5 ms·

There’s a fortune to be made in the global freight industry. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/15/convoy-flexport-automating-the-shipping-industry.html https://www.

There’s a fortune to be made in the global freight industry. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/15/convoy-flexport-automating-the-shipping-industry.html https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/15/convoy-flexport-automating-t... There are tens of billions that can be carved out with automation. Electrics near large urban areas will definitely help air quality.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
icxa 7y ago
There's more than a couple of fortunes to lose by automating the trucking industry as well.
- tannerc 7y ago
  Can you elaborate? I don't necessarily agree nor disagree, I'm simply curious what you're specifically referring to here.
  - TaylorAlexander 7y ago
    Wealthy people will dump money in to R&D and some will lose. Robotics is an unforgiving business and the field is littered with dead.
pbhjpbhj 7y ago
Tens of billions of wages no longer to be paid out to truckers. Amazon seem a long way on with packers too. That's a lot of wealth transfer that's no longer going to happen between companies and poorer people; seems we'll accelerate wealth/income disparity.
- jryle70 7y ago
  Or a half full view: tens of billions, possibly more, will be paid to the same truckers in their new, more fulfilling and healthier occupation? I don't know which scenario will play out. Neither do you. We'll have to see. Better yet, strive to make my scenario the reality. Complain about automation wouldn't help.
  - maximente 7y ago
    complaining about automation sure will help, there's even a US presidential candidate polling >1% whose ideas about how the government supports its citizens were greatly inspired by - you guessed it - people losing jobs and not getting them back due to automation. the idea that an individual can somehow strive to change capital capturing massive swathes of business and not sharing those proceeds with those they have sidelined is pretty laudable. i appreciate your optimism but i would consider it more on the unrealistic side, especially given that truck drivers probably aren't gung ho about studying for years to get retrained given most of them don't have college degrees in the first place.
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      > i appreciate your optimism but i would consider it more on the unrealistic side, especially given that truck drivers probably aren't gung ho about studying for years to get retrained given most of them don't have college degrees in the first place. That doesn’t mean we should create or endorse make work projects, jobs that could be faster, cheaper and more efficient when automated. Society has a responsibility to these people, which is why I support both basic income and job retraining programs. It’s the humane way to make progress without fear.
  - chpatrick 7y ago
    What I fear is that the new, more fulfilling occupations you describe will go to the next generation of non-truckers, not those who lost their jobs. If you spent your whole life driving trucks and it's what you're good at, can you really transfer to a new occupation that's more fulfilling and well-paid in older age, or will you just be left unemployed or stuck with a worse job? I think more automation is absolutely the future but we need to find some way to take care of the people who are left behind, and not just say "oh they'll get some other job".
    - gdubya 7y ago
      some way to take care of the people left behind.... some kind of Income that was Basic but Universal...
- phreack 7y ago
  The way forward seems to be enforcing the distribution at the state level, rather than forbidding automation.
- z3t4 7y ago
  Automation, electronics, washing machines, sewing machines etc have been a way out of poverty. human labour will be worth more. And prices of goods will go down, so the poor can buy more.
- mcintyre1994 7y ago
  You might not agree with his proposed solution (it's UBI), but Andrew Yang's book 'The war on normal people' is a really good well researched exploration of this issue (and other industries too).
  - munk-a 7y ago
