Study: Robots Expected to Replace 5 Million Jobs By 2020

Stupidity

New member
Sep 21, 2013
146
0
0
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.

Also kudos to that one guy that blames overpopulation. You do realize that only a few countries have positive population growth, if it wasn't for immigration the populations of every every first world country in the world would be shrinking. Japan as an example seems to be trying to half their population by next gen.

Judging by the comments on this thread, the biggest threat is ignorance of political and economic systems.
 

Knight Captain Kerr

New member
May 27, 2011
1,283
0
0
Not a bad thing of you ask me. It's not like we smash all the tractors because we'd have more farm workers without them. Well it might be a bad thing under capitalism, people will lose their jobs and be deprived of their livelihood. But it would be a good thing if we use this to transfer ourselves to another economic system that allows everyone access to a good standard of living. Without a majority of people partaking in wage labor and using those wages to purchase commodities capitalism can't survive. And if businesses refuse to mechanize, they'll go out of business as they're unable to compete with those that do.
 

Kevin Cross

New member
Jan 10, 2013
9
0
0
Meh. I've been seeing similar doom-and-gloom reports since the early 1970s. I'll believe it when I see it.
 

Hairless Mammoth

New member
Jan 23, 2013
1,595
0
0
I been hearing "robots will replace jobs" my whole life, well which jobs. As others have said above, there are some jobs that a real-life robot made within our grand children's lifetimes with never be able to perform. Some of them require human judgement calls and flexibility of the human mind and body that can't be replicated.

There is also the fact that as more machines are brought in to streamline production, more machines will exist to be worn out and repaired/replaced. Even when engineered to be robust in industrial environments, these machines don't last long without some kind of attention. You may someday see drones coming along to do minor preventative maintenance on their plastic brethren, but diagnosis, complex disassembly, and repair will be done by fleshy fingers and a mind that can adapt to the the random and sometimes bizarre situations at hand. If you work on an assembly line, it might be a good idea to either start learning how other processes in the plant work, show your bosses you can join the maintenance team with little extra training, or try to go to school to learning how to fix your (future?) robot coworkers.


--

And also as said above, many of those career fields are have high demand for newcomers. I've been told several times that the field I'm about to jump into has more workers retiring than the companies can recruit (and, boy, are they trying on that recruiting part).

People just don't know about the needs in these fields, don't want to go into them, or can't find the time to get the necessary schooling for them. That last part is probably the biggest issue, especially with the way some colleges have their schedules set up. Companies everywhere now want degrees or trade certification in the fields they are hiring for. It's even true with the businesses that are hurting for employees, simply because they don't want to sink any money into training someone who may go off to another job within a couple years.

--

Another way to look at this is computers (and other machines) themselves have also assisted jobs (both skilled/educated and non-skilled) that they can't truly replace, to the point that less of those positions are required in a single company because of the increase in efficiency. The requirements that machines just can not meet will keep those job markets from completely disappearing, but growth in technology will limit them.

Similarly, there are examples of two different jobs with similar responsibilities, but one has lower wages and experience requirements. Locally for me at least, the hospitals and clinics are hiring less nurses and instead bringing in medical assistants, which can do most of what a nurse can do. That way they can have full teams that cost less than the old methods. Business are learning new ways to cut costs everyday. It up to the workforce to adapt (and revolt if things get really shady).
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
 

chikusho

New member
Jun 14, 2011
873
0
0
Deathfish15 said:
The problem isn't JUST Capitalism. The problem is also personal responsibility on the social construct by individuals.

