‘Routine’ Jobs Are Disappearing

Depends. Fees that exist to influence direction of growth for opinionated reasons definitely represent a bias, but to NOT price in the shared impact (i.e. environmental impact, use of a globally limited resource (coal), etc) represents a bias in the opposite direction. I'm willing to bet (purely personal opinion) that fossil fuel costs do NOT fully include those common costs, and thus more than wipe out any bias represented in other fees.

I perfectly acknowledge that using "renewable" resources all have shared costs as well, and likely involve some sort of non-renewable impact. I'm just saying you need to include those costs to have an even remote chance of a fair comparison.

--- Is that a good attempt at this new era of pro-trump, anti-worker hatred?

Edit: Seriously now? This kind of commentary is very much on-topic. By definition, low-wage people and poor people have roughly 0 input into the economy. That's not a moral or ethical issue, that's just numbers.

I've seen countless times here, of discussions on which markets to chase after (from HN viewpoint), and many times, entrepreneurs say to not go after the low wage classes - no fungible income.

This commentary also plays in to the idea that "Someone is poor because they do not work hard, and so they deserve that fate. Someone is rich because they worked hard, and due to their working hard are successful." -- These ideas are core to the Republican and Democrat parties, although the Democrats have the idea that it might not, kind of , maybe not be as true. Whereas the Republicans ran the "Welfare Queen", a known fraudster, as the eminent welfare model, that all welfare recipients are like.

I would have figured that at least some people would have seen where that kind of 'quote' would have went towards. There's quite a lot of meat up top there, with core values packed in there by a bulk of one of our political parties.

the comment I replied to was wanting to take People in Job A, and retrain them for Job B in healthcare as a second career do to Job A being automated. You are not likly to be a Surgeon as a Second Career unless you are already a non-surgical doctor. You are not going to take a welder and make them a Surgeon as a second career most likely.

As such it was implied that Healthcare was a "safe" industry for people seeking refuge from having their jobs automated away. I was pointing out it is not.

Note the "or outsourced" piece. If the prevailing wage in the US is $20+ an hour vs a 3rd or quarter of that in the developing world there is no way the average US worker can compete. While I get the automation argument, that still doesn't explain the large (seemingly majority) of retail goods in the United States are that manufactured in lower labor cost countries. Not everyone is cut out to be a knowledge worker. As much as I personally like tech, this is not going to be the great job creator for Middle America.

There are still a lot of jobs that can't be automated and/or won't be for a long time. If it was possible to automate as much as some would have you believe in the short term straight up there are some robotics companies that would have not closed down (Willow Garage), and you would be seeing a lot more traction with others doing more interesting things instead of telepresence robots and clunky household devices such as the Roomba.