    I think a UBI is sort of inevitable to ensure society transitions peaceably into this new era - this round of automation appears to be falling well short on new industry creation compared to prior iterations. It's something I'd love to see get a wider adoption as otherwise I'm pretty :shrug: on Yang.
- HeadsUpHigh 7y ago
  Are we really going to have the same conversation every single time something about automation is mentioned. I'm just mindblown how hostile people suddenly became to the very same process that has been enriching our lives since the first industrial revolution.
  - ionwake 7y ago
    Yes because we live in a society that currently cannot function without employment
    - anticensor 7y ago
      -cannot +does not It is a deliberate choice by states and elites, not an inability.
    - simonh 7y ago
      That’s been true since the introduction of the Jaquard Loom.
    - ivalm 7y ago
      Have we previously lived in a society that was more friendly to unemployed? Because automation has been happening for a while, people got displaced from their jobs for a while....
  - pbhjpbhj 7y ago
    >I'm just mindblown how hostile people suddenly became // I welcome automation, I don't welcome the income disparity that goes along with it. Automation needs to serve mankind, not only serve the currently wealthy who can "own the means of automation" to coin a phrase. No longer is the issue owning the means of production, but that the capitalists can owner the tools, and the [robotic] workers. Where does that leave the proletariat (the current workforce)? It leaves them useless to the Capitalists. In Capitalism that which doesn't aid profit becomes valued at zero -- and people can't live on zero, even if that means wealthy people can have their parcels delivered without any human intervention. We can't rely on perpetual growth to get out of it, we're getting to the crunch. What worked before worked because we discovered energy production that seemed limitless, but coal isn't limitless. "But we found oil, surely that's limitless?".
- DINKDINK 7y ago
  >we'll accelerate wealth/income disparity Do you believe that the wealth/income disparity would decrease if instead of employing one worker to drive a truck, each box was hand carried by 1000 workers? Unless the more cost-efficient delivery companies prevent competitors from entering the (now leaner) delivery market, the result of a decrease in the marginal cost of production is more, better quality, cheaper goods whose price decrease benefits those who are at the margins the most (the group you seem to be wanting to help and who would hurt the most by artificially increasing the cost of delivering goods). The "Curse" of Machinery https://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-lesson-henry-hazlitt/vii-the-curse-of-machinery/ https://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-le... Spread-the-Work Schemes http://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-lesson-henry-hazlitt/viii-spread-the-work-schemes http://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-les...
  - JamesBarney 7y ago
    Sure in the long run automation benefits society. But in the short run they can definitely lead to increases in inequality. And yes if you suddenly created huge numbers of unnecessary jobs at the bottom income disparity would decrease.
- m463 7y ago
  I've wondered if maybe we'll just have 5-day weekends?
- megaremote 7y ago
  If you have to go to the extreme to make your argument, maybe you are wrong? Yes, it is disconcerting to remove so many jobs. There needs to be a solution to that.
- manfredo 7y ago
  Why is there so much emphasis on wealth disparity when there's substantial evidence that life is significantly getting better for the poor regardless of this disparity? This is just one example off the top of my news queue: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2019/05/18/american-life-is-improving-for-the-lowest-paid https://www.economist.com/united-states/2019/05/18/american-... The phrase "A rising tide lifts all ships" gets routinely mocked, but the data seems to indicate that is is true. While inequality has risen over the past several decades, quality of life even for the poorest quartile has improved.
Farradfahren 7y ago
The global freight industry is the new deal employment initiative of half the industrialized world. Automat that, and all governments will silently try to sabotage your attempts.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

