3 ms·

I want to play the devils advocate here. If these jobs were gotten rid of with automation would these workers be better or worse off? I know the essential argu

I want to play the devils advocate here. If these jobs were gotten rid of with automation would these workers be better or worse off? I know the essential argument is that the job should pay more and also not be automated away but due to the competitive nature of capitalism there is a tipping point where it becomes cheaper to have robots do the work. Should all these jobs be replaced by robots? What would society look like then? I don't think anybody in charge is answering these important questions.

imustbeevil 7y ago
These jobs will be automated. Amazon doesn't have human workers because they like people more than robots; they have human workers because some work today still needs human workers.
owenmarshall 7y ago
> I don't think anybody in charge is answering these important questions. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-for-the-super-rich https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-... Oh, they absolutely are thinking about these questions.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
velcrovan 7y ago
Are people better off since we outlawed child labor? I mean, don't child workers help poor people get more money?
projektfu 7y ago
This is a relative of the “lump of work” fallacy. These workers are currently hired by amazon and its contractors because amazon has already displaced other forms of work (retail, logistics, call centers). Experience shows that increases in productivity caused increases in living standards and work conditions across the board. So, usually, one would expect people to be better off with automation even if there’s some “friction” in reducing an automated workforce. It’s worth pointing out that productivity growth has been low for years and shows no sign of rapid acceleration in the Information Age.
- einpoklum 7y ago
  "Experience shows that increases in productivity caused increases in living standards and work conditions across the board." Only if you average it across entire societies. For example, living conditions in many peripheral de-industrialized areas in various countries often deteriorate for long periods of time while central cities benefit from cheaper products. So it's not just about "transitional friction" - it's huge swaths of society, in terms of geography and the population.
  - projektfu 7y ago
    I think deindustrialization is not exactly a symptom of productivity growth. It's more of a symptom of loss of labor competitiveness, possibly from a failure in productivity growth relative to other industries. Mobility of capital has a lot to do with it. For example, an area with lots of factories that popped up at the same time, and now they're reaching end of life and the capital owner will rebuild them in a different location where labor is more competitive. If you think about the postwar boom, there was massive productivity growth in many regions that saw continuously increasing labor force participation and internal immigration. Detroit comes to mind. In the low-productivity 80s (when productivity growth reached 0 at one point) factories started closing because they were uncompetitive with foreign producers. Northern industrial centers started evaporating as they were replaced by southern ones with similar productivity but lower overall labor cost.

imustbeevil 7y ago

These jobs will be automated. Amazon doesn't have human workers because they like people more than robots; they have human workers because some work today still needs human workers.

owenmarshall 7y ago

> I don't think anybody in charge is answering these important questions. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-for-the-super-rich https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-... Oh, they absolutely are thinking about these questions.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

velcrovan 7y ago

Are people better off since we outlawed child labor? I mean, don't child workers help poor people get more money?

projektfu 7y ago

This is a relative of the “lump of work” fallacy. These workers are currently hired by amazon and its contractors because amazon has already displaced other forms of work (retail, logistics, call centers). Experience shows that increases in productivity caused increases in living standards and work conditions across the board. So, usually, one would expect people to be better off with automation even if there’s some “friction” in reducing an automated workforce. It’s worth pointing out that productivity growth has been low for years and shows no sign of rapid acceleration in the Information Age.

einpoklum 7y ago
"Experience shows that increases in productivity caused increases in living standards and work conditions across the board." Only if you average it across entire societies. For example, living conditions in many peripheral de-industrialized areas in various countries often deteriorate for long periods of time while central cities benefit from cheaper products. So it's not just about "transitional friction" - it's huge swaths of society, in terms of geography and the population.
- projektfu 7y ago
  I think deindustrialization is not exactly a symptom of productivity growth. It's more of a symptom of loss of labor competitiveness, possibly from a failure in productivity growth relative to other industries. Mobility of capital has a lot to do with it. For example, an area with lots of factories that popped up at the same time, and now they're reaching end of life and the capital owner will rebuild them in a different location where labor is more competitive. If you think about the postwar boom, there was massive productivity growth in many regions that saw continuously increasing labor force participation and internal immigration. Detroit comes to mind. In the low-productivity 80s (when productivity growth reached 0 at one point) factories started closing because they were uncompetitive with foreign producers. Northern industrial centers started evaporating as they were replaced by southern ones with similar productivity but lower overall labor cost.