What 375 million people will have to do when robots take their jobs

What 375 million people will have to do when robots take their jobs

By 2030, as many as 375 million workers—or 14% of the global workforce—could be useless in their jobs, thanks to automation.

That figure comes from the McKinsey Global Institute, which released a report today (Nov. 29) looking at the displacement that automation will cause in the near future. Research analysts from the consultancy firm estimate that somewhere between 400 million and 800 million people will find themselves in need of new jobs as automation and machine learning creep into industries all over the world. Of that number, McKinsey suggests 375 million will have to switch occupational categories entirely.





https://qz.com/1140364/as-automation-hits-375-million-people-will-have-to-change-careers-entirely/



____________________________________________________


So I know that 2030 might sound like a long time away, but that is only 12 years away.

Think on that for a minute. In the next 12 years the US is projected to lose 32 million jobs to automation, and that is just the tip of the iceberg for what is to come.

Articles like this, tend to paint a picture of labor workers, going to tech schools and stem to fill the need for all the new tech jobs automation will create. Well color me skeptical, but I think I have heard this one before. Something about all the tech jobs that were coming to replace our manufacturing jobs. We got Starbucks and wal-mart jobs instead, the very jobs most easily replaced by automation.

What say you WR, is 32 million high, low, about right?

Will we magically create 32 million tech jobs to replace those lost to automation?

Can capitalism in the US withstand losing 32 million jobs in 12 years, and as a low estimate 50 million over the next 20 years?

Please paint me a picture of how 32 million jobs is going to be replaced.

Discuss.......
Well they can post on Sherdog and Social Media.
 
Shortening work days, to create more jobs, and raising the minimum wage.

We could set tax rates for business's based on how many people they employ vs how much GDP they make up. They are free to reduce their workforce by 90%, and they would be free to pay the 90% tax rate that accompanies that action.

All of it requires government market intervention, which is why I became an economic progressive.

I actually don't support UBI. There is no feedback loop in it.
None of that will provide a living wage unless the cost of living falls drastically which I don't see happening, it may in theory drop if automation cuts the cost of production but not by much imo.
 
Meanwhile EU push to get as many zillions of third worlders as possible, that EU will have to feed when they will not find low-skill jobs avaible to support themselves
Wtf does this have to do with the OP ?

This is an important and interesting topic and thread is being cluttered with wise cracks and shit posting ffs
 
None of that will provide a living wage unless the cost of living falls drastically which I don't see happening, it may in theory drop if automation cuts the cost of production but not by much imo.

I could invision a system where unemployed are given a basic income, and we set minimum wages at a very high level to create incentive for people to still want to work.
 
Don't act like you want one. You're all for government mommy and daddy
Never taken a dime from a social program , left home at 18 , moved to a different city at 19 never been out of work, (self employed so I never will be) never asked my parents for a dime and I have beautiful family and nice real estate portfolio so go f yourself you nasty pos
 
I could invision a system where unemployed are given a basic income, and we set minimum wages at a very high level to create incentive for people to still want to work.

Where are these basic bitches gonna work though? Go to a place and stand around?

The only jobs that will be available, will be high level shit.
 
I could invision a system where unemployed are given a basic income, and we set minimum wages at a very high level to create incentive for people to still want to work.
That's what I think has to happen, some form of ubi and a 2 or 3 day work week for most people

Its either that or something dystopian imo
 
You do realize AI will replace even computer programmers, right? Sure, companies will need a software engineer or two to oversee things but they'll be overseeing computers that write code, not humans.

Yeah I do realize machine learning and AI will be taking jobs--even for programmers. But data still needs to be fed onto these computers. I am interested to see WHEN AI will replace us completely.

I think in the far far future all that there will be left of humans will be the archived Sherdog threads being hosted in every non-organic-based life form's memory cells as a reminder that exterminating the human race was the best thing that happend in the solar system lol.

Until you can program robots to repair and program other robots.

Picture unrelated

0a7.png

Who is going to program the robots that repair and program other robots??? ;)
 
Where are these basic bitches gonna work though? Go to a place and stand around?

The only jobs that will be available, will be high level shit.

They won't work. Some will play video games all day. Some will open MMA gyms. Some will learn theoretical physics as a past time. Some will probably try to see how many STD's they can catch. Ect.

I think the worrying part about a society where the majority don't work is actually drugs and alcohol. I support drug and alcohol use in a society where we drone our lives away in 8 and 12 hour shifts. It is self medication.

In a society where you have to define your own goals, and pursuits of all your time, drugs and alcohol would be very destructive. A party culture could turn our post resource scarcity utopia, into a decadent, and dark society, with sky high suicide rates.
 
