McKinsey: Automation May Wipe Out 1/3 of America’s Workforce by 2030

[Jarlaxle]

Well you can't force them to give you a paycheck either. So once you have decided you'd rather be worthless to your employer where do you expect to be?

I expect to be right where I am, at the top level of the Department's Progression Roster for the next 30 years. My Union dues ensure that I can only be fired for cause, not because I refuse to bid on a non-progression "Senior" level job that i don't want.

They could get rid of you in less than a year if they wanted to. (Actually, they could get rid of you next week if they REALLY wanted to.)

 

[g5000]

That's okay I'll be 70 then I will have started a new carrier as a pimp for hooker bots...

While that is funny, it is actually pretty close to the advice I have been giving my kids.

Cars are going to become automated, too. Truckers and taxi drivers and mechanics and a whole host of jobs are going to become obsolete.

But another thing which is going to happen is that less and less people will own cars. Right now, your car sits idle 22 out of 24 hours of the day. That is incredibly inefficient.

With automated cars, we will no longer need personal vehicles. We can just summon an automated car when we need one, and automated cars can be utilized 23 out of 24 hours.

I've told my kids they want to be the guy who owns the automated car service.

 

[HappyJoy]

Time to think about 30 hour work weeks.

The amount of value created by a single worker is much greater than a worker of the past, but our wages are not reflecting that.

I would be first in line for that puppy! Give me 3 10 hour days and I am golden!

There is a flip side we also have to implement.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common sense.

Social Security and Medicare eligibility age needs to be changed to 70, indexed to 9 percent of the population.

The American average lifespan is only 78.

Which is 18 years longer than when Social Security was established.

We are living DECADES longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

I don't see a benefit to raising the age of retirement to 70, especially if there are fewer jobs due to automation, I don't see how someone who is 65, less productive really stands a chance in the workforce.

The 65 year old of today is healthier than the 65 year old of 1935.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common. Fricking. Sense.

My issue with this is as you age your productivity goes down and if you have older Americans hanging onto jobs that younger people should have, then what happens? What are companies going to do? Hang onto people who earn more money and don't produce as much as they used to, or fire them and hire younger people who are more productive?

What happens to the older generation who can't find a job but are now too young to retire? Plus the average lifespan hasn't really increased that much. In 1960 it was 70, now it's 78. Then what happens if the average lifespan ever drops, what do we do then?

Life Expectancy In U.S. Drops For First Time In Decades, Report Finds

 

[Moonglow]

That's okay I'll be 70 then I will have started a new carrier as a pimp for hooker bots...

While that is funny, it is actually pretty close to the advice I have been giving my kids.

Cars are going to become automated, too. Truckers and taxi drivers and mechanics and a whole host of jobs are going to become obsolete.

But another thing which is going to happen is that less and less people will own cars. Right now, your car sits idle 22 out of 24 hours of the day. That is incredibly inefficient.

With automated cars, we will no longer need personal vehicles. We can just summon an automated car when we need one, and automated cars can be utilized 23 out of 24 hours.

I've told my kids they want to be the guy who owns the automated car service.

I told mine to be the coder..

 

[g5000]

Mamas' don't let your babies grow up to be cowboys
Don't let 'em pick guitars or drive them old trucks
Let 'em be doctors and lawyers and such

 

[Aletheia4u]

The days of growing up to work in your daddy's factory are long gone. We need to retool our education system for the jobs of tomorrow, not the jobs of yesterday.

McKinsey: automation may wipe out 1/3 of America’s workforce by 2030

In a new study that is optimistic about automation yet stark in its appraisal of the challenge ahead, McKinsey says massive government intervention will be required to hold societies together against the ravages of labor disruption over the next 13 years. Up to 800 million people—including a third of the work force in the U.S. and Germany—will be made jobless by 2030, the study says.

The bottom line: The economy of most countries will eventually replace the lost jobs, the study says, but many of the unemployed will need considerable help to shift to new work, and salaries could continue to flatline. "It's a Marshall Plan size of task," Michael Chui, lead author of the McKinsey report, tells Axios.


