based towards conventional income
I agree. Capital gains should be taxed the same as wages. Otherwise you are literally subsidizing an unelected class of super-elites.
>several grand worth of property and school taxes.
As you should. Otherwise you're subsidizing the bourgeoisie at the expense of the working class.
Now, if people get back better services than they paid for because they agreed to pay for it as a whole society rather than like rats in fear of mortal death, high taxation isn't really a problem to those without some serious fetishism problems.

The ownership of, and benefits from, running those machines will have to be democratised. Universal income will be the last effort of the rich to keep ex-workers fed and calm, but the communalisation of privately owned means of production, and dismantling of all the institutions that we have in place to protect it, is inevitable.

>>61603996
Furthermore, patents on these technologies is the main linchpin, the removal of which will allow this to get going. Luckily intellectual property is an absurd concept that mostly old people take seriously and moralise about aside from those who directly benefit from it. They will die eventually.

File: 1497473988297.jpg (48KB, 500x300px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 500x300px

>>61603854
>pic related
>no pic related

>>61594609

>This period of history isn't set to be like other periods of history where technology actually opened up new job markets and industries creating new jobs the world adapted to. This is a period where robots will literally remove humans from jobs and other robots will take over new jobs created from that automation.
Notice it is always the historically illiterate that are worried about this? This literally happend many times over history. Some way more drastic even. Something like 80-90% of the world worked in agriculture and got completely fucked by the plough cultivator. How could the world continue with no jobs? Surely we are all doomed. Only the world economy actually boomed and growth was insane as people were freed up from solely providing substance and new careers popped up. It's not like they knew how bug merchandising would be. Or that in a few hundred years millions of people would work solely in software development. So realistically it will be a period of largescale frictional unemployment followed by economic boom and mass advancements in new fields.
Though no where near to the same scale since our economy is way more diversified already and automation is being phased in slowly.

>Would love to hear theories from others on how this will affect unemployment and possible solutions that will be implemented because of the coming displacement.
>This is a very real scenario that will be coming about in the next couple of decades and will affect 10's of millions of people.
>Thoughts, theories, solutions?

>>61603854
>Work really hard to afford property or make smart investments so you can better afford it.
>Get taxed on all the money you earn towards the house.
>get taxed on the bouse itself
>pay interest on home
>decide to move
>pay tax on new home
>pay tax on sale of other home.

WTF IF WE TAKE OUT THE LAST STEP WE ARE SUBSIDIZING THE SUPER RICH.
Yes. I really am that retarded that i think only the super elite own property or invest. Yes i really am retarded that i think a subsidy is when you only tax people 3 times on the same thing.

>>61604148
>implying past performance guarantees future results
The song of the cornucopian.
>world continue with no jobs? Surely we are all doomed
Humanity is now running into genuine material constraints and limits. There is no muh growth to be had, and beside, growth only ever benefits the absentee owners on net.
Do your damned chores and feed, shelter, and clothe EVERYONE before you go play your idiotic numbers game.

>>61604188
You're not entitled to have me reward you for your personal problems.
Fucking rent for all I care.

>>61604188
Adding, you're only taxed on the gains in the price of your old home, which are by no means guaranteed.
Your petulance makes a fine argument for the Chinese system of 99-year leases rather than outright ownership.

>>61604199
Yes it's happend multiple times. And if you can replicate results..
>>61604214
Okay don't reward me. Infact we can cut a lot of taxes by not rewarding anyone. Let's cut the capital gains tax and stop giving subsidies to poor people. You can rent for all I care :^) Or are you just so stupid you don't understand what a tax cut is? or where money comes from. Spoiler alert: letting people keep their money isn't "rewarding" or a subsidy. I mean I have no problem taxing investments to be honest. It should be done stabley and sparingly to maintain a stable real interest rate that encourages eithet investment or spending as your country needs. On property it's kinda useless.
>>61604244
This makes sense. Because when you move, your property goes up in value but surely nobody elses did. My parents bought a house for $250k 25 years ago and sold it for $850k. But i mean they can totally just buy another $250k house right? I mean i acknowledge inflation and time limits effect the tax. But single property owners don't benefit from the appreciation.

