Robots Will Create 'Permanently Unemployable Underclass'

[Polish_Silver]

Re: Maintenance robots

Was talking to a customer yesterday about his company. Seems they use automatic welders. Set up a track and the welding machine just runs about doing it's business in fuel storage tanks, buildings, etc. Pretty amazing what tech there is out there today. He said they are not that much quicker than humans after set up time is considered, but more precise, can work longer hours, and don't get sick or lay out of work.

The human welder gets $30-$40/hour ? I'm guessing the machine pays for itself in 3 years, and is essentially free welding after that.

But human welders will not quickly be replaced, due to the need for thinking and versatility in non-repetitive tasks. It is only the repetitive ones that will be done by machine. I'd be surprised if most auto factory welding has not been done by machine since 1980.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Robots vs secretaries

MIT says Google cars still way more fantasy than reality.

Would you buy a self-driving car that couldn’t drive itself in 99 percent of the country? Or that knew nearly nothing about parking, couldn’t be taken out in snow or heavy rain, and would drive straight over a gaping pothole?If your answer is yes, then check out the Google Self-Driving Car, model year 2014.

[Ghent12]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

Really? Really? It's 2014. Those types of references to black folk were already wholly inappropriate 100 years ago.

I made no reference to black folk. You are making a racist inference, and I can only assume this is so because you are a racist or otherwise preoccupied with race. It is largely the Democrats who claim to champion the poor, but really they corral the poor and treat them as a farmer would livestock--they cultivate and harvest them, but never let them leave the ranch. If you think the word "plantation" is racist, you're wrong. If you think some people aren't considered to be purely reliable votes, then you're equally wrong.

Regularly on iTulip the members refer to "the people" as "the sheeple" and nobody bats an eye. But refer to poor people as voterstock on a politician's plantation and everyone loses their freaking minds!

My example used a black family, but that was only to enhance its realism (since youth unemployment among blacks is substantially higher than other demographics). Take any example of poor people in this country, and you will likely find them assaulted and insulted by politicians who spout how those poor poor people have the whole world against them, and the only solution to your plight in poverty is to get everyone to pay their "fair share," and I'm going to make those greedy bastards pay their fair share, and then finally somehow magically you poor poor people will be okay, because I'm a champion of the poor and I'm on your side.

[Ghent12]

Re: Maintenance robots

The human welder gets $30-$40/hour ? I'm guessing the machine pays for itself in 3 years, and is essentially free welding after that.

But human welders will not quickly be replaced, due to the need for thinking and versatility in non-repetitive tasks. It is only the repetitive ones that will be done by machine. I'd be surprised if most auto factory welding has not been done by machine since 1980.

Machines require maintenance, space, and typically power from electricity or some type of fuel. There's no free lunch with machines, just as there's no free lunch with anything.

[Ghent12]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

Now we find ourselves in a very cynical situation where politicians (mostly Republicans) own whole cohorts of senior white males.

I don't understand your point. What does a person's skin color have to do with anything? Are you a racist?

[vinoveri]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I don't understand your point. What does a person's skin color have to do with anything? Are you a racist?

unfortunately racism is now officially institutionalized in our culture as a matter of law - e.g., routine questions on applications for employment, credit, etc. request individuals to identify their race (oh yeah, and we're sexist too)

[lektrode]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

....racist or otherwise preoccupied with race. It is largely the Democrats who claim to champion the poor, but really they corral the poor and treat them as a farmer would livestock--they cultivate and harvest them, but never let them leave the ranch. If you think the word "plantation" is racist, you're wrong. If you think some people aren't considered to be purely reliable votes, then you're equally wrong....

exactly right and its the BIGGEST BS STORY EVER TOLD (mostly by the lamerstream media op/ed depts)
maybe back in the days of FDR and MAYBE up thru LBJ - but after that....???

and believe it or not - theres a whole bunch of people (mostly not around anymore) who happen to think they were lucky to have lived on plantations... hell, they're tourist attractions these daze...

