Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

[barryqwalsh]

Nearly half of the jobs in Australia are at high risk of "digital disruption" in the next 20 years, and our education system is not equipping students with the skills needed to adapt, a new report warns.

PricewaterhouseCoopers chief executive Luke Sayers is calling for a national summit on the issue, saying universities need to start producing far more people literate in science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects (STEM) to help the workforce adapt to a rapidly changing global economy.

PwC's report, The STEM Imperative: Future Proofing Australia's Workforce, warns many of the jobs people work in today "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number".

Digital shift puts nearly half of Australia s jobs at high risk report warns

 

[barryqwalsh]

The Chief Operating Officer at PWC, Tony Peake, speaks to Ticky Fullerton.

ABC
THE BUSINESS

VIDEO 6:30In the studio with Tony Peake


THE BUSINESSPOSTED THU AT 4:32PM

In the studio with Tony Peake - The Business - ABC News Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

[william the wie]

That sounds like an overoptimistic report to me. Google real clear technology for a quick down and dirty summary of daily tech news. The average annual deflation rate for the various high tech industrial revolutions eliminating jobs tends towards 37.5%. The imputed salary of a robot should be $1/hr within 2-3 years at the bottom end and that says nothing about what will happen when the 10 year olds with lego-tech will shift it into high gear. And there are about 15 different high tech industrial revolutions happening now.

 

[Porker]

Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

Many jobs of yesteryear (25 years ago or longer) simply don't exist TODAY.
So what else is new?

 

[Moonglow]

Will we have a robot maid?

 

[william the wie]

Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

Many jobs of yesteryear (25 years ago or longer) simply don't exist TODAY.
So what else is new?

The speed of job loss

 

[Moonglow]

Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

Many jobs of yesteryear (25 years ago or longer) simply don't exist TODAY.
So what else is new?

The speed of job loss

Don't worry, they'll always need ass kissers............

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Who needs a job when you can vote Democrat?

 

[Moonglow]

Who needs a job when you can vote Democrat?

Get your liberal card for cradle to grave.....

 

[beagle9]

Nearly half of the jobs in Australia are at high risk of "digital disruption" in the next 20 years, and our education system is not equipping students with the skills needed to adapt, a new report warns.

PricewaterhouseCoopers chief executive Luke Sayers is calling for a national summit on the issue, saying universities need to start producing far more people literate in science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects (STEM) to help the workforce adapt to a rapidly changing global economy.

PwC's report, The STEM Imperative: Future Proofing Australia's Workforce, warns many of the jobs people work in today "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number".

Digital shift puts nearly half of Australia s jobs at high risk report warns

Nah, we just need to go back to the days when a new and potential farmer was given (the equipment) two mules and a plow for example, and he was given so many acres to work, and to raise his family on, They are to become self sustaining citizens that make America stronger in the numbers of educated Americans that are being formed in this way, instead of propping everything up in some artificial way like was are doing so much of now.

 

[Moonglow]

Nearly half of the jobs in Australia are at high risk of "digital disruption" in the next 20 years, and our education system is not equipping students with the skills needed to adapt, a new report warns.

PricewaterhouseCoopers chief executive Luke Sayers is calling for a national summit on the issue, saying universities need to start producing far more people literate in science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects (STEM) to help the workforce adapt to a rapidly changing global economy.

PwC's report, The STEM Imperative: Future Proofing Australia's Workforce, warns many of the jobs people work in today "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number".

Digital shift puts nearly half of Australia s jobs at high risk report warns

Nah, we just need to go back to the days when a new and potential farmer was given (the equipment) two mules and a plow for example, and he was given so many acres to work, and to raise his family on, They are to become self sustaining citizens that make America stronger in the numbers of educated Americans that are being formed in this way, instead of propping everything up in some artificial way like was are doing so much of now.

Well at least until the dust bowl happens..

 

[fbj]

Caseworker for the welfare office will still be in existence

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

Many jobs of yesteryear (25 years ago or longer) simply don't exist TODAY.
So what else is new?

The speed of job loss

If the speed was fast unemployment would not be 5%
despite idiotic liberal policies like shipping 30 million jobs to China, destroying the school system and family , and giving 20 million jobs to illegals.