>>61604289
Realize this sounds dumb since i said single home. But i meant who inheriant or obtain secondary property. Unless you are purely liquidating it you don't gain.

>>61604289
>where money comes from
It comes from fractional reserve lending, i.e. (((banks))) print it.
>their money
It was never your money in the first place. Society just lets you use it to force other people to do things for you.
>stable real interest rate
Kill yourself, usurer.
Go back to >>>/pol/ if all you're going to do is spew your CTR neoliberal bullshit in here.

>>61604188
Acquire property and make personal use of it - fine.
Acquire property in order to charge money for the property-less to use it, in order for you to acquire even more property - fuck off.
Tax is negation of rent, if we abolish rent no one will tax you.

>>61604326
Rent is an artifact of the price system. The only way to abolish rent is to tax it at 100% and redistribute it.

>>61604326
Stupidity test incoming.
Basic sense to see if I should bother further engaging.
Would you support instead of a capital gains tax on the sale of secondary properties a increased sales tax to the buyer to match the same total amount paid in tax by both parties (none paid by seller) ? Even if it was the buyers only property. Why or why not?

>>61604381
Oh i realized
>>61604323
May be a different tankie. So same question.

>>61604381
Yes, different tankie.
Absolutely not. That's a ridiculous idea that doesn't suit any public purpose, certainly not one of seeing to it that everyone has shelter.
Society is not entitled to allow you to speculate with what other people use.

>>61604381
>>61604459
You're right, I'm not the person who wrote the previous post.
You're talking about taxing the exchange of property? I don't see what the point of it is unless there are profits to be made from owning the property in question. It would only impede redistribution of property to someone for whom it is actually useful.

>>61604476
Okay so you are economically illiterate. Look don't take it personally, i know nothing about coding in assembly, and while i don't pretend to know anything and shitpost like an expert, i still would understand why nobody would want to debate me on anything related.

Just as a quick lesson before I go who you tax and who bares it are unrelated. The latter is based solely on elasticity. With my tax proposal the amount after tax paid and recieved by both parties would actually be the exact same, sale price would adjust to reflect that. This is an extreme example because house sale prices are negotiated one on one in a case to case basis and thusly easily changed. If you support one tax you should objectively support the other. This can also be observed in smaller cases when you take a look at something like gasoline. Demand is inelastic so a large change in price results in only a small change in consumption thusfore if consumers are taxed on it seller do not have to lower prices much. And if taxes are put on sellers they can increase prices to pay for most of it. Thus it doesn't matter who you tax. This works in the other opposite or anywhere inbetween. Please note this is a possitive not normative statement and can reproduced over and over. Only flucation is based on abilities to change prices and psychology of taxes vs sticker price. Neither which really effect real estate.

>>61604350
A fundamental change in conception of what property is and what it allows you to do is also possible.

>>61595242
Machines can repair machines

File: h2147483647.jpg (129KB, 710x823px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 710x823px

>>61598701
>>61598718

/thread

>>61601722
Numerous scientists also predicted Africa's fertility rate would fall like in other countries whose life expectancy improved.

Extrapolation is shit.

>>61600487
What do they care?
They'll be off on their private islands.

>>61594609
>This period of history isn't set to be like other periods of history where technology actually opened up new job markets and industries creating new jobs the world adapted to. This is a period where robots will literally remove humans from jobs and other robots will take over new jobs created from that automation.
Capitalism intrinsically compels the maximisation of labour productivity and thus has for its entire history displaced labour with technology. This process has always led to the creation of new industries using the labour liberated by productivity gains and has never and can never within the context of the capitalist mode of production simply lead to the permanent unemployment of the displaced.

Literally even Karl fucking Marx understood this.

>>61598701
>>61598718
nice analysis