icxa 7y ago

There's more than a couple of fortunes to lose by automating the trucking industry as well.

tannerc 7y ago
Can you elaborate? I don't necessarily agree nor disagree, I'm simply curious what you're specifically referring to here.
- TaylorAlexander 7y ago
  Wealthy people will dump money in to R&D and some will lose. Robotics is an unforgiving business and the field is littered with dead.

pbhjpbhj 7y ago

Tens of billions of wages no longer to be paid out to truckers. Amazon seem a long way on with packers too. That's a lot of wealth transfer that's no longer going to happen between companies and poorer people; seems we'll accelerate wealth/income disparity.

jryle70 7y ago
Or a half full view: tens of billions, possibly more, will be paid to the same truckers in their new, more fulfilling and healthier occupation? I don't know which scenario will play out. Neither do you. We'll have to see. Better yet, strive to make my scenario the reality. Complain about automation wouldn't help.
- maximente 7y ago
  complaining about automation sure will help, there's even a US presidential candidate polling >1% whose ideas about how the government supports its citizens were greatly inspired by - you guessed it - people losing jobs and not getting them back due to automation. the idea that an individual can somehow strive to change capital capturing massive swathes of business and not sharing those proceeds with those they have sidelined is pretty laudable. i appreciate your optimism but i would consider it more on the unrealistic side, especially given that truck drivers probably aren't gung ho about studying for years to get retrained given most of them don't have college degrees in the first place.
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    > i appreciate your optimism but i would consider it more on the unrealistic side, especially given that truck drivers probably aren't gung ho about studying for years to get retrained given most of them don't have college degrees in the first place. That doesn’t mean we should create or endorse make work projects, jobs that could be faster, cheaper and more efficient when automated. Society has a responsibility to these people, which is why I support both basic income and job retraining programs. It’s the humane way to make progress without fear.
- chpatrick 7y ago
  What I fear is that the new, more fulfilling occupations you describe will go to the next generation of non-truckers, not those who lost their jobs. If you spent your whole life driving trucks and it's what you're good at, can you really transfer to a new occupation that's more fulfilling and well-paid in older age, or will you just be left unemployed or stuck with a worse job? I think more automation is absolutely the future but we need to find some way to take care of the people who are left behind, and not just say "oh they'll get some other job".
  - gdubya 7y ago
    some way to take care of the people left behind.... some kind of Income that was Basic but Universal...
phreack 7y ago
The way forward seems to be enforcing the distribution at the state level, rather than forbidding automation.
z3t4 7y ago
Automation, electronics, washing machines, sewing machines etc have been a way out of poverty. human labour will be worth more. And prices of goods will go down, so the poor can buy more.
mcintyre1994 7y ago
You might not agree with his proposed solution (it's UBI), but Andrew Yang's book 'The war on normal people' is a really good well researched exploration of this issue (and other industries too).
- munk-a 7y ago
  I think a UBI is sort of inevitable to ensure society transitions peaceably into this new era - this round of automation appears to be falling well short on new industry creation compared to prior iterations. It's something I'd love to see get a wider adoption as otherwise I'm pretty :shrug: on Yang.
HeadsUpHigh 7y ago
Are we really going to have the same conversation every single time something about automation is mentioned. I'm just mindblown how hostile people suddenly became to the very same process that has been enriching our lives since the first industrial revolution.
- ionwake 7y ago
  Yes because we live in a society that currently cannot function without employment
  - anticensor 7y ago
    -cannot +does not It is a deliberate choice by states and elites, not an inability.
  - simonh 7y ago
    That’s been true since the introduction of the Jaquard Loom.
  - ivalm 7y ago
    Have we previously lived in a society that was more friendly to unemployed? Because automation has been happening for a while, people got displaced from their jobs for a while....
- pbhjpbhj 7y ago
  >I'm just mindblown how hostile people suddenly became // I welcome automation, I don't welcome the income disparity that goes along with it. Automation needs to serve mankind, not only serve the currently wealthy who can "own the means of automation" to coin a phrase. No longer is the issue owning the means of production, but that the capitalists can owner the tools, and the [robotic] workers. Where does that leave the proletariat (the current workforce)? It leaves them useless to the Capitalists. In Capitalism that which doesn't aid profit becomes valued at zero -- and people can't live on zero, even if that means wealthy people can have their parcels delivered without any human intervention. We can't rely on perpetual growth to get out of it, we're getting to the crunch. What worked before worked because we discovered energy production that seemed limitless, but coal isn't limitless. "But we found oil, surely that's limitless?".
DINKDINK 7y ago
>we'll accelerate wealth/income disparity Do you believe that the wealth/income disparity would decrease if instead of employing one worker to drive a truck, each box was hand carried by 1000 workers? Unless the more cost-efficient delivery companies prevent competitors from entering the (now leaner) delivery market, the result of a decrease in the marginal cost of production is more, better quality, cheaper goods whose price decrease benefits those who are at the margins the most (the group you seem to be wanting to help and who would hurt the most by artificially increasing the cost of delivering goods). The "Curse" of Machinery https://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-lesson-henry-hazlitt/vii-the-curse-of-machinery/ https://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-le... Spread-the-Work Schemes http://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-lesson-henry-hazlitt/viii-spread-the-work-schemes http://www.stevebaker.info/quick-guides/economics-in-one-les...
- JamesBarney 7y ago
  Sure in the long run automation benefits society. But in the short run they can definitely lead to increases in inequality. And yes if you suddenly created huge numbers of unnecessary jobs at the bottom income disparity would decrease.
m463 7y ago
I've wondered if maybe we'll just have 5-day weekends?
megaremote 7y ago
If you have to go to the extreme to make your argument, maybe you are wrong? Yes, it is disconcerting to remove so many jobs. There needs to be a solution to that.
manfredo 7y ago
Why is there so much emphasis on wealth disparity when there's substantial evidence that life is significantly getting better for the poor regardless of this disparity? This is just one example off the top of my news queue: https://www.economist.com/united-states/2019/05/18/american-life-is-improving-for-the-lowest-paid https://www.economist.com/united-states/2019/05/18/american-... The phrase "A rising tide lifts all ships" gets routinely mocked, but the data seems to indicate that is is true. While inequality has risen over the past several decades, quality of life even for the poorest quartile has improved.

Farradfahren 7y ago

The global freight industry is the new deal employment initiative of half the industrialized world. Automat that, and all governments will silently try to sabotage your attempts.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]