3 ms·

As the need for cog-in-the-machine factory workers declined over the years, the labor force moved to industries like service, construction, transportation, and

by raldi 4y ago

As the need for cog-in-the-machine factory workers declined over the years, the labor force moved to industries like service, construction, transportation, and technology. My understanding is that if you could take a 2023 UPS driver or WalMart employee back in time and give them a day working at a factory in 1930 or 1970, they would eagerly return to the present. And those modern jobs exist today at such great scale in large part due to automation eliminating the old factory jobs (i.e., allowing goods to be produced much more cheaply).

DrewADesign 4y ago
What you call understanding is assumption. There were retail jobs back then too and a hell of a lot of people worked in those factories. Being able to raise a family in a nice house that you own, drive new cars, send your kids to college without scrimping and retire in your early 60s with a pension is a pretty compelling reason to endure difficult work environments. Meanwhile, in some states, 3% of full-time non-elderly non-disabled Walmart employees need medicaid and food stamps. Again, the amount of poverty and decay in once vibrant rust belt cities are a living argument against the assumption that everybody just sort of figures it out when large swaths of people are rendered obsolete.
- raldi 4y ago
  The data doesn't seem to support what you're saying, e.g., even ignoring the other three and just looking at service-industry jobs, their growth alone made up for the drop in manufacturing jobs many times over: https://i0.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/20220928_ServiceSectorFacts_FigB.png https://i0.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/... Also, the definition of a "nice house" in 1950 or 1975 is very, very different from today. In the 70's, a nice house often had one story and a single bathroom, a tiny kitchen with no dishwasher, no dryer, no air conditioning... As for the poverty rate, I'm not seeing the trend you describe: https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/imagecache/lightbox/main-images/poverty_rate_historical_0.jpg https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/imagecache/ligh...
  - DrewADesign 4y ago
    The US population is well over 100 million larger than in the 70s. You can't just erase changes in individual communities by looking only at national statistics. Our national economy profited just fine. Even within those national numbers, jobs that have seen significant growth line food service jobs are worse in measurable ways. The wages are significantly lower, they're less likely to provide basic benefits like health insurance, let alone paid vacation and retirement. One again, my initial assertion is that a whole lot of people don't just figure it out when part of a broad population deemed unnecessary, and the rust belt is obvious evidence of that.

by raldi 4y ago

DrewADesign 4y ago

What you call understanding is assumption. There were retail jobs back then too and a hell of a lot of people worked in those factories. Being able to raise a family in a nice house that you own, drive new cars, send your kids to college without scrimping and retire in your early 60s with a pension is a pretty compelling reason to endure difficult work environments. Meanwhile, in some states, 3% of full-time non-elderly non-disabled Walmart employees need medicaid and food stamps. Again, the amount of poverty and decay in once vibrant rust belt cities are a living argument against the assumption that everybody just sort of figures it out when large swaths of people are rendered obsolete.

raldi 4y ago
The data doesn't seem to support what you're saying, e.g., even ignoring the other three and just looking at service-industry jobs, their growth alone made up for the drop in manufacturing jobs many times over: https://i0.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/20220928_ServiceSectorFacts_FigB.png https://i0.wp.com/www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/... Also, the definition of a "nice house" in 1950 or 1975 is very, very different from today. In the 70's, a nice house often had one story and a single bathroom, a tiny kitchen with no dishwasher, no dryer, no air conditioning... As for the poverty rate, I'm not seeing the trend you describe: https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/imagecache/lightbox/main-images/poverty_rate_historical_0.jpg https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/imagecache/ligh...
- DrewADesign 4y ago
  The US population is well over 100 million larger than in the 70s. You can't just erase changes in individual communities by looking only at national statistics. Our national economy profited just fine. Even within those national numbers, jobs that have seen significant growth line food service jobs are worse in measurable ways. The wages are significantly lower, they're less likely to provide basic benefits like health insurance, let alone paid vacation and retirement. One again, my initial assertion is that a whole lot of people don't just figure it out when part of a broad population deemed unnecessary, and the rust belt is obvious evidence of that.