Translation: Stop drinking the piss of politicians who tell you they will bring back the jobs that went overseas. The jobs didn't go overseas. They have been automated and are never coming back.



Read this, too: https://economics.mit.edu/files/12763

Between 1993 and 2007, every new robot replaced between 3 and 5.6 workers.



Read this: http://conexus.cberdata.org/files/MfgReality.pdf

"Almost 88 percent of job losses in manufacturing in recent years can be attributable to productivity growth, and the long-term changes to manufacturing employment are mostly linked to the productivity of American factories.”



Gone, baby, gone. Those jobs are not coming back. Ever. Anyone who promises you they are is a fucking criminal liar.


When a shitbag politician tells you he is going to bring back those lost jobs with tariffs and trade deals, he is talking out of his ass. He is being fucking lazy and hoping you are too ignorant to catch on.

We need to start burning those politicians at the stake, and start forcing their replacements to retool our entire education system.


Back to Axios:

• The transition compares to the U.S. shift from a largely agricultural to an industrial-services economy in the early 1900s forward. But this time, it's not young people leaving farms, but mid-career workers who need new skills. "There are few precedents in which societies have successfully retrained such large numbers of people," the report says, and that is the key question: how do you retrain people in their 30s, 40s and 50s for entirely new professions?

Wake up, America. You're children are being robbed of a future by elected hucksters.

That is why people needs to upgrade. Go into areas like computers, machinist, electronics and mechanics. And then there is the transportation department. Automation helps create jobs. It lower the cost of the product and which it more buyers. The more buyers, the more demand. Like at the moment. Organic foods is at a big demand. But the cost is high. But automation will help lower the prices of organic products. But creates more jobs in the transportation dept. And there is a big demand for machinist.

 

[g5000]

Time to think about 30 hour work weeks.

The amount of value created by a single worker is much greater than a worker of the past, but our wages are not reflecting that.

I would be first in line for that puppy! Give me 3 10 hour days and I am golden!

There is a flip side we also have to implement.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common sense.

Social Security and Medicare eligibility age needs to be changed to 70, indexed to 9 percent of the population.

The American average lifespan is only 78.

Which is 18 years longer than when Social Security was established.

We are living DECADES longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

I don't see a benefit to raising the age of retirement to 70, especially if there are fewer jobs due to automation, I don't see how someone who is 65, less productive really stands a chance in the workforce.

The 65 year old of today is healthier than the 65 year old of 1935.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common. Fricking. Sense.

My issue with this is as you age your productivity goes down and if you have older Americans hanging onto jobs that younger people should have, then what happens? What are companies going to do? Hang onto people who earn more money and don't produce as much as they used to, or fire them and hire younger people who are more productive?

What happens to the older generation who can't find a job but are now too young to retire? Plus the average lifespan hasn't really increased that much. In 1960 it was 70, now it's 78. Then what happens if the average lifespan ever drops, what do we do then?

Life Expectancy In U.S. Drops For First Time In Decades, Report Finds

How are any of the problems you described not applicable to the current situation?

If you work until 70, you have increased the number of your earning years. You will be contributing longer to the treasury, and drawing out less. That's a boon to our federal expenditures on entitlement programs.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 when SS was established. Now, 15% of Americans are over 65. That is an unsustainable trend. Less workers are supporting more retirees.

We are living longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

As for life expectancy dropping, that's because we are victims of our own prosperity and have become obese.

 

[Rexx Taylor]

I agree that technology is going to eliminate many repetitive labor time jobs. I don't believe it is the fault of politicians. They will need to start figuring out what the heck you do with 15 to 20% unemployment.

i will be 134 years old by then, so it wont affect me

Don't be too sure about that. I don't think it will be in the next 10 years but in the next 50? Oh yeah.

ok ok,,,give or take 25

 

[sakinago]

Go to a four day work week for full time employees is a good start.

That’s dependent on what job you work in, if it’s in some sort of construction or Labor business, well there a deadlines and actual work that needs to be done. And if you’re paying your employees hourly, not only are you going to be forever 1/5 behind on your deadlines, those employees won’t be too happy with 4 days pay. Sure there’s a lot of jobs with people spending multiple hours a day on social media and whatnot because they don’t actually have work to do the entire time. But there’s also a shit ton of jobs that still need to operate on 5 day work weeks. Lawyers, healthcare, labor, anything hourly, etc.

