Tipping Point- Technology Destroys More Jobs Than It Creates

[stromboli]

http://www.businessinsider.com/technology-is-destroying-jobs-and-it-could-spur-a-global-crisis-2015-6

The technology is here. But the jobs are nowhere to be found.

Thanks to the efficiency of the internet and automated systems, productivity and GDP have grown during the last few decades, but the middle class and jobs are disappearing.

In fact, we have reached a tipping point where technology is now destroying more jobs than it creates. And if the trend continues we could face a serious crisis in the US and abroad, said Wendell Wallach, a consultant, ethicist, and scholar at the Yale University Interdisciplinary Center for Bioethics.

Robots, 3D printing, and other emerging technologies are all fueling technological unemployment and global wealth disparity, Wallach said.

Technological unemployment is the concept of technology killing more jobs than it produces. While that fear has been considered a Luddite fallacy for the past 200 years, it is now becoming a stark reality, he said.

“This is an unparalleled situation and one that I think could actually lead to all sorts of disruptions once the public starts to catch on that we are truly in the midst of technological unemployment," Wallach said during a presentation at the Carnegie Council for Ethics and International Affairs on Tuesday.

And yet there are no signs of the trend reversing. Because technology is evolving faster than ever before with little to no oversight or regulation, the likelihood of more jobs being replaced by new tech is at an all-time high, Wallach told Business Insider.

In fact, some 47% of present jobs in the US could be computerized in the next 10 to 20 years, according to an Oxford University study published in 2013.

Wallach, who authored “A Dangerous Master: How to Keep Technology from Slipping Beyond Our Control,” said that as new technologies continue to displace workers, wage stagnation in the US and around the world will also continue to grow.

Traditionally, elements like productivity, jobs, hourly wages, and income all grew in unison. However, during the last 30 years GDP and productivity grew while the US median income stopped and employment flattened, Wallach writes in his new book. Technology innovation has played a significant role in this trend.

“For most of our history 50% of GDP went to wages and 50% went to capital, and we are seeing a radical alteration in that largely because of the anomalies of money being made in high tech industries,” he said. “That’s not anybody doing anything wrong, that’s just technology industries are different from old manufacturers."

So, for example, in 1990 GM, Ford, and Chrysler brought in $36 billion in revenue and hired over a million workers, Wallach said. The big three today â€" Apple, Facebook, and Google â€" bring in over a trillion dollars in revenue and only have about 137,000 workers, he said.

This change has created a situation where more and more of the capital is going to a smaller percentage of the population. In fact, we are on course for 70% of stock ownership to be held by 5% of the population, Wallach said. 

This is a dangerous scenario because it could potentially lead to massive social unrest, possibly even revolutions.

"When people no longer receive the money from wages they need to support their families, it is hard to know what they will do, but in the past and in other countries this has been thought of as a situation ripe for a revolution," Wallach said.

However, he added, that such a crisis could be averted if government take action to fix wealth distribution.

"That kind of dire response can of course be avoided through welfare reforms or job subsidies, but these would require redistributing some of the capital growth achieved through from increased productivity," he said.

I read Future Shock and other predictive books years ago; I don't personally recall this issue being addressed, but it makes sense. It takes less and less training to operate robots and machinery that is becoming smarter and more autonomous. A robot can do precision work much more easily and much faster than the most skilled craftsman.

The rise of the middle class initially, as I understand it, was based on skilled trades and know how created within the development of technical trades like machinists, welders and other skills. When a robot can effectively do that with endless repetition and never make a mistake, skilled labor is toast.

The ongoing radical shift of wealth from the middle class to the now 1/2 of 1% is directly related to who owns and can afford the machines versus who potentially runs them.

Another factor is population sizes relating to available labor. If you have large families (can you say Duggars?) producing children for less jobs, you have a problem. The upper middle class and wealthy tend to smaller family sizes and better educated children. They also tend to be less religious. Wow, talk about a pattern. Generating kids willy nilly and not providing them a technical education is bad news for future generations.

Reminds me of the movie Metropolis. a city that is a facade built over warrens of low class workers living in poverty underneath. Scary, because it now seems to be our future.

[Solitary]

I would say that lack of education in science and the war against science by Christian authority and their message against birth control, and Christian politicians that support anti-science, are a big part of the problem too.

[stromboli]

I would say that lack of education in science and the war against science by Christian authority and their message against birth control, and Christian politicians that support anti-science, are a big part of the problem too.

And by doing that they have not only hurt everyone but more so hurt their own children's future.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Just a very small glimpse of the results of technolization of society,  here there are several companies that will come to cut all of the grass, trim and blow off all the debris on a half acre lot for about $25 and it takes about 15-20 minutes.  How do they do it? Easy.  There are so many people willing to work for shit wages so a truck pulls up,  5-6 people get out and go to work. One with a wide cut zero turn mower, about 4 with weed trimmers and the others with blowers. The only person who even needs to know anything really is the guy who fixes the equipment and he's in a shop somewhere. .
If the jobs worth having were plentiful these companies would never find enough people to do the work.

[SGOS]

Well, one of the reasons for technology is to eliminate the need for workers, which is the same thing as eliminating jobs.  The other reason is to make our lives easier, but from the perspective of capitalism, it's to eliminate jobs.

I remember way back when in elementary school, we were learning about robots and machinery that would do our work for us.  I think we were on the topic due to an article in The Weekly Reader.  Remember The Weekly Reader?  It was a children's version of a regular news paper.  So the thrust of the thing was that these machines would do the work of men, and some people were concerned that it would eliminate jobs, but the Reader went on to add that new jobs would be created to replace the old jobs, because men had to fix the machines when they broke down.