Basically put into a simpler term:
~~~~~~People need to stop screwing and popping out more babies than they themselves can economically support!

That is the underlying issue with a lot of countries right now. US is especially susceptible to this because for new mothers there are programs that say "taxpayers will pay for your child for quite a few years from birth on!" such as WIC, Welfare, and Foodstamps.
Honestly, it's the other way around. Society needs to do a better job of taking care of its people. The US, for being a developed country, has such an awful system for taking care of its citizens that it creates more problems than it solves. Time and time again science shows that people who are in a safe environment provide a much greater benefit to society as well as the economy. The opposite creates unskilled people without many other options than 'being a drain' all the way to being an active force against society through criminal activity.

People need to stop viewing people as dirty, needy masses and realize that human individuals are resources that can be utilized to create a better world for everyone.
 

Mr_Spanky

New member
Jun 1, 2012
152
0
0
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.

Also kudos to that one guy that blames overpopulation. You do realize that only a few countries have positive population growth, if it wasn't for immigration the populations of every every first world country in the world would be shrinking. Japan as an example seems to be trying to half their population by next gen.

Judging by the comments on this thread, the biggest threat is ignorance of political and economic systems.
It's much easier to polarise people if you play to the ignorant fallacy of their being no middle ground. A capitalism vs. communism debate never gets very far. Moderation is key. Are we all supposed to pretend that:

1. Western style capitalsim is flawless.
2. The ONLY alternative is live in United Soviet States of the World?

And what are we saying about population growth? Yes true in a lot of first world countries the population, as described purely by birth, is not increasing by very much. But we would be ignorant fools if we were only to look at the first world right?

To put things in perspective in 1916 (so 100 years ago) the world population was around 1.8 billion. As of today it stands at 7.4 billion. So in other words in the last 100 years the population of our planet has QUADRUPLED. UN estimates vary but a moderate one is that by 2100 the population will be a little over 10 billion.

And you dont think that overpopulation is an issue?
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
SaneAmongInsane said:
It doesn't help that we lie to people from an early age, "Follow your dreams!" we say. All things are possible, we say. Without disclosing that, yeah but it takes a lot of work and a shit ton of luck.

If I could tell anything to the kids just going into school now I'd tell them, forget your dreams. GET PAID. You can always do that thing you want to do later.
Yeah thats a point that needs to be made more often. People grow up these days with a culture that tells them that they are really important and the world revolves around them with very little practical advice of how to deal with adult life. Even more so that they are going to be competing for jobs with Sanjay and Fang, whose grandparents were peasants working the land and trying to get far away as possible from extreme poverty as quickly as possible.
Shamanic Rhythm said:
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
That's because there isnt one. Capitalism works because of the decisions made by millions about what they want to buy. As soon as substitute the choice of millions with the choice of few then success or failure becomes about you ability to get a positive decision from politicians not the merits of what you are selling. Capitalism works because it puts money into goods and services that people actually want instead of what some people think they should want.
 

Stupidity

New member
Sep 21, 2013
146
0
0
Mr_Spanky said:
It's much easier to polarise people if you play to the ignorant fallacy of their being no middle ground. A capitalism vs. communism debate never gets very far. Moderation is key. Are we all supposed to pretend that:

1. Western style capitalsim is flawless.
2. The ONLY alternative is live in United Soviet States of the World?

And what are we saying about population growth? Yes true in a lot of first world countries the population, as described purely by birth, is not increasing by very much. But we would be ignorant fools if we were only to look at the first world right?

To put things in perspective in 1916 (so 100 years ago) the world population was around 1.8 billion. As of today it stands at 7.4 billion. So in other words in the last 100 years the population of our planet has QUADRUPLED. UN estimates vary but a moderate one is that by 2100 the population will be a little over 10 billion.

And you don't think that overpopulation is an issue?
I think that the most capitalist countries in the world have the lowest birth rates. So you shouldn't imply capitalism is making overpopulation worse.

Also, I never implied capitalism was flawless, certainly not as it is practiced today, what I said was that it's protesters on this forum come off as spectacularly ignorant of what capitalism even is and the millions of people who have been enslaved and murdered by communist governments in the glorious battle to bring communism to the people.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
Deathfish15 said:
The problem isn't JUST Capitalism. The problem is also personal responsibility on the social construct by individuals.

Basically put into a simpler term:
~~~~~~People need to stop screwing and popping out more babies than they themselves can economically support!

That is the underlying issue with a lot of countries right now. US is especially susceptible to this because for new mothers there are programs that say "taxpayers will pay for your child for quite a few years from birth on!" such as WIC, Welfare, and Foodstamps. Hate to bring in something so morally questionable to other people, but abortion might be the right answer to many who are just unfit to support another living being brought into this world. Before the fetus develops, before it becomes its own being that is more than just a cluster of cells, before the brain is mostly formed, that is a time to decide "this isn't right" and be done with it.
Well yes, the population growth is a constant issue, that goes without saying. Better education on sex, contraception and bloody religion would be a start for many. Parts of South America and other less developed countries have certainly an issue with denying abortion, which will need to be addressed, if only for the wellbeing of young girls in the grips of sexual violence within own families/social groups. The policing of such matters, and indeed general population growth would be another matter to consider.

Stupidity said:
I think that the most capitalist countries in the world have the lowest birth rates. So you shouldn't imply capitalism is making overpopulation worse.

