Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 206 posts

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#51

Post by Moshe_Silnorin »

knieveltech wrote: post #38
aylons wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for a welding operator to become a physical therapist is an even larger leap. Also, there's also a lot of resistance (and prejudice) in going from blue-collar to pink-collar, partly because care and health services are seem as feminine jobs(except doctors, of course).

Hard to have much sympathy for someone who's strangling themselves with their own gender stereotypes.

Universalize that statement and apply it to X demographic not choosing a STEM degree and you'll find yourself in a struggle session.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#52

Post by cryoshon »

retbull wrote: post #5

It is interesting that the people who are losing jobs aren't retraining. What exactly is Trump/Republican party going to do to help with that? Bring back Coal when renewable is cheaper?

i'd say it's not so much that they aren't retraining versus can't retrain due to constrained resources

it's tough to retrain. now add kids, low savings, and a mortgage. then you re-start at the bottom of the salary ladder. now it's time to retire.

my prediction: trump does nothing to address this problem whatsoever.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#53

Post by vostok »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #39
CodeSheikh wrote: post #11

"To counter these trends, the U.S. must invest in raising the skills of the workers most likely to be affected by the disappearance of routine jobs..." Not sure how's that going to play out for example a welding machine operator can't become a mechanical engineer in a short span of time because those routine jobs are eventually going to be consumed by automated robots, per this study. Why not motivate people to look…

Engineering and Medecine seem to be the only safe places atm.

Traditional elite jobs such as sales, banking (not trading), and management seem to have also resisted automation for the time being.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#54

Post by JohnTHaller »

Welding machine operators are a drop in the bucket compared with the biggest looming job shift on the horizon: truck drivers. It's the most commonly listed job in 29 states and there are millions of them across the US. And most will be replaced by automated driving systems within the next couple decades. Yes, there will be service jobs within trucking, but that will be a small fraction of the 'routine' jobs that automation will replace.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#55

Post by ergothus »

tptacek wrote: post #40
metaphorm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

elder-care cannot possibly be a solid basis for the economy. they are not in their working years and are not (on the average) contributing positive sums to GDP or tax revenue. there is a humanitarian case to be made for improved quality of life for elderly people, but I can't imagine that there is a reasonable economic case to be made for it, unless you're arguing that the elder-care industry is just an elaborate sub…

I don't understand the reasoning here, like, at all. For decades now researchers have been pointing out the demographic issues of aging populations and the workforces required to care for them. I don't know the specific numbers, but they're doubtless enormous. Why wouldn't they be a significant part of the economy?

Not the above poster, but their point appears to be that caring for the elderly doesn't CONTRIBUTE to the economy (i.e. as a transaction it adds to GDP, but in terms of value-creation it's near zilch. So while a blue-collar worker might add value by creating a product, an elder care worker adds only humanitarian benefit. (And unlike a doctor that can help those blue collar workers continue to work, there isn't even much INDIRECT value-addition to elder care).

To continue my devil-advocacy, I'm sure the above poster wouldn't argue AGAINST elder care on humanitarian grounds, but is instead saying this is not where you want to redirect significant portions of your workforce, because you'll tank value-addition and harm everyone (including those elderly patients).

Personally, I find the argument a little repulsive, but also an important argument to refute. So I'm glad it was raised.

My rebuttal would be that with increased automation we're doing fine in value-addition, and the entire point of having positive wealth creation is to improve the overall well-being of a lot of people (I was going to say "as many as possible", but that might not be agreed to by some). If we skip the "reward" of a society's wealth-creation, why are we doing it again?

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#56

Post by ThomPete »

retbull wrote: post #5

It is interesting that the people who are losing jobs aren't retraining. What exactly is Trump/Republican party going to do to help with that? Bring back Coal when renewable is cheaper?

Billons where spent in Denmark doing that. The results where void. The problem is that the kind of skills you need require much more than what retraining can do.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#57

Post by dllthomas »

aylons wrote: post #21
CodeSheikh wrote: post #11

"To counter these trends, the U.S. must invest in raising the skills of the workers most likely to be affected by the disappearance of routine jobs..." Not sure how's that going to play out for example a welding machine operator can't become a mechanical engineer in a short span of time because those routine jobs are eventually going to be consumed by automated robots, per this study. Why not motivate people to look…

And for a welding operator to become a physical therapist is an even larger leap. Also, there's also a lot of resistance (and prejudice) in going from blue-collar to pink-collar, partly because care and health services are seem as feminine jobs(except doctors, of course).

My brother recently finished nursing school. The number of times he got the question, "you're gonna be a male nurse?" ... He had a number of cute responses.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#58

Post by maratd »

knieveltech wrote: post #38
aylons wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And for a welding operator to become a physical therapist is an even larger leap. Also, there's also a lot of resistance (and prejudice) in going from blue-collar to pink-collar, partly because care and health services are seem as feminine jobs(except doctors, of course).

Hard to have much sympathy for someone who's strangling themselves with their own gender stereotypes.

> strangling themselves with their own gender stereotypes

Those stereotypes exist for a reason. No matter how much you pretend otherwise, differences between men and women exist. That's why we refer to one as men and one as women. Because they're different. They will naturally gravitate toward specific industries and tasks. Lecturing people because of their natural preferences is juvenile.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#59

Post by phkahler »

tptacek wrote: post #40
metaphorm wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

elder-care cannot possibly be a solid basis for the economy. they are not in their working years and are not (on the average) contributing positive sums to GDP or tax revenue. there is a humanitarian case to be made for improved quality of life for elderly people, but I can't imagine that there is a reasonable economic case to be made for it, unless you're arguing that the elder-care industry is just an elaborate sub…

I don't understand the reasoning here, like, at all. For decades now researchers have been pointing out the demographic issues of aging populations and the workforces required to care for them. I don't know the specific numbers, but they're doubtless enormous. Why wouldn't they be a significant part of the economy?

>> Why wouldn't they be a significant part of the economy?

Because they don't have any money. Retired people either don't have a lot of money to spend or they tend to be very conservative in their spending since they don't have a regular income. If you want to increase the amount of money they have, you're looking at increased government handouts which come from taxes, which come from the people who are working. BTW I don't consider social security in the US to be a handout, but it does theoretically come from taxes on a persons previous income.

Re: ‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

#60

Post by tptacek »

phkahler wrote: post #59
tptacek wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the reasoning here, like, at all. For decades now researchers have been pointing out the demographic issues of aging populations and the workforces required to care for them. I don't know the specific numbers, but they're doubtless enormous. Why wouldn't they be a significant part of the economy?

>> Why wouldn't they be a significant part of the economy? Because they don't have any money. Retired people either don't have a lot of money to spend or they tend to be very conservative in their spending since they don't have a regular income. If you want to increase the amount of money they have, you're looking at increased government handouts which come from taxes, which come from the people who are working. BTW…

They in fact do have money, as do their families. When we note that senior care is an increasingly important part of the economy, we're not saying that's because we're allocating more government funds to them; it's simply because there are more seniors to care for.
Post reply on HN