5 ms·

I don't know, but maybe it had a net positive impact on the world. Maybe not everything is about reducing labor costs, maybe it improved car quality or assembly

by plafl 10y ago

I don't know, but maybe it had a net positive impact on the world. Maybe not everything is about reducing labor costs, maybe it improved car quality or assembly speed. It would be great to know what is the most important incentive auto companies have for installing robots.

croon 10y ago
Hypothetical: Let's say GP was right and 1M jobs disappeared. Robots are cheaper. Are cars going to get cheaper? My bet is on no. Where does that money go? Up. Who will buy the cars? Definitely not the 1M people losing those jobs. I'm not saying we should go backwards, but just producing more stuff cheaper with less labor without a goal in sight isn't a net positive impact on the world, and the economic inequality will only grow steeper. I'm saying this as a cushy white collar business owner that will likely be comfortably ahead of that curve. But we're still just lemmings scurrying to get ahead of everyone else, while a whole lot will be left behind. This is what decided this election, regardless of anyones politics (I certainly didn't agree with the choice).
- akytt 10y ago
  That's not how capitalism works, you know. The prices will go down. Look at the car you get today and compare it to a car 10 years ago. Bang per buck has increased while brands like Dacia are coming in from below.
  - visarga 10y ago
    Dacia, my first car :-)
- kbart 10y ago
  Car industry is very competitive, so you can assume that decrease of the expenses will result in lower price. Maybe not directly price in currency, but better car for same money. Compare any new car to cars made even 10 years ago - they are better in pretty much any metrics. Heck, I remember times when air bags were counted as luxury and I'm not even that old. Take Tesla for example, such technologies and parameters were only available in luxury sport cars (Ferrari, Porsche etc).
  - croon 10y ago
    Sure, and my computer is a thousand times better than 25 years ago. It still costs LESS even disregarding inflation. That technology goes forward doesn't warrant price inflation. Like you said, your car hasn't gotten cheaper. So why would it going forward?
    - witty_username 10y ago
      Because of robotics.
- witty_username 10y ago
  If money is going up (shareholders?) then one should invest in that car company. If it's going excessively to the managers, then the shareholders should change the management's compensation. It is a net positive (shareholders or management and consumers gain), but not necessarily Pareto efficient (some people lose). > Definitely not the 1M people losing those jobs. Why? They would get a lesser paying job, but I think they could still buy a cheap car.

by plafl 10y ago

croon 10y ago

Hypothetical: Let's say GP was right and 1M jobs disappeared. Robots are cheaper. Are cars going to get cheaper? My bet is on no. Where does that money go? Up. Who will buy the cars? Definitely not the 1M people losing those jobs. I'm not saying we should go backwards, but just producing more stuff cheaper with less labor without a goal in sight isn't a net positive impact on the world, and the economic inequality will only grow steeper. I'm saying this as a cushy white collar business owner that will likely be comfortably ahead of that curve. But we're still just lemmings scurrying to get ahead of everyone else, while a whole lot will be left behind. This is what decided this election, regardless of anyones politics (I certainly didn't agree with the choice).

akytt 10y ago
That's not how capitalism works, you know. The prices will go down. Look at the car you get today and compare it to a car 10 years ago. Bang per buck has increased while brands like Dacia are coming in from below.
- visarga 10y ago
  Dacia, my first car :-)
kbart 10y ago
Car industry is very competitive, so you can assume that decrease of the expenses will result in lower price. Maybe not directly price in currency, but better car for same money. Compare any new car to cars made even 10 years ago - they are better in pretty much any metrics. Heck, I remember times when air bags were counted as luxury and I'm not even that old. Take Tesla for example, such technologies and parameters were only available in luxury sport cars (Ferrari, Porsche etc).
- croon 10y ago
  Sure, and my computer is a thousand times better than 25 years ago. It still costs LESS even disregarding inflation. That technology goes forward doesn't warrant price inflation. Like you said, your car hasn't gotten cheaper. So why would it going forward?
  - witty_username 10y ago
    Because of robotics.
witty_username 10y ago
If money is going up (shareholders?) then one should invest in that car company. If it's going excessively to the managers, then the shareholders should change the management's compensation. It is a net positive (shareholders or management and consumers gain), but not necessarily Pareto efficient (some people lose). > Definitely not the 1M people losing those jobs. Why? They would get a lesser paying job, but I think they could still buy a cheap car.