>Fast food chains, trucking companies, farms and factories across the country switch to robots and automation technology, cutting back 90% of their workforce in the process
>20 Million Jobs lost
>Public outrage ensues
What do?
How do we avoid this situation without passing up the benefits of automation?
Other urls found in this thread:
engadget.com
twitter.com
ubi or mass extermination/ww3 are pretty much the only options
So a continuation of the last 600 years but with robots instead of machines.
Yes, kind of, but I think that with the current world population and the capabilities of automation, the impact will be much faster and more devastating.
In the past it has simply taken less people to do the same job because they make the work easier and implementation has been very slow and usually in only one or two fields at a time, now we have the ability to erase many jobs across a variety of fields.
I mean there are only so many jobs that are immune to automation, most of those either require a high level of education (Engineers, Doctors mechanics etc) or require creativity (Artists, musicians etc) which many people do not possess.
I was thinking of a taxation system that allowed a company owner to recoup the initial cost of installing the automation system and the maintenance costs but then as time progresses, taxation increases to pay welfare to the replaced workers.
Of course you would not want to make it uneconomical to use automation, but I think that some of the money they save should be used to benefit society, not just the company
Pulled this directly from your ass did you?
Threshing machines alone put more people out of work in an instant than anything you will be able to cite that isn't bad science fiction.
It took less people to do the job because they were replaced with machines, the work did not get easier and implementation was not slow nor was it confined to a single industry. It has been continual progress on all free market enterprises.
honestly op i hope that happens i am an industrial robot salesman, just the other day i was playing air hockey with an automotive robot arm (the future is great)
not to mention that automation takes away alot of plebian jobs but it creates more higher paying technical jobs as well as engineering jobs,
also if we wanted a solution i think governments should invest in engineering related education instead of useless arts degrees that way we have more engineers = better machines = higher average income = and more taxes circle of financial life
> What do?
Genocide, preferably. It's either that or we end up with 7 billion NEETs on autismbux.
Invest in captcha technology
> pay welfare to the replaced workers
Why? What is the point of keeping useless eaters alive?
They will only reduce the amount of resources available to be consumed by the remaining productive people, and the owners of the machines.
What's the point in keeping around all of these people who would add nothing to the stock of goods and services; who would only reduce that stock? Embrace evolution and let them die off.
I think you will find that there were riots and unrest after they invented these, and at least there were other jobs of a similar skill level for the laborers to do.
Not everyone wants to become an engineer, I'd like to think that the point of automation is to provide a culture of less work, more living.
Chaos, robot owners would be killed off by the multitudes of starving people.
Alternatively, the "Useless eaters" are a majority, enjoy your democracy as lawmakers divide the spoils of industry
Who will buy the goods produced by the robots, then?
This is, in my opinion, the most probable sequence of events:
>at some point, due to automation technology becoming both better and cheaper, most unskilled human labor becomes wholly uncompetitive
>society demands people who've lost their job to just move on to some field that hasn't been automated, but the advancement of automation doesn't stop and those fields become less and less
>eventually only a small number of fields are available, most of them requiring secondary education and above-average intelligence. Only a small number of unskilled fields are unable to be automatized
>tens of millions of unemployed demand some sort of new system. Old white politicians don't realize that a society of only highly skilled workers and artists can't work and write off everyone who can't find a job as lazy bums who just want free stuff
>GOOD END: eventually people realize requiring everyone to work to live doesn't work anymore and some form of basic income is implemented. As technology advances and more jobs are automated, basic income becomes more generous and civilization becomes a utopia where robots do all our work while we are free to do what we wish without worrying about basic needs
>BAD END: laws are put in place to severely restrict the use of automation, just so no lazy bums can live off welfare. Advancement of civilization grinds to a halt.
>REALLY BAD END: Fuckwads like are in power. Millions of people starve due to some archaic notion that only those who work deserve to live
Also, although I don't believe in the concept of "useless eaters", I'm sure there will be a lot less of them once the next generation does not have to worry about finances and can get a job in the field they enjoy and will excel in, not the one that they don't enjoy but pays the best
eugenics
The industrial revolution coincided with lower birth rates so we were able to handle the job losses. Get the moralfags out of the way and start sterilizing undesirables.
We'll inevitably have to go back to 90% taxes like in the 50's
>>Fast food chains, trucking companies, farms and factories across the country switch to robots and automation technology, cutting back 90% of their workforce in the process
Million Jobs lost
>>Public outrage ensues
>What do?
>How do we avoid this situation without passing up the benefits of automation?
Just don't implement it all at once and it'll be fine. If all those fields are completely automatic by 2075, nobody will care, because people will have had plenty of time to adjust, and since they weren't all laid off at once, there won't be a massive influx of unskilled workers in need of jobs.
Not really. Think of all the jobs that have become insignificant in the last 200 years, and think about how few people you need to do now what hundreds needed to do back in the day. is right.
Underrated post.
CRAWWWWLLLLIIIIING IN MY SKIIIIIINNN
Nailed it.
Also very likely.
> Working in GM R&D's robot research
> Researching ways to make robot researcher obsolete.
Marxism but through stock ownership of the factors of production?
Automation can free up society but only with a sustainable population. It can eventually provide for an entire population as long as that population is stable. How do we keep people from taking the stability as a free check to fuck and overpopulate into instability?
>first world countries have low birthrates on average
>third world countries have high birthrates on average
unless you see a reason for these trends to not continue then it should handle itself.
>2075
pffftthahaha
the takeover has reached critical mass right now and it's gonna go faster. it's a mass job extinction event.
engadget.com
you know it's over once fucking wal-"our workforce can apply for food stamps"-mart starts using it.
McDonalds is trying to replace its cashiers, and Wal-mart and Amazon it's warehouse workers. Those are the only big ones right now. I'm not saying McDonalds and Amazon should phase out their hourly workers by 2075, I'm saying all unskilled labor that can be automated should be gone by 2075. When it becomes harder to get an unskilled job, people will either A), go to community college to get a non-automated job, or B), stop working and live entirely on government assistance, which again, since we have 75 years to completely adjust, won't be extremely detrimental.
automated hunt and capture condoms.
Just try having sex in the missionary position for the sold purpose of recreation with a swarm of these roaming around.
You forgot Eugenics.
Also, nice 9/11
Spotted the edgy middle schooler
This attitude is exactly why the economy is so fucked up right now, though. Consumer demand is collapsing because workers are having their pay cut and hours increased, which in turn hurts further hurts the bottom lines of their employers when they don't go out and buy things. To have an "economy," by definition you need to have people buying and selling things. It doesn't work anymore when you have one group that's managed to accumulate all the capital that used to be in circulation amongst everyone else.
Get job as -
Robot Salesman, distributor, designer, marketer, repairman, salvager, servicer, etc
Millions of robots means lots of problems the robots can't fix. At least not yet.
Then you sell the repair machines, etc
I work at a parcel depot.
Nobody is complaining that we have conveyor belts, forklift trucks, or barcode scanners, instead of having to shift everything and write down reference numbers all day.
>I think you will find that there were riots and unrest after they invented these, and at least there were other jobs of a similar skill level for the laborers to do.
Those jobs came into being because there was a profit to be made in employing them to do those jobs since they were now cheap and available. There was not a chronically under staffed industry those people move into. The industries were created in response to the new availability of labor.
> I'd like to think that the point of automation is to provide a culture of less work, more living.
What you like to think is irrelevant. The actual point is to increase profits. No business is implementing automation to provide a culture of less work and more living. They do it to make more money.
Lets say we all agree and people should be provided a good life without any effort on their part. Do you think this would be a net positive or negative for society?