6 ms·

The Growing Underclass: Jobs Gone Forever

37 points by robg 17y ago

yummyfajitas 17y ago
This article suggests that perhaps the way to get out of the recession is to force people to accept reality: "Workers whose entire occupations...are disappearing (think: auto workers) will need to start over and find a new career path. But the new skills they will need take a long time to acquire." Reality: auto work was not highly skilled labor, and it just paid as if it was skilled due to union coercion. This turned out to be unsustainable. Former auto workers must now accept low skill pay. "...some workers may need to move to new places in order to start a different career....Homeowners who are “underwater” ...may not be able to sell their house for enough money to enable them to buy a home in a new area." Reality: you speculated on real estate and lost. You can not afford to own a home anymore. Rent.
- josh33 17y ago
  This is also a reminder that for those struggling during this recession, it would go a long way if those who are not reached out to help. That way we don't need to rely on ever more inefficient gov't programs trying to help. Private charity is good for the giver and receiver (most of the time).
- dabent 17y ago
  The funny thing is, the problem auto workers face isn't exactly new to America. I remember when there were massive auto plant layoffs in the 1980's, yet new people must have been going into that line of work.
- gsmaverick 17y ago
  Exactly! Many people don't want to accept the reality. We have been enjoying a really high standard of living which we can't really afford. But now we have to perfect storm and people don't want to accept that they won't be able to buy a 50in TV or a new car every 3 years.
- fnid2 17y ago
  Reality: you speculated on real estate and lost. You can not afford to own a home anymore. Rent. Look at the silver lining. Due to ridiculous cultural issues in the U.S., you got to live well beyond your means for quite a long time.
  - ShabbyDoo 17y ago
    cultural? Please explain. The trickle-down of Wall Street irrationality, perhaps.
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
- patio11 17y ago
  Former auto workers must now accept low skill pay. Or try to get a job at the industry unionization is least likely to kill: the government. You don't need to be a highly trained specialist to be a DMV clerk or supervise the Berkeley toolshed. In related news, the portion of unionized workers working in the public sector exceeded 50% this month...
- crux_ 17y ago
  > This article suggests that perhaps the way to get out of the recession is to force people to accept reality. In other words, the way to get "out of the recession" is to redefine the current situation as normal, rather than to actually improve it. Well, that would work.
  - Calamitous 17y ago
    > redefine the current situation as normal I think the point is that the current situation is normal.
    - crux_ 17y ago
      I think the point was that the current situation is acceptable. I can't agree with that.
stuff4ben 17y ago
This makes me wonder what may end up being the "auto worker" job in 2035? Software/web development? University teachers? How do you even prepare for such an eventuality?
- jerf 17y ago
  "Web development" quite possibly. However, one of the reasons I chose my career in programming oh-so-long-ago is that I don't forsee the end of programming coming for a long time. Or, if you prefer, "automation". Our level of abstraction that we operate at may rise ever higher and someday we may all be programming nanobots instead of "computers", but until full and true human-level AI comes along there will always be a need for programmers to be programming something, and while I doubt the nanobots will be programmed in Java there will still be significant carry-over from current skills. And sort of tying into the recent discussion about how the iPad is for "everybody else" who isn't a programmer, the idea that everybody will want to be programmers or will be programmers is clearly false. The iPad is apparently forcing some people to face up to that. And since "full and true human-level AI" is basically the Singularity, I haven't tried to plan my career past that on the grounds that it's totally impossible to make plans.
  - clistctrl 17y ago
    There was a story yesterday about using genetic programming for automated debugging. Granted, its probably not putting out the best code in the world but if it works isn't that what business is going to truly care about (maybe its the sliced bread of software development, in that it sucks compared to bread from a bakery but you can still make an edible sandwich from it) While debugging is only a part of the software development process, it seems like it creates an evolutionary path for automated development.
    - anonjon 17y ago
      In that article, a programmer still had to input tests, I believe. So you could end up with fully-test driven development (requirements oriented?). I kind of doubt genetic programming is a way to fully automated development. Someone will always have to describe what it is that the computer should do.