but of course there are some - mostly on the same team that keeps the poor enslaved - who'll do anything to maintain the illusion that their people are "the only ones who stand up for the poor" because its 'the right thing to do' - mostly because it keeps them and the 'social welfare advocacy industry' - and its industrial-complex - employed at mostly .gov jobs that pay WAAAAAAY MORE than the 'typical' working stiff will EVER see - and they keep BS'n em into voting the same way, decade-in and decade-out

all the while the lamerstream media allows THE REAL ROBBER-BARRON-CLASS to pick their pockets, along with The Rest of US - by ignoring anything that isnt flattering to their own team's interests...

like i said, its THE BIGGEST BS STORY EVER TOLD....

[dcarrigg]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I'm not calling you racist. I'm not calling you anything. Don't take it personally.

I just think you could choose your words better.

When you talk about Democrats "owning" "plantations worth" of "voting-stock," you do realize it sounds like a bad old reference to slavery, don't you? You have the word "plantation" right in there with the word "own" and you're implying something maybe you didn't mean. But you're it's certainly not what Michael Dawson is talking about in "Behind the Mule."

You could choose your words more carefully if you don't want people thinking you mean anything nefarious about race.

Otherwise, you might sound like you were criticizing an entire race of people for being unthinking morons who are hoodwinked into voting against their own personal interests and incapable of independent critical thought.

And if that's not what you meant, then there had to be a better way to have expressed what you actually did mean.

[santafe2]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I'm not calling you racist. I'm not calling you anything. Don't take it personally.

I just think you could choose your words better.

When you talk about Democrats "owning" "plantations worth" of "voting-stock," you do realize it sounds like a bad old reference to slavery, don't you? You have the word "plantation" right in there with the word "own" and you're implying something maybe you didn't mean. But you're it's certainly not what Michael Dawson is talking about in "Behind the Mule."

You could choose your words more carefully if you don't want people thinking you mean anything nefarious about race.

Otherwise, you might sound like you were criticizing an entire race of people for being unthinking morons who are hoodwinked into voting against their own personal interests and incapable of independent critical thought.

And if that's not what you meant, then there had to be a better way to have expressed what you actually did mean.

I thought you were appropriately calling out the worst sort of racist comment iTulip has let live in a while. Eric and his support staff should be ashamed they did not call it out before you took the time to do it. Plantations are places of slavery and voterstock or votingstock is a clear reference to domestic animals, to livestock. Don't apologize, demand that this board moderate itself more closely. I could care less how often iTulip is correct economically if this board will allow loathsome bigots to cloak their racial hatred in cheap rhetoric with no official challenge.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I thought you were appropriately calling out the worst sort of racist comment iTulip has let live in a while. Eric and his support staff should be ashamed they did not call it out before you took the time to do it. Plantations are places of slavery and voterstock or votingstock is a clear reference to domestic animals, to livestock. Don't apologize, demand that this board moderate itself more closely. I could care less how often iTulip is correct economically if this board will allow loathsome bigots to cloak their racial hatred in cheap rhetoric with no official challenge.

Yeah. That was my initial reaction. I was moving on to offering a bit of benefit of the doubt and assuming the words may have been chosen by some sort of mistake. Maybe I shouldn't have. But either way, there is no justification for sentences like:

Now we find ourselves in a very cynical situation where politicians (mostly Democrats) own whole plantations of voterstock

If you mean those words earnestly, you are being completely inappropriate, and we need to strive for better.

[Techdread]

Re: Maintenance robots

Machines require maintenance, space, and typically power from electricity or some type of fuel. There's no free lunch with machines, just as there's no free lunch with anything.

The fact that the universe exists, renders that over used statement false.