 

[g5000]

We will still need plumbers, but less of them. Robots will prefab your home's plumbing. We'll just need a guy to come unclog the toilet once in while.

Same with electricians. We will still need them, just not as many.

 

[g5000]

Go to a four day work week for full time employees is a good start.

That’s dependent on what job you work in, if it’s in some sort of construction or Labor business, well there a deadlines and actual work that needs to be done. And if you’re paying your employees hourly, not only are you going to be forever 1/5 behind on your deadlines, those employees won’t be too happy with 4 days pay. Sure there’s a lot of jobs with people spending multiple hours a day on social media and whatnot because they don’t actually have work to do the entire time. But there’s also a shit ton of jobs that still need to operate on 5 day work weeks. Lawyers, healthcare, labor, anything hourly, etc.

That's why you have four 30 hour employees, instead of three 40 hour employees.

That solves the employment problem HappyJoy was worried about.

 

[Anathema]

They could get rid of you in less than a year if they wanted to. (Actually, they could get rid of you next week if they REALLY wanted to.)

Ever hear the phrase "Wage and Job Protection? The only way they're getting rid of me is by my choice, or for cause.

 

[HappyJoy]

I would be first in line for that puppy! Give me 3 10 hour days and I am golden!

There is a flip side we also have to implement.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common sense.

Social Security and Medicare eligibility age needs to be changed to 70, indexed to 9 percent of the population.

The American average lifespan is only 78.

Which is 18 years longer than when Social Security was established.

We are living DECADES longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

I don't see a benefit to raising the age of retirement to 70, especially if there are fewer jobs due to automation, I don't see how someone who is 65, less productive really stands a chance in the workforce.

The 65 year old of today is healthier than the 65 year old of 1935.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common. Fricking. Sense.

My issue with this is as you age your productivity goes down and if you have older Americans hanging onto jobs that younger people should have, then what happens? What are companies going to do? Hang onto people who earn more money and don't produce as much as they used to, or fire them and hire younger people who are more productive?

What happens to the older generation who can't find a job but are now too young to retire? Plus the average lifespan hasn't really increased that much. In 1960 it was 70, now it's 78. Then what happens if the average lifespan ever drops, what do we do then?

Life Expectancy In U.S. Drops For First Time In Decades, Report Finds

How are any of the problems you described not applicable to the current situation?

If you work until 70, you have increased the number of your earning years. You will be contributing longer to the treasury, and drawing out less. That's a boon to our federal expenditures on entitlement programs.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 when SS was established. Now, 15% of Americans are over 65. That is an unsustainable trend. Less workers are supporting more retirees.

We are living longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

As for life expectancy dropping, that's because we are victims of our own prosperity and have become obese.

It is our current situation. If you increase the retirement age and there are fewer jobs due to automation then there is going to be a gap between employment and retirement. Either that gap is going to be on the youngest or oldest employed generations.

By the way, I wouldn't even pretend to have the solution to this, however cutting back social security benefits while the number of jobs is reduced seems to be a recipe for disaster.

 

[Jarlaxle]

They could get rid of you in less than a year if they wanted to. (Actually, they could get rid of you next week if they REALLY wanted to.)

Ever hear the phrase "Wage and Job Protection? The only way they're getting rid of me is by my choice, or for cause.

Dude...they could be rid of you easily. Hell...I expect you working for a female supervisor would do it in a few months!

 

[g5000]

The income disparity between CEOs and other executives and their workforce has been getting wider and wider.

Instead of sharing the wealth created by the more productive workforce, the upper management has been keeping it for themselves.

If we go to a 30 day workweek, there is more than enough wealth to pay four 30-hour employees the same paychecks as the three 40-hour workers are currently getting.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

And you're why unions are dying off.

I have no interest in Supervisory, Analytical or Bureaucratic work. The Senior level job requires all three, along with computer programmng skills I don't have or want. I'm perfectly happy being a worker bee, making my money and doing my job to the best of my ability 40 hours a week, thsnk you very much.

