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

If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 92 posts

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#51

Post by meritt »

creaghpatr wrote: post #27

And despite all of these concerns, the NYT frequently and consistently advocates for increases in low-skill immigrants, the very people who will the government will need to support when the 'robots come for [their] jobs'. The question is which of those 2 arguments are disingenuous?

That's not the case at all. It's very cost-ineffective to automate low-skill jobs because the human capital has historically been extremely cheap. There's a reason we don't broadly have robots cleaning our houses, landscaping our yards, providing in-home care, picking fresh produce, or providing general construction labor.

It's the precisely the lack of these low-skill workers that will drive the necessity of automation, because the cost of hiring people will become too expensive.

Quartz published a well-research article last year on the same topic: "Low-skill workers aren’t actually the ones most threatened by robots" https://qz.com/1010831/the-middle-skill-job-is-disappearing-...

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#52

Post by RobertoG »

mindcrime wrote: post #13
Proven wrote: post #2

The government should do precisely NOTHING. The jobs don't belong to workers, so the premise is entirely wrong to begin with.

The government should do precisely NOTHING. Exactly. It is not the job of the State to make sure everybody has a job. Arguably all the State should do is protect property rights, enforce contracts and provide some notion of a "justice system". And really, all three of those things can be debated. The best way to think of it, IMO, is the way Bastiat[1] put it by describing "the law" as "no more than the collective ext…

The state not only protect property rights, it defines them.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#53

Post by trendia »

petermcneeley wrote: post #45
trendia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The total US tax revenue in 2017 was $3.422 trillion. If you split that evenly among 300 million people, each would get $11,000, which is half of the poverty line of $22,000. Even if you thought that little money was acceptable, to afford it you'd have to cut: 1. all military programs 2. all existing social security programs 3. all government infrastructure projects 4. all education programs 5. ...

Is this an honest reply? The middle sees no real change in total income, the only the extremes see changes in total income.

My post is describing why minimum income would not result in everyone getting $50,000 a year.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#54

Post by hinkley »

fixermark wrote: post #3

I've heard universal basic income may be a viable approach, but I think it's unclear how it scales up as of yet. Regardless, I haven't seen better suggestions yet.

What sold me on BI was the concept that every decade the GDP per capita goes up. But we don’t need that product as much which leads to consumerism. If one guy can produce all the stuff for five people what’s the point of the other four working? We could switch to an experience or service based economy, and/or we could give people a cushion that lets them try out a lot of different things.

Not everybody knows what they want to do at 9 years old like I did. I watch friends and family struggle their whole lives with this and recognize that I was very fortunate.

That said if I had health insurance and programmer culture was a bit different I would work 30 hours a week, get nearly as much done and have more time for family and hobbies.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#55

Post by bbddg »

This problem is much deeper than just automation and has been spiraling out of control since at least the 1970s. https://thecurrentmoment.files.wordpress.com/2011/08/product...

Years of tax cuts for corporations and the rich combined with the destruction of Unions and workers ability to collectively bargain has created this problem. Start taxing wealth and corporate profits at post-ww2 levels, increase protections for workers. Encourage co-operatives, profit sharing, and other forms of worker control and ownership.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#56

Post by [deleted] »

trendia wrote: post #44
rootusrootus wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yes, it would require significantly increasing tax revenue to pay for it.

To get everyone up to the poverty line and not have to cut government projects, you'd have to triple tax revenue. Since the average tax burden for those making $500k+ is around 30% already, that would effectively mean taxing them at 90%. I don't think it's politically feasible.

[deleted]

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#57

Post by RobertoG »

exabrial wrote: post #9
Proven wrote: post #2

The government should do precisely NOTHING. The jobs don't belong to workers, so the premise is entirely wrong to begin with.

This is correct. It's not the government's job to provide you a job, it's a personal responsibility to find one, if you want one. If you seek one, the government might provide some minor worker abuse and discrimination protections, but this in no way implies you have entitlement to a job or even income.

>>" It's not the government's job to provide you a job"

Maybe now things are how you say, but it's not a divine mandate.

If you see the government as a tool of society, it's the society who should choose the role of the government through the democratic process.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#58

Post by hinkley »

mozumder wrote: post #35

Raise everyone up a level to make sure they can perform jobs that robots can't do, like get an advanced degree or incorporate a business. Make it a requirement for citizenship.

We have computers doing diagnostics now.

Remember that problem with the glassblower? He had no one to replace him because there was no market for a journeyman chem glass blower so nobody followed behind. We will have the same problems elsewhere.

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#59

Post by carapace »

nickthemagicman wrote: post #20
mc32 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d also remove the way for lots of people to make a living. The unemployed only know that making a living in a lousy industry is better than not making any living at all.

That's exactly the point. Humans rely on jobs, what happens when robots take over?

I think we'll find, if we stop hitting them with stupid-sticks in childhood (I'm looking at you organized educational systems) and feed them well that most people are in fact interesting, intelligent, curious, and driven to express themselves in glorious self-directed vibrant creative constructive expression. (And if some of them turn out not to be, well then, we can toss 'em in a volcano.)

A "job" is not something you need. You need to contribute to society and you need support from society as well, and we currently structure that relationship primarily through jobs and "the economy" but that structure is what's going away. The question is, what to replace it with?

Automation is a good thing. From the point of view of the machines Moore's Law means that humans are becoming exponentially more valuable! (Thanks to Mark Miller for that gem.)

Unless you can do something that a machine can't be programmed to do you have a serious problem, though. What will your children be? And their children? We are deciding today what our distant descendants will be doing.

An A.I. koan:

Q: What can you do that a machine cannot? A: Could a machine answer that question?

Re: If the Robots Come for Our Jobs, What Should the Government Do?

#60

Post by mindcrime »

chongli wrote: post #41
mindcrime wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The government should do precisely NOTHING. Exactly. It is not the job of the State to make sure everybody has a job. Arguably all the State should do is protect property rights, enforce contracts and provide some notion of a "justice system". And really, all three of those things can be debated. The best way to think of it, IMO, is the way Bastiat[1] put it by describing "the law" as "no more than the collective ext…

The job of the state, ultimately, is to preserve itself. In practice, that means upholding a social contract in order to maintain order. If we see a widespread outbreak of technological unemployment then more effort on the part of government is necessary lest public order breaks down. It's that simple. No moral arguments are necessary.

Widespread technological unemployment is definitely a concern, no question there. I'm just not convinced that government is the best tool to try and solve that problem, on both moral and practical grounds. But when I say "government" I really mean "Government as we know it today" - big, corrupt, invasive, inefficient, etc. Possibly a better model could be developed which would be better suited. That, to me, is the challenge for our time.
Post reply on HN