 

[Stephanie]

We can all become an Obama Julia. Here's his little video he made to tell you how wonderful it can be

And then you can all look forward to sitting around waiting for your handout when you get on Taxpayers GRAVY train though this all loving and caring Federal Government

 

[Pksimon2007]

Many of today's jobs "simply won't exist in the next decade, either entirely, or at the same number"

Many jobs of yesteryear (25 years ago or longer) simply don't exist TODAY.
So what else is new?

The speed of job loss

If the speed was fast unemployment would not be 5%
despite idiotic liberal policies like shipping 30 million jobs to China, destroying the school system and family , and giving 20 million jobs to illegals.

- I think you're ignoring a declining labor force participation rate, lower wages, and underemployment.

The rate looks better than it is. It's masking some really disturbing underlying trends. The OP is right, and we need to have a conversation about where we go.

We have traditionally rewarded hard work with money, and opportunity has been widespread enough that it works for most people.

But as our production and service become more and more mechanized we have already transitioned from needing everyone to work to being able to provide the real means for an affluent lifestyle for all Americans with a high rate of unemployment. So we now don't NEED everyone to work.

As this trend accelerates, it becomes more and more true that replacing robots with humans would create higher costs, so we won't WANT everyone to work.

Since jobs and hard work are the basis of reward, how do we distribute the benefits of capitalism when capital takes over and simply doesn't need labor, other than as customers for what it can produce?

This is an issue we're currently facing, whether we acknowledge it or not. It's central to our issues of income inequality, and absent some sort of affirmative action, the market will only continue to make that worse - and I hate to use the words secular stagnation, because I disagree with that particular theory, but the result is secular, and it is stagnant.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So we now don't NEED everyone to work.
.

absurd stupid and liberal of course. The minute one farmer could feed 2 we no longer needed everyone to work but here we are with 2% farmers and only 5.5% unemployment despite idiotic liberal programs that have shipped 30 million jobs off shore and invited 20 million illegals in to take what jobs are left and bid down the wages of those jobs.

 

[Pksimon2007]

So we now don't NEED everyone to work.
.

absurd stupid and liberal of course. The minute one farmer could feed 2 we no longer needed everyone to work but here we are with 2% farmers and only 5.5% unemployment despite idiotic liberal programs that have shipped 30 million jobs off shore and invited 20 million illegals in to take what jobs are left and bid down the wages of those jobs.

- And, so what?

Does that make the hypothesis wrong?

Nah.

It's just partisan whining.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Does that make the hypothesis wrong?

yes you said we don't need everyone to work yet somehow almost everyone does despite idiotic liberal policies that make it very very hard to work.

 

[Pksimon2007]

Does that make the hypothesis wrong?

yes you said we don't need everyone to work yet somehow almost everyone does despite idiotic liberal policies that make it very very hard to work.

- Economics 101 includes supply and demand. As the supply of labor increases relative to the demand for it, wages fall, and underemployment increases (exactly as we have been seeing).

So we don't need everyone to work, but PEOPLE still need to work, because that's how income is distributed.

So the hypothesis stands, and your objection, in a way, supports it.

 

[william the wie]

Does that make the hypothesis wrong?

yes you said we don't need everyone to work yet somehow almost everyone does despite idiotic liberal policies that make it very very hard to work.

- Economics 101 includes supply and demand. As the supply of labor increases relative to the demand for it, wages fall, and underemployment increases (exactly as we have been seeing).

So we don't need everyone to work, but PEOPLE still need to work, because that's how income is distributed.

So the hypothesis stands, and your objection, in a way, supports it.

Does that make the hypothesis wrong?

yes you said we don't need everyone to work yet somehow almost everyone does despite idiotic liberal policies that make it very very hard to work.

- Economics 101 includes supply and demand. As the supply of labor increases relative to the demand for it, wages fall, and underemployment increases (exactly as we have been seeing).

So we don't need everyone to work, but PEOPLE still need to work, because that's how income is distributed.

So the hypothesis stands, and your objection, in a way, supports it.

What is truly bizarre is that "reshoring" otherwise known as insourcing is really picking up steam as jobs leave China. However that is not resulting in more manufacturing jobs net in the US. The op-ed pieces pointing this out are all over the map. Marketwatch is the most accessible report I've seen on the subject.