Explain to me what is wrong with that philosophy?

First of all you're complaining that automation is taking your job but aren't willing to move along with the job requirement. You kind of want the head guy type of salary without any of the responsibilities or adapting to the future of where the job will be. You're counting on a union to hold a position for you that is becoming less in need simply because it's always been what you do. You're one union vote, or one state wide for for Right to Work away from losing your job because you're not flexible enough to keep up.

Do you have computer classes available to you from the company or the union? If not why not? If so why the hell aren't you taking them?

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The income disparity between CEOs and other executives and their workforce has been getting wider and wider.

Instead of sharing the wealth created by the more productive workforce, the upper management has been keeping it for themselves.

If we go to a 30 day workweek, there is more than enough wealth to pay four 30-hour employees the same paychecks as the three 40-hour workers are currently getting.

And why as a business owner would I ever do that?

 

[g5000]

There is a flip side we also have to implement.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common sense.

Social Security and Medicare eligibility age needs to be changed to 70, indexed to 9 percent of the population.

The American average lifespan is only 78.

Which is 18 years longer than when Social Security was established.

We are living DECADES longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

I don't see a benefit to raising the age of retirement to 70, especially if there are fewer jobs due to automation, I don't see how someone who is 65, less productive really stands a chance in the workforce.

The 65 year old of today is healthier than the 65 year old of 1935.

We are living longer, we should be working longer. Common. Fricking. Sense.

My issue with this is as you age your productivity goes down and if you have older Americans hanging onto jobs that younger people should have, then what happens? What are companies going to do? Hang onto people who earn more money and don't produce as much as they used to, or fire them and hire younger people who are more productive?

What happens to the older generation who can't find a job but are now too young to retire? Plus the average lifespan hasn't really increased that much. In 1960 it was 70, now it's 78. Then what happens if the average lifespan ever drops, what do we do then?

Life Expectancy In U.S. Drops For First Time In Decades, Report Finds

How are any of the problems you described not applicable to the current situation?

If you work until 70, you have increased the number of your earning years. You will be contributing longer to the treasury, and drawing out less. That's a boon to our federal expenditures on entitlement programs.

5.4% of Americans were over 65 when SS was established. Now, 15% of Americans are over 65. That is an unsustainable trend. Less workers are supporting more retirees.

We are living longer. We should be working longer. Common sense.

As for life expectancy dropping, that's because we are victims of our own prosperity and have become obese.

It is our current situation. If you increase the retirement age and there are fewer jobs due to automation then there is going to be a gap between employment and retirement.

Which is why it should be coupled to a 30 hour work week.

 

[sakinago]

Go to a four day work week for full time employees is a good start.

That’s dependent on what job you work in, if it’s in some sort of construction or Labor business, well there a deadlines and actual work that needs to be done. And if you’re paying your employees hourly, not only are you going to be forever 1/5 behind on your deadlines, those employees won’t be too happy with 4 days pay. Sure there’s a lot of jobs with people spending multiple hours a day on social media and whatnot because they don’t actually have work to do the entire time. But there’s also a shit ton of jobs that still need to operate on 5 day work weeks. Lawyers, healthcare, labor, anything hourly, etc.

That's why you have four 30 hour employees, instead of three 40 hour employees.

That solves the employment problem HappyJoy was worried about.

That’s still a regression for the employees. There’s not going to be a magical jump in wages, and people will loose not only their shit, but their houses as well if you cut out 25% of their income.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Your thread reminded me of this book I read a few years back...

The Coming Jobs War

"
What everyone in the world wants is a good job.

In a provocative book for business and government leaders, Gallup Chairman Jim Clifton describes how this undeniable fact will affect all leadership decisions as countries wage war to produce the best jobs.

Leaders of countries and cities, Clifton says, should focus on creating good jobs because as jobs go, so does the fate of nations. Jobs bring prosperity, peace, and human development -- but long-term unemployment ruins lives, cities, and countries.

Creating good jobs is tough, and many leaders are doing many things wrong. They're undercutting entrepreneurs instead of cultivating them. They're running companies with depressed workforces. They're letting the next generation of job creators rot in bad schools.

A global jobs war