Also, I never implied capitalism was flawless, certainly not as it is practiced today, what I said was that it's protesters on this forum come off as spectacularly ignorant of what capitalism even is and the millions of people who have been enslaved and murdered by communist governments in the glorious battle to bring communism to the people.
It is not a matter of solely capitalism vs communism, why does the US seem intent on pushing that idea to all their people? There are many other options inbetween with plenty of room for diplomacy, although it has been stated above i see now. To assume also that all communism is equal to slavery and murder shows a potential ignorance and unwillingness to see the similar problems emerging from multiple angles and plan for the future. To assume ignorance from what is not said is to assume a silence is indication of a blank mind. Taking things at face value is a unfortunately common waste of time.
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
Xsjadoblayde said:
It is not a matter of solely capitalism vs communism, why does the US seem intent on pushing that idea to all their people? There are many other options inbetween with plenty of room for diplomacy, although it has been stated above i see now. To assume also that all communism is equal to slavery and murder shows a potential ignorance and unwillingness to see the similar problems emerging from multiple angles and plan for the future. To assume ignorance from what is not said is to assume a silence is indication of a blank mind. Taking things at face value is a unfortunately common waste of time.
My guess is something to do with the fact that communism has produced the 2 biggest mass murders in human history. What happened when India and China allowed free markets, oh yes 750 million people were lifted out of poverty in 25 years. How about the wonders of state planned socialism in Venezuela, despite having the world's largest oil reserves and 10 years of oil at $100 barrel earning it $800 billion you can't even buy toilet paper. State planning has been tried and it doesn't work. If you want to believe in state planning and communism you can but don't go around accusing others of ignorance in the face of the 60 - 100 million dead of Mao and Stalin. If you system allows that, then is does not work.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
That's because there isnt one. Capitalism works because of the decisions made by millions about what they want to buy. As soon as substitute the choice of millions with the choice of few then success or failure becomes about you ability to get a positive decision from politicians not the merits of what you are selling. Capitalism works because it puts money into goods and services that people actually want instead of what some people think they should want.
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
 

Stupidity

New member
Sep 21, 2013
146
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
Since a pure capitalist system doesn't and never has existed, that would be a weird argument. I suggest you re-read that comment and be a little less divisive and judgmental.
 

Stupidity

New member
Sep 21, 2013
146
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
Since a pure capitalist system doesn't and never has existed, that would be a weird argument. I suggest you re-read that comment and be a little less divisive and judgmental.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
Stupidity said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
Since a pure capitalist system doesn't and never has existed, that would be a weird argument. I suggest you re-read that comment and be a little less divisive and judgmental.
You're right, I should be less divisive and judgemental. Especially when my peers in this thread have set such a great example. Ho hum.
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
That's because there isnt one. Capitalism works because of the decisions made by millions about what they want to buy. As soon as substitute the choice of millions with the choice of few then success or failure becomes about you ability to get a positive decision from politicians not the merits of what you are selling. Capitalism works because it puts money into goods and services that people actually want instead of what some people think they should want.
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
I suggest that you look at the post history of India. 40 years of state planned economy produced anemic growth and 100s of millions stuck in rural poverty. 25 years of deregulation and 350 million lifted out of rural poverty. Real world v internet marxists
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
That's because there isnt one. Capitalism works because of the decisions made by millions about what they want to buy. As soon as substitute the choice of millions with the choice of few then success or failure becomes about you ability to get a positive decision from politicians not the merits of what you are selling. Capitalism works because it puts money into goods and services that people actually want instead of what some people think they should want.
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
I suggest that you look at the post history of India. 40 years of state planned economy produced anemic growth and 100s of millions stuck in rural poverty. 25 years of deregulation and 350 million lifted out of rural poverty. Real world v internet marxists
If you go right back to my original comment, you'll note that I was commenting on a trend whereby people sticking up for capitalism just cite examples of communism failing as though there are only two systems you can ever have. So go on, keep demonstrating my point.
 

Albino Boo

New member
Jun 14, 2010
4,667
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
albino boo said:
Shamanic Rhythm said:
Stupidity said:
I never tire of people who complain about capitalism mindlessly.

Capitalism: an economic system based on private ownership of the means of production and the creation of goods and services for profit. Central characteristics of capitalism include private property, capital accumulation, wage labour and competitive markets.

Clearly we'd all be better off without any of those things. I mean it's not like every attempt at a communist country hasn't ended in failure and genocide (or very close). Yay Communism.
I never tire of people who brush aside any criticism of capitalism with complaints about communism. Like there isn't any kind of midpoint between the two systems.
That's because there isnt one. Capitalism works because of the decisions made by millions about what they want to buy. As soon as substitute the choice of millions with the choice of few then success or failure becomes about you ability to get a positive decision from politicians not the merits of what you are selling. Capitalism works because it puts money into goods and services that people actually want instead of what some people think they should want.
So by your logic, there's zero difference between, say, a country that subsidises a particular industry, and full blown Stalinism? Crikey.
I suggest that you look at the post history of India. 40 years of state planned economy produced anemic growth and 100s of millions stuck in rural poverty. 25 years of deregulation and 350 million lifted out of rural poverty. Real world v internet marxists
If you go right back to my original comment, you'll note that I was commenting on a trend whereby people sticking up for capitalism just cite examples of communism failing as though there are only two systems you can ever have. So go on, keep demonstrating my point.
Congratulations you have proved that you dont know what the hell you are talking about. India has been a democracy for the last 68 years, ruled over by the leftwing congress party for all but 8. Not the communist party. Real world v internet expert