msluyter 17y ago
Or maybe the culprit is a corollary of Moore’s Law, the idea of exponential advances in technology over time. That might suggest that innovation and automation displace more and more workers by the time each recession rolls around. This is also Marshall Brain's thesis in Robotic Nation: http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm In the broadest terms, automation and computerization increase productivity, which means fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work. Conventional wisdom holds that new jobs will be created for displaced workers, but it's as yet unclear what those new jobs might be.
- rleisti 17y ago
  In a more general sense, increased productivity means more value is created per unit cost. This could mean the same value with less jobs; it could also mean the same amount of jobs with more value. A growing pool of displaced labour is also a growing un-tapped resource (or a growing revolution, depending on how well society manages it).
- jodrellblank 17y ago
  http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-faq.htm http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-faq.htm His suggestion is to ramp up to giving everyone $25,000 per year living costs from the government, with the understanding that people will not just "do nothing" anymore than people "do nothing" with their free time now, but still keep a capitalist system so people who want to earn more can earn more, and ... more details in the FAQ linked above.
- krakensden 17y ago
  Are workers being replaced by robots, or by workers in other countries who are willing/able to work for less money?
drewr 17y ago
One thing Congress could do immediately is cut the minimum wage. It is now at $7.25 per hour. This is a price control on labor. You can't make a worker's $5.00/hour skills magically worth $7.25. They could also make it cheaper for small businesses to hire people. That $7.25/hour labor really costs $14.50.
- jswinghammer 17y ago
  Unions like minimum wage too much for that to happen. They've historically used minimum wages to try to drive up wage rates for their members.
  - daniel-cussen 17y ago
    This is sad and true. The only way out for governments historically has been to inflate the currency to cut labor costs. It's like people need a government for them to have someone to lie to them.
- flatline 17y ago
  Nobody's labor is worth as little as $5/hour. That's not a living wage anywhere in the US, and as a result it borders on slave labor to hire people for that little. The high price for small businesses is, however, a more realistic problem.
  - ewanmcteagle 17y ago
    By what process do you come to the conclusion that no labor is worth as little as $5/hour?
    - flatline 17y ago
      By virtue of the fact that it's not possible to make enough to provide food and shelter on that amount (an untested hypothesis on my own part, admittedly). If someone is not trying to make a living then there well may be labor that is worth that little, but I'm not sure how you would make a meaningful distinction to avoid exploitation without a ton of other, more onerous regulations.
danteembermage 17y ago
It is commonly accepted wisdom that the higher quality job you pursue the longer your job search will be; this makes sense as the matching problem becomes much more difficult. Therefore the more skilled the labor force the longer time "between jobs" is going to be optimal from the job seekers perspective; it's worth it to get the match right. I'll let you make your own conclusions on what this implies for the percentage unemployment rate after recessions.
Towle_ 17y ago
Jobs gone forever? That's depressing news. If only there were a way to make more. I mean actually make more, not just tax the people with jobs so you can hire and pay the people who don't have jobs to do work nobody really needs them to do. You know... jobs the employer can afford to pay for not because the employer forced earned money out of everyone's wallets, but because free-willed participants in a fair market agreed to pay for those services without being threatened with jail time. Wouldn't that just be the bee's knees! If the government could create more jobs out of thin air like that? Well, for the government it'd be thin air anyway. For everyone else involved, it'd be blood, sweat, and tears. Almost makes you think it's unfair who gets the credit for job creation. Maybe that's why the government makes it harder than it needs to be by getting in the way a little: because government leaders know they don't deserve the credit but there's no way avoid it, so they decided the only way to receive less undeserved credit for job creation would be to make it harder for people to create jobs. Sure, those people might have to bleed, sweat, and cry a little more to create those jobs for others, but in the end our noble government leaders know that sacrifice is worth being able to maintain their humility. Being a politician is a hard job, you know.
regularfry 17y ago
And there was me thinking this would be yet another Apple story...

