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

9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

blogs.forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 253 posts

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#241

Post by chernevik »

muhfuhkuh wrote: post #167
chernevik wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, your own response raises the elaborated problems to your proposals. But you're so committed to your preferred end-state that you've flipped the obvious answers. State bureaucrats will be smarter than federal? because they're "decentralized"? Healthy people will pay premium for a program that will take them at any time? C'mon man, really? This stuff doesn't even link up with your first explanation of the pro…

"State bureaucrats will be smarter than federal? because they're "decentralized"?" "Smarter"? Why would they need to be "smarter"? They just need to analyze a business plan just like any other bank would (which is why I propose a "credit union" style of management and disbursement), but you're saying it will be rife with waste and fraud. I disagree, and can name this very network upon which we disagree as just one co…

You don't know anything about what I would or wouldn't do, because I'm focussed here on how we think about the problem.

If you think our current educational system "works", then why is it that our economic problems are poor worker preparation and inflexible attitudes about work?

If you are satisfied with how you're thinking about all this, I can't change that. Maybe sometime, when you're wondering why everyone is so stupid / evil that they can't see the brilliance of boosting small businesses with $10bn annual subsidy and their own single payer health system, you'll consider that maybe something along these lines helps explain the disconnect.

BTW, suggesting that the Postal Service was some kind of economic accelerator until 4 years ago is just ignorant. Their productivity is terrible, UPS & FedEx kicked their ass decades ago. They should have been relegated to rural / remote universal service, and the rest privatized, a long time ago. Think about why they weren't and you'll go a long way to understanding why political entities make lousy economic decisions.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#242

Post by gaius »

jshen wrote: post #240
jimbokun wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I'm guessing there are many reasons to get an education, but isn't the primary reason to understand the world better than before?" Surely that's rhetorical? Do you honestly think most people pursue education primarily to understand the world better, and not to increase their earning potential?

I think the smart ones realize they increase their earning potential by understanding the world better, but it also does much more than increase your earning potential. The idea that an education turns one into a producer from a consumer sounds absurd. People without educations produce!

People without college education sure, but they have a different kind of education, which was my original point. Why is college seen as the only way?

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#243

Post by dy »

jarrett wrote: post #52

The question of whether automation causes unemployment to rise in the long run is addressed in detail here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_of_automation_to_u... TL;DNR for the Wikipedia article: People have worried about machines putting humans out of work for centuries. But the unemployment rate has not risen steadily over the same period even as technology has constantly grown. The long term trend (measu…

> Widespread, permanent unemployment is one of the less favorable possible outcomes.

Wondering why you think this is a less favorable outcome - presumably if there were robots that could make all our whims come true it would be closer to a utopian society. The value of "employment" for itself seems nonsensical - the ability to procure things that people want seem to be the better barometer of a society's wealth.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#244

Post by jshen »

gaius wrote: post #242
jshen wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the smart ones realize they increase their earning potential by understanding the world better, but it also does much more than increase your earning potential. The idea that an education turns one into a producer from a consumer sounds absurd. People without educations produce!

People without college education sure, but they have a different kind of education, which was my original point. Why is college seen as the only way?

by that definition all of life is an education is it not? I don't think college is the only way, but I still don't think an education is about becoming a producer instead of a consumer.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#245

Post by protomyth »

roel_v wrote: post #234
gregpilling wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a friend with a sewage pumping business. He pays his drivers $40,000+ per year (high school education not required) and is a millionaire himself. There is money in handling 'issues' that other people don't want to handle.

Being a business owner and having multiple people working for you != 'being a plumber'. 40k is about half of the US median programmer salary.

where did you get your figure for US median programmer salary?

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#246

Post by roel_v »

protomyth wrote: post #245
roel_v wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being a business owner and having multiple people working for you != 'being a plumber'. 40k is about half of the US median programmer salary.

where did you get your figure for US median programmer salary?

Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos303.htm .

"In May 2008, median annual wages of wage-and-salary computer applications software engineers were $85,430. The middle 50 percent earned between $67,790 and $104,870. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $53,720, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $128,870."