Last edited:
Shortening work days, to create more jobs, and raising the minimum wage.

We could set tax rates for business's based on how many people they employ vs how much GDP they make up. They are free to reduce their workforce by 90%, and they would be free to pay the 90% tax rate that accompanies that action.

All of it requires government market intervention, which is why I became an economic progressive.

I actually don't support UBI. There is no feedback loop in it.
That's a terrible approach.

I support improved labor conditions, but it's important to recognize that under most circumstances, they substantially increase labor costs, which spurs even more automation in the long run.

The really bad part is the way that you try to address this by taxing automation . . . Which just destroys most economic gains from technology. Every tool you work with saves labor compared to going without. A mining drill cuts labor from picks and shovels. A powered loom drops labor costs from hand looms. "Automation" catches a lot of this. An economy that makes technologies nonfeasible to preserve jobs is deliberately retarding itself. Any company that can manufacture elsewhere would immediately start doing so, and domestics would be unable to compete. You could try fixing this with strict tariffs, but that runs into the same problems.
 
Until you can program robots to repair and program other robots.

Picture unrelated

0a7.png

There are already robots that repair other robots and we are close to producing robots that can design and build other robots :(
 
They won't work. Some will play video games all day. Some will open MMA gyms. Some will learn theoretical physics as a past time. Some will probably try to see how many STD's they can catch. Ect.

Well, yeah, but I was talking about the minimum wage incentive for those who want to work. I think that's going to be an impossibility, with those types of jobs being obsolete. There won't be any minimum wage type jobs to create any incentive to work, no matter how high you set it. It's going to be engineers, and that's about it. There won't be anything to offer the masses, who can't offer anything to that kind of environment.
 
That's a terrible approach.

I support improved labor conditions, but it's important to recognize that under most circumstances, they substantially increase labor costs, which spurs even more automation in the long run.

The really bad part is the way that you try to address this by taxing automation . . . Which just destroys most economic gains from technology. Every tool you work with saves labor compared to going without. A mining drill cuts labor from picks and shovels. A powered loom drops labor costs from hand looms. "Automation" catches a lot of this. An economy that makes technologies nonfeasible to preserve jobs is deliberately retarding itself. Any company that can manufacture elsewhere would immediately start doing so, and domestics would be unable to compete. You could try fixing this with strict tariffs, but that runs into the same problems.

Not in the long run, in the short run labor costs increases automation. Any job a robot can replace l, it eventually will.

I thought this was the neo-liberal playbook. Redistribution through taxation, which would be something you would support.

As to your other points, all those efficiency increases, also led to the 40 hour work week in the US.
 
Last edited:
You can't be having that because, well, bootstraps and lazy poor people....or something.

It seems insane to me that we don't take advantage of technology to just let people chill. Let them focus on their lives, their family, etc. I understand the need for humans to continue working towards something, but who's to say if we let people not stress about working 2000 hours a year we can't continue advancing?
That was tesla's idea, but guess he didn't factor in capitalism and human nature
 
Never taken a dime from a social program , left home at 18 , moved to a different city at 19 never been out of work, (self employed so I never will be) never asked my parents for a dime and I have beautiful family and nice real estate portfolio so go f yourself you nasty pos

Yet you think it's the government's job to provide healthcare and a monthly allowance simply for existing. Like I said. You support the idea of government being mommy and daddy
 
Yet you think it's the government's job to provide healthcare and a monthly allowance simply for existing. Like I said. You support the idea of government being mommy and daddy
You're mommy or daddy need to give you a smack , spare the rod .....
 
Wtf does this have to do with the OP ?

This is an important and interesting topic and thread is being cluttered with wise cracks and shit posting ffs

About everthing?

EU is importing tons and tons of low-skilled (by western job pov) peoples hoping to integrate them into society, finding them a job
V
Automation will erase tons of the jobs these peoples could have covered, actually these in particular
V
EU will find itself with the additional problem of feed these peoples, while automation itself will already cause tons of citiziens to be supported by the state due loss of job
V
More mouths to feed > less food for each mouth


Not rocket science

Yeah, nothing to do with the topic lol
 
About everthing?

EU is importing tons and tons of low-skilled (by western job pov) peoples hoping to integrate them into society, finding them a job
V
Automation will erase tons of the jobs these peoples could have covered, actually these in particular
V
EU will find itself with the additional problem of feed these peoples, while automation itself will already cause tons of citiziens to be supported by the state due loss of job
V
More mouths to feed > less food for each mouth


Not rocket science

Yeah, nothing to do with the topic lol
Pretty clear you have an axe to grind, maybe you should start a thread, I'm sure it will go well ....
 
Back
Top