37 points by robg 17y ago

This article suggests that perhaps the way to get out of the recession is to force people to accept reality: "Workers whose entire occupations...are disappearing (think: auto workers) will need to start over and find a new career path. But the new skills they will need take a long time to acquire." Reality: auto work was not highly skilled labor, and it just paid as if it was skilled due to union coercion. This turned out to be unsustainable. Former auto workers must now accept low skill pay. "...some workers may need to move to new places in order to start a different career....Homeowners who are “underwater” ...may not be able to sell their house for enough money to enable them to buy a home in a new area." Reality: you speculated on real estate and lost. You can not afford to own a home anymore. Rent.

josh33 17y ago
This is also a reminder that for those struggling during this recession, it would go a long way if those who are not reached out to help. That way we don't need to rely on ever more inefficient gov't programs trying to help. Private charity is good for the giver and receiver (most of the time).
dabent 17y ago
The funny thing is, the problem auto workers face isn't exactly new to America. I remember when there were massive auto plant layoffs in the 1980's, yet new people must have been going into that line of work.
gsmaverick 17y ago
Exactly! Many people don't want to accept the reality. We have been enjoying a really high standard of living which we can't really afford. But now we have to perfect storm and people don't want to accept that they won't be able to buy a 50in TV or a new car every 3 years.
fnid2 17y ago
Reality: you speculated on real estate and lost. You can not afford to own a home anymore. Rent. Look at the silver lining. Due to ridiculous cultural issues in the U.S., you got to live well beyond your means for quite a long time.
- ShabbyDoo 17y ago
  cultural? Please explain. The trickle-down of Wall Street irrationality, perhaps.
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
patio11 17y ago
Former auto workers must now accept low skill pay. Or try to get a job at the industry unionization is least likely to kill: the government. You don't need to be a highly trained specialist to be a DMV clerk or supervise the Berkeley toolshed. In related news, the portion of unionized workers working in the public sector exceeded 50% this month...
crux_ 17y ago
> This article suggests that perhaps the way to get out of the recession is to force people to accept reality. In other words, the way to get "out of the recession" is to redefine the current situation as normal, rather than to actually improve it. Well, that would work.
- Calamitous 17y ago
  > redefine the current situation as normal I think the point is that the current situation is normal.
  - crux_ 17y ago
    I think the point was that the current situation is acceptable. I can't agree with that.

stuff4ben 17y ago

This makes me wonder what may end up being the "auto worker" job in 2035? Software/web development? University teachers? How do you even prepare for such an eventuality?

jerf 17y ago
"Web development" quite possibly. However, one of the reasons I chose my career in programming oh-so-long-ago is that I don't forsee the end of programming coming for a long time. Or, if you prefer, "automation". Our level of abstraction that we operate at may rise ever higher and someday we may all be programming nanobots instead of "computers", but until full and true human-level AI comes along there will always be a need for programmers to be programming something, and while I doubt the nanobots will be programmed in Java there will still be significant carry-over from current skills. And sort of tying into the recent discussion about how the iPad is for "everybody else" who isn't a programmer, the idea that everybody will want to be programmers or will be programmers is clearly false. The iPad is apparently forcing some people to face up to that. And since "full and true human-level AI" is basically the Singularity, I haven't tried to plan my career past that on the grounds that it's totally impossible to make plans.
- clistctrl 17y ago
  There was a story yesterday about using genetic programming for automated debugging. Granted, its probably not putting out the best code in the world but if it works isn't that what business is going to truly care about (maybe its the sliced bread of software development, in that it sucks compared to bread from a bakery but you can still make an edible sandwich from it) While debugging is only a part of the software development process, it seems like it creates an evolutionary path for automated development.
  - anonjon 17y ago
    In that article, a programmer still had to input tests, I believe. So you could end up with fully-test driven development (requirements oriented?). I kind of doubt genetic programming is a way to fully automated development. Someone will always have to describe what it is that the computer should do.