On the other hand, from that same page:

"Median annual wages of wage-and-salary computer programmers were $69,620 in May 2008. The middle 50 percent earned between $52,640 and $89,720 a year. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $40,080, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $111,450. "

and

"In May 2008, median annual wages of wage-and-salary computer systems software engineers were $92,430. The middle 50 percent earned between $73,200 and $113,960. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $57,810, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $135,780."

So they make a strong distinction between "programmers" and "software engineers". I guess there's a definition in there somewhere, I didn't read it that closely (which is why I initially took the 85k as 'overall' median).

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#247

Post by protomyth »

roel_v wrote: post #246
protomyth wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

where did you get your figure for US median programmer salary?

Bureau of Labor Statistics: http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos303.htm . "In May 2008, median annual wages of wage-and-salary computer applications software engineers were $85,430. The middle 50 percent earned between $67,790 and $104,870. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $53,720, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $128,870." On the other hand, from that same page: "Median annual wages of wage-and-salary compu…

wow - good find, they actually have a few more classifications lower on the page (developers). I wonder what the difference between responses of the workers versus management under what category they find themselves.

They make it equally difficult to figure the plumber and other vocational professions. The initial pages seems to bunch a varying groups together. ick

defs: Computer software engineers design and develop software

omputer programmers write programs. After computer software engineers and systems analysts design software programs, the programmer converts that design into a logical series of instructions that the computer can follow (A section on computer systems analysts appears elsewhere in the Handbook.)

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#248

Post by AlisdairO »

chc wrote: post #23
AlisdairO wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure. I think we will continue to create highly skilled jobs, but I just don't see where unskilled labour gets a look-in in the new economy - In the past, it was reasonably easy to see where new jobs might come from, whereas I just don't see anything much coming up. We're even replacing more and more service jobs, which were what took over as farming and industry employment declined. I agree, there will pr…

If they have no skills, they never had very good prospects. Even "simple" farmhands need to have some skill at tending to the farm. It's not like you could just stand by a conveyor belt with a dumb look on your face and call yourself a factory worker for very long.

Right. I'm using the traditional definition of 'unskilled labour', which is generally that which does not require a high degree of training/education - not none at all. I believe that this class of labour is reducing in availability - which is a problem for a substantial proportion of the population.

I wonder if this will have knock-on implications for those of us who have relatively high levels of training. Right now, if my specialism becomes obsolete I can at least pick up a non-specialist alternative job - will this be the case in the future?

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#249

Post by AlisdairO »

usaar333 wrote: post #183
tomkarlo wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is so true... if you don't have a spouse whose coverage you can utilize, the cost of health insurance is prohibitive, ESPECIALLY for anyone over 30 who has a spouse and kids. At that point going without insurance (as I did when doing a startup, and so many other entrepreneurs I've seen do) is not just risky, it's irresponsible and foolhardy. Taking financial risks to start a business is fine - but you shouldn't…

Out of curiosity, what is the large source of the disparity? I was aware you don't get as nice of a tax break (though that will become irrelevant when you are making no money). Individually, I'd be surprised if your family had to pay over $1,500 a month for everyone, which is pretty comparable to group rates.

IIRC employer-bvased healthcare in the US is more heavily regulated, and allows for coverage of pre-existing conditions and so on.

Re: 9.2% Unemployment? Blame Microsoft.

#250

Post by AlisdairO »

chc wrote: post #132
gaius wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No-one who's ever farmed would say farming is unskilled. Just as I'm sure, programming would look just like typing to a farmer.

That was my point, and why I wrote "simple" in quotation marks. Even jobs that are viewed as "unskilled" generally involve some kind of skill — farmhands, factory workers, customer service representatives, etc. Any job that truly requires no skill essentially has no job security anyway, as the worker literally brings nothing to the table. The actual complaint here is that the demand for various skills waxes and wanes…

Jobs like working in mcdonalds obviously require a certain skillset, but that skillset can be taught in a very limited timeframe, as opposed to skilled jobs where that educations takes a much longer amount of time. I'm saying that the availability of such jobs seems to be on the wane.

I appreciate that such jobs are undesirable, but they're much in demands by those unable to take up a skilled trade, or those whose skillset has been rendered obsolete. They might not be great jobs, but they beat the alternative of nothing.

Post reply on HN