The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
1–10 of 247 posts
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#2One upside to automation is that comparative advantage with regard to labour costs becomes much less important. This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies.
There are other considerations of course, such as proximity to resources, transport hubs, and markets.
Ultimately though, this doesn't change the fact that automation is mostly beneficial to capital owners and not the wider workforce, so capitalism's tendency toward inequality (as described by Piketty) still applies.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#3One upside to automation is that comparative advantage with regard to labour costs becomes much less important. This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. There are other considerations of course, such as proximity to resources, transport hubs, and markets. Ultimately though, this doesn't change the fact that automation is mostly beneficial to capital owners and no…
> This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies.
But this doesn't really bring jobs back, since they'll just be automated.
That's not to say there aren't other benefits aside from job creation, though.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#4One upside to automation is that comparative advantage with regard to labour costs becomes much less important. This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. There are other considerations of course, such as proximity to resources, transport hubs, and markets. Ultimately though, this doesn't change the fact that automation is mostly beneficial to capital owners and no…
> This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. But this doesn't really bring jobs back, since they'll just be automated. That's not to say there aren't other benefits aside from job creation, though.
Someone has to service the machines. Also, big machines are expensive to transport, so it makes sense to make them closer to where they will be used, leading to more service jobs.
There are also a lot of engineering jobs designing the hardware and software of these automated factories.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#5It's interesting that many politicians, including Trump and Sanders, want policies to prevent jobs from leaving the US, but have no policy proposals around automation.
If you want manufacturing jobs to stay in the US, regulating automation would be far more effective than trying to prevent companies from outsourcing jobs. (Incidentally, a lot of jobs that have been outsourced probably would have been automated if outsourcing had not been possible, and that's what opponents of outsourcing are missing.)
I'm very much against a policy to restrict automation, but it's worth pointing out.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#6One upside to automation is that comparative advantage with regard to labour costs becomes much less important. This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. There are other considerations of course, such as proximity to resources, transport hubs, and markets. Ultimately though, this doesn't change the fact that automation is mostly beneficial to capital owners and no…
> This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. But this doesn't really bring jobs back, since they'll just be automated. That's not to say there aren't other benefits aside from job creation, though.
It won't bring manual assembly line jobs back, but let's be honest: nothing will.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. But this doesn't really bring jobs back, since they'll just be automated. That's not to say there aren't other benefits aside from job creation, though.
Someone has to service the machines. Also, big machines are expensive to transport, so it makes sense to make them closer to where they will be used, leading to more service jobs. There are also a lot of engineering jobs designing the hardware and software of these automated factories.
Doesn't the question then become how many and at what salary do these engineering jobs exist?
Seems like there typically are fewer jobs and the total compensation for labor is reduced when manufacturing is automated (why else would the company pursue such a course of action?)
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This means that manufacturers can more easily afford to keep production in high wage economies. But this doesn't really bring jobs back, since they'll just be automated. That's not to say there aren't other benefits aside from job creation, though.
Someone has to service the machines. Also, big machines are expensive to transport, so it makes sense to make them closer to where they will be used, leading to more service jobs. There are also a lot of engineering jobs designing the hardware and software of these automated factories.
Yes, but this isn't very many jobs. The amount of labor per unit of productivity is drastically reduced in any case.
If we can attract new factories then it could be a net win, but someone will lose out (not china, but Bangladesh, India, Vietnam, and other countries that are trying to break into middle income).
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#9This was one of the more frustrating parts of this past election cycle:
"No candidate talked much about automation on the campaign trail. Technology is not as convenient a villain as China or Mexico, there is no clear way to stop it, and many of the technology companies are in the United States and benefit the country in many ways."
A lot of US jobs have been lost to globalization, but in the long-term that won't compare to the jobs lost to automation. As a software developer this seems painfully obvious to me, and I would hope most politicians are intelligent enough to see it as well. Unfortunately none of them have even talked about it, much less proposed solutions to help displaced workers.
Re: The Long-Term Jobs Killer Is Not China, It’s Automation
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Someone has to service the machines. Also, big machines are expensive to transport, so it makes sense to make them closer to where they will be used, leading to more service jobs. There are also a lot of engineering jobs designing the hardware and software of these automated factories.
Yes, but this isn't very many jobs. The amount of labor per unit of productivity is drastically reduced in any case. If we can attract new factories then it could be a net win, but someone will lose out (not china, but Bangladesh, India, Vietnam, and other countries that are trying to break into middle income).
Some jobs is better than no jobs, right?