The implication was that it would be a wash, and everything was going to be hunky dory, but I wondered, if it all comes out equal as far as jobs are concerned, why would companies bother with machines?  They still have to pay the workers.  I think the counterpoint given was that it increased productivity (more new cars in a shorter time).  But that just means you reach a saturation point where needs have been met, and there's nothing to do but shut down the factory until people need new cars again.

While I did think about these things, I decided that everything would be hunky dory in the end.  The Weekly Reader said so, and I think my teacher agreed.  I mean, who's going to argue with The Weekly Reader?

[stromboli]

All of this fits neatly into the oligarchy's plan of world ownership. Uneducated masses believing on Jesus/Allah/insert god here fighting for jobs and declaring their hate for the people they view as the enemy, whichever religious or anti-group they choose. Throw in global warming and the loss of resources, loss of food sources, loss of jobs and an ever growing population *cough* Duggars *cough* fighting for low level service jobs- not a pretty scenario. sometimes being old and not having to face that future personally is a good thing.

Hopefully my grand kids won't be fighting for those jobs, because they have the ability to get a higher education and are smart enough to go after it. Even so, the competition will be fierce at every level. My personal view is pessimistic at best.

[Solitary]

  A pessimist is what an idealist Christian calls a realist.

[Mike Cl]

While I did think about these things, I decided that everything would be hunky dory in the end.  The Weekly Reader said so, and I think my teacher agreed.  I mean, who's going to argue with The Weekly Reader?

The Weekly Reader.  I have not thought of that in years!  It did say things would be hunky dory didn't it?  'Hunky dory', I haven't used that in years either.  What does that mean--I know what it means, but where does it come from?

[Mike Cl]

All of this fits neatly into the oligarchy's plan of world ownership. Uneducated masses believing on Jesus/Allah/insert god here fighting for jobs and declaring their hate for the people they view as the enemy, whichever religious or anti-group they choose. Throw in global warming and the loss of resources, loss of food sources, loss of jobs and an ever growing population *cough* Duggars *cough* fighting for low level service jobs- not a pretty scenario. sometimes being old and not having to face that future personally is a good thing.

Hopefully my grand kids won't be fighting for those jobs, because they have the ability to get a higher education and are smart enough to go after it. Even so, the competition will be fierce at every level. My personal view is pessimistic at best.

Brave New World---here we come!

[SGOS]

The Weekly Reader.  I have not thought of that in years!  It did say things would be hunky dory didn't it?  'Hunky dory', I haven't used that in years either.  What does that mean--I know what it means, but where does it come from?

Ordinarily, I wouldn't use that term either as it's been falling out of favor for so long.  But I was hiking with the Wilderness Guard for the Forest Service a few years back.  He was equipped with a hand held radio, and was supposed to call the dispatcher with a "4-16" at designated times during the day.  It means, "Not much to report, but I'm still alive," so back at the station, they know, well, that you're "still alive," and they don't have to send someone looking for your body.  So we're sitting on the ground eating our lunch, and the Guard says, "It's Noon.  I'd better call the station and give 'em a "Hunky Dory.""  It was one of those things got us laughing, because it's so absolutely contrary to formal radio protocol.  We laughed so much that when he finally put his serious face on and called the station, he was still laughing on the radio.  So for the rest of the summer, we always referred to the general check in as the "hunky dory."

[Sal1981]

At the point were general, human-level, A.I. robots become available with human-like capacity of thinking and problem solving, I don't see why the global workforce becomes replaced entirely by machines (when they become less costly than having a human working, that is). Then what?

[AllPurposeAtheist]

Not to worry. .in awhile the robot wars will kick off and several billion people will die and probably the people who run the robots will be killed and the people with real world skills will be killed leaving just the service people around to dig graves and starve because they have no clue how to grow food. . See the wonder of technology?

[Green Bottle]

The Weekly Reader.  I have not thought of that in years!  It did say things would be hunky dory didn't it?  'Hunky dory', I haven't used that in years either.  What does that mean--I know what it means, but where does it come from?

From here mibbe......?

https://youtu.be/YQTENuQYgjM

[Sal1981]

Not to worry. .in awhile the robot wars will kick off and several billion people will die and probably the people who run the robots will be killed and the people with real world skills will be killed leaving just the service people around to dig graves and starve because they have no clue how to grow food. . See the wonder of technology?

I was thinking more in the line of the 2nd Renaissance in the Ani-Matrix shorts, just without the robot rebellion.

[Mike Cl]

Ordinarily, I wouldn't use that term either as it's been falling out of favor for so long.  But I was hiking with the Wilderness Guard for the Forest Service a few years back.  He was equipped with a hand held radio, and was supposed to call the dispatcher with a "4-16" at designated times during the day.  It means, "Not much to report, but I'm still alive," so back at the station, they know, well, that you're "still alive," and they don't have to send someone looking for your body.  So we're sitting on the ground eating our lunch, and the Guard says, "It's Noon.  I'd better call the station and give 'em a "Hunky Dory.""  It was one of those things got us laughing, because it's so absolutely contrary to formal radio protocol.  We laughed so much that when he finally put his serious face on and called the station, he was still laughing on the radio.  So for the rest of the summer, we always referred to the general check in as the "hunky dory."

When I was growing up that phrase was used all the time by my parents, my grandparents and my parents friends and associates.  I heard it all the time.  But as I grew older I heard it less and less.  When you used that phrase in a post above, it brought a smile.  I was curious about were it came from.  So I Googled it.  It is a little hazy and most likely comes from the Middle Dutch word 'honk meaning 'home' or 'goal' when playing a game; hence 'hunky'.  Apparently the 'dori' was just added on much as the 'dokey' was in 'okey-dokey'.