3 ms·

I have been resistant to the idea of government/state support for people who are losing jobs to automation, because I think people will adjust over the long run

by elamje 7y ago

I have been resistant to the idea of government/state support for people who are losing jobs to automation, because I think people will adjust over the long run and focus on more digital jobs. However, in the nearer term, there does seem to be a bigger case to be made for some sort of support since trucking a top occupation in the US, and #1 in most states. In 10 - 20 years it seems concerning to think that 2 - 3 million people will be out of traditional work with little or no education. Additionally, young people will not have that occupation as an option. Any industry that large (including traditional diesel truck manufacturers, truck stops, gas stations, truck mechanics, etc.) will be drastically impacted, all in a relatively short time span. Should there be some help? Should the government be rapidly retraining truck drivers for something else in the next few years?

cabaalis 7y ago
The primary barrier to social safety nets is the cost, and the ideological idea that government should not take more from its productive citizens to cover that cost. If the largest organizations are effectively optimizing humans out of the costs, then wouldn't their profits correspondingly increase? And as the demand rises for the safety net, along with corporate profits, it seems so would the argument to take a portion of those profits to cover the nets. Maybe to the point of breaking the ideological barrier. So wouldn't the businesses most harmed be those who continue to employ humans, as they'll have to pay the increased profit taxes as well as their employees?
dwild 7y ago
> Additionally, young people will not have that occupation as an option. What if the young already believe that? It's anecdotal but I know someone that worked temporarily at a trucking company at the reception of their office. She's been told by the staff that they have quite a bit of trouble recruiting drivers. She didn't saw that many that came for an interview, but one of them didn't even had a driver license for trucks. They did an interview for someone that couldn't even do the job yet. I can't see how legislation can be changed in 10 - 20 years either. Uber is 10 years old and still have trouble in MANY markets, not only against the laws but also against Taxi drivers. Even automatic trucks won't solve everything, thus companies that will use them will need both drivers, and a strike would be much worse to them than for Uber right now. What about airplane and trains? Why do they still have drivers if automating them is much easier (and already actually done)? Personally I can't see this industry no longer needing drivers for at least 30-40 years. Which isn't too bad with the current shortage of younger drivers.
jacquesm 7y ago
> I have been resistant to the idea of government/state support for people who are losing jobs to automation Hazarding a guess: your job is not immediately at risk due to automation.
credit_guy 7y ago
Truck drives lose their jobs to automation. C programmers are superseded by java programmers, and then Rust/Go. Simplex optimization jobs get swept away by CPLEX, and later tensorflow. 20 years ago Visual Basic was all the rage, and 20 years before Cobol. Lots of people find themselves obsolete because, you know, the world changes. What's so special about truck drivers that they need government assistance? To be honest, my guess would be that a typical truck driver is more resourceful than a typical javascript programmer. Take a look at [1] where a truck driver asks for advice how to switch careers and become a welder. You'll be impressed: the guy goes from asking a question to having his welding rig in two months. [1] https://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?57666-From-Truck-Driver-to-Welder https://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?57666-From-Truck-Drive...
mattrp 7y ago
My problem with UBI is that it somehow doesn’t seem to be such a good idea to pay people to sit around and do nothing - except perhaps get too deep into social media. At the same time, I do see some benefit to the Danish-style garden leave where one gets about 80% of their former salary to bridge them to their next gig.

by elamje 7y ago

cabaalis 7y ago

The primary barrier to social safety nets is the cost, and the ideological idea that government should not take more from its productive citizens to cover that cost. If the largest organizations are effectively optimizing humans out of the costs, then wouldn't their profits correspondingly increase? And as the demand rises for the safety net, along with corporate profits, it seems so would the argument to take a portion of those profits to cover the nets. Maybe to the point of breaking the ideological barrier. So wouldn't the businesses most harmed be those who continue to employ humans, as they'll have to pay the increased profit taxes as well as their employees?

dwild 7y ago

> Additionally, young people will not have that occupation as an option. What if the young already believe that? It's anecdotal but I know someone that worked temporarily at a trucking company at the reception of their office. She's been told by the staff that they have quite a bit of trouble recruiting drivers. She didn't saw that many that came for an interview, but one of them didn't even had a driver license for trucks. They did an interview for someone that couldn't even do the job yet. I can't see how legislation can be changed in 10 - 20 years either. Uber is 10 years old and still have trouble in MANY markets, not only against the laws but also against Taxi drivers. Even automatic trucks won't solve everything, thus companies that will use them will need both drivers, and a strike would be much worse to them than for Uber right now. What about airplane and trains? Why do they still have drivers if automating them is much easier (and already actually done)? Personally I can't see this industry no longer needing drivers for at least 30-40 years. Which isn't too bad with the current shortage of younger drivers.

jacquesm 7y ago

> I have been resistant to the idea of government/state support for people who are losing jobs to automation Hazarding a guess: your job is not immediately at risk due to automation.

credit_guy 7y ago

Truck drives lose their jobs to automation. C programmers are superseded by java programmers, and then Rust/Go. Simplex optimization jobs get swept away by CPLEX, and later tensorflow. 20 years ago Visual Basic was all the rage, and 20 years before Cobol. Lots of people find themselves obsolete because, you know, the world changes. What's so special about truck drivers that they need government assistance? To be honest, my guess would be that a typical truck driver is more resourceful than a typical javascript programmer. Take a look at [1] where a truck driver asks for advice how to switch careers and become a welder. You'll be impressed: the guy goes from asking a question to having his welding rig in two months. [1] https://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?57666-From-Truck-Driver-to-Welder https://weldingweb.com/showthread.php?57666-From-Truck-Drive...

mattrp 7y ago

My problem with UBI is that it somehow doesn’t seem to be such a good idea to pay people to sit around and do nothing - except perhaps get too deep into social media. At the same time, I do see some benefit to the Danish-style garden leave where one gets about 80% of their former salary to bridge them to their next gig.