[FRED]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I thought you were appropriately calling out the worst sort of racist comment iTulip has let live in a while. Eric and his support staff should be ashamed they did not call it out before you took the time to do it. Plantations are places of slavery and voterstock or votingstock is a clear reference to domestic animals, to livestock. Don't apologize, demand that this board moderate itself more closely. I could care less how often iTulip is correct economically if this board will allow loathsome bigots to cloak their racial hatred in cheap rhetoric with no official challenge.

We cannot moderate every post on every thread in the public forums nor do we feel that this is good policy. We allow community members to work through differences of opinion and misunderstandings. Unless a post is reported by multiple community members we will not intervene.

Threads that become overly divisive are moved to Rant and Rave where rules of conduct are less stringent. Members who do not appreciate that kind of environment can choose to stay away from Rant and Rave.

New members who are consistently hostile to management or to other members (aka trolls) are banned. We have had to do this only three times since 2006 when the forums opened.

We consider the banning of trolls, the moving of threads that do not adhere to iTulip standards of civility, and otherwise allowing community members to work through differences to be a successful policy to produce lively, varied, thoughtful and civil discussion.

[don]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

I don't understand your point. What does a person's skin color have to do with anything? Are you a racist?

senior white males

are not considered a voting cohort? Can't help you there, pal.

[Polish_Silver]

labor's plight

. . .

But the real issue (or scare) here isn't technology, is it? The real issue is jobs going away...a

So the way I see it, the problem here isn't technology. It's not really about more robots or whatever. The problem is labor's share of income. But look at the data. Labor's share of income only really hit its precipitous plunge after China's ascent to the WTO and during the last two financialization-inspired bubble collapses. Even if you believe the technology-only theory, the timing should make you pause and wonder.

. . . .

But I think that the problem with this argument is that: 1) there's pretty good data out there showing that it's not really technology that's the primary driver here, and 2) we have to power to regulate technology.

Very thoughtful post, and I wish I could read some of the references you quoted.

I have to disagree about controlling technology. It would not be easy to control, and nations that tried to limit technology usually did not end up very well. If you outlaw a particular machine, it will go underground, or offshore.

I do agree that blaming labors plight primarily on technology is premature. You did not mention immigration, which is really "worker trade policy". The US immigration policy is much more liberal than most other OECD nations.

One way to look at the effect of technology is the attitude towards education. As late as 1980, many thought anything past high school to be superfluous, and to some extent they were right. Now we have a national obsession with trying to get everyone into a 4 year college, clearly a practical impossibility if academic standards are to be at all maintained.

[santafe2]

Re: Greenspan the Un-Rand

We cannot moderate every post on every thread in the public forums nor do we feel that this is good policy. We allow community members to work through differences of opinion and misunderstandings. Unless a post is reported by multiple community members we will not intervene.

Threads that become overly divisive are moved to Rant and Rave where rules of conduct are less stringent. Members who do not appreciate that kind of environment can choose to stay away from Rant and Rave.

New members who are consistently hostile to management or to other members (aka trolls) are banned. We have had to do this only three times since 2006 when the forums opened.

We consider the banning of trolls, the moving of threads that do not adhere to iTulip standards of civility, and otherwise allowing community members to work through differences to be a successful policy to produce lively, varied, thoughtful and civil discussion.

That may be true but you read my post so I can only assume you read dcarrigg's response as well as the original post. In any event, the original post is now well known to the Fred community and apparently, it's OK for the OP to continue his racist comments as long as the OP is clever enough pretend he doesn't understand the historical context of his comments and the Freds are free to pretend this is 1920 and we have a difference of opinion or a misunderstanding.

The thread is a good one. The thread does not deserve RnR ranking, the OP's post deserves a reprimand. There was a time on iTulip where that sort of race baiting, (definition: The act of using racially derisive language, actions, or other forms of communication in order to anger or intimidate or coerce a person or group of people), would not be tolerated. Now we have to be concerned that we're not creating too much divisiveness and assisting a good thread toward the iTulip bore hole.

I hope iTulip's standards of civility are based in the 21st Century. If so, you will censure overt racism from all posters and not require your subscribers to call it out.