msluyter 17y ago

Or maybe the culprit is a corollary of Moore’s Law, the idea of exponential advances in technology over time. That might suggest that innovation and automation displace more and more workers by the time each recession rolls around. This is also Marshall Brain's thesis in Robotic Nation: http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm http://www.marshallbrain.com/robotic-nation.htm In the broadest terms, automation and computerization increase productivity, which means fewer people are needed to do the same amount of work. Conventional wisdom holds that new jobs will be created for displaced workers, but it's as yet unclear what those new jobs might be.

rleisti 17y ago
In a more general sense, increased productivity means more value is created per unit cost. This could mean the same value with less jobs; it could also mean the same amount of jobs with more value. A growing pool of displaced labour is also a growing un-tapped resource (or a growing revolution, depending on how well society manages it).
jodrellblank 17y ago
http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-faq.htm http://marshallbrain.com/robotic-faq.htm His suggestion is to ramp up to giving everyone $25,000 per year living costs from the government, with the understanding that people will not just "do nothing" anymore than people "do nothing" with their free time now, but still keep a capitalist system so people who want to earn more can earn more, and ... more details in the FAQ linked above.
krakensden 17y ago
Are workers being replaced by robots, or by workers in other countries who are willing/able to work for less money?

drewr 17y ago

One thing Congress could do immediately is cut the minimum wage. It is now at $7.25 per hour. This is a price control on labor. You can't make a worker's $5.00/hour skills magically worth $7.25. They could also make it cheaper for small businesses to hire people. That $7.25/hour labor really costs $14.50.

jswinghammer 17y ago
Unions like minimum wage too much for that to happen. They've historically used minimum wages to try to drive up wage rates for their members.
- daniel-cussen 17y ago
  This is sad and true. The only way out for governments historically has been to inflate the currency to cut labor costs. It's like people need a government for them to have someone to lie to them.
flatline 17y ago
Nobody's labor is worth as little as $5/hour. That's not a living wage anywhere in the US, and as a result it borders on slave labor to hire people for that little. The high price for small businesses is, however, a more realistic problem.
- ewanmcteagle 17y ago
  By what process do you come to the conclusion that no labor is worth as little as $5/hour?
  - flatline 17y ago
    By virtue of the fact that it's not possible to make enough to provide food and shelter on that amount (an untested hypothesis on my own part, admittedly). If someone is not trying to make a living then there well may be labor that is worth that little, but I'm not sure how you would make a meaningful distinction to avoid exploitation without a ton of other, more onerous regulations.

danteembermage 17y ago

It is commonly accepted wisdom that the higher quality job you pursue the longer your job search will be; this makes sense as the matching problem becomes much more difficult. Therefore the more skilled the labor force the longer time "between jobs" is going to be optimal from the job seekers perspective; it's worth it to get the match right. I'll let you make your own conclusions on what this implies for the percentage unemployment rate after recessions.

Towle_ 17y ago

Jobs gone forever? That's depressing news. If only there were a way to make more. I mean actually make more, not just tax the people with jobs so you can hire and pay the people who don't have jobs to do work nobody really needs them to do. You know... jobs the employer can afford to pay for not because the employer forced earned money out of everyone's wallets, but because free-willed participants in a fair market agreed to pay for those services without being threatened with jail time. Wouldn't that just be the bee's knees! If the government could create more jobs out of thin air like that? Well, for the government it'd be thin air anyway. For everyone else involved, it'd be blood, sweat, and tears. Almost makes you think it's unfair who gets the credit for job creation. Maybe that's why the government makes it harder than it needs to be by getting in the way a little: because government leaders know they don't deserve the credit but there's no way avoid it, so they decided the only way to receive less undeserved credit for job creation would be to make it harder for people to create jobs. Sure, those people might have to bleed, sweat, and cry a little more to create those jobs for others, but in the end our noble government leaders know that sacrifice is worth being able to maintain their humility. Being a politician is a hard job, you know.

regularfry 17y ago

And there was me thinking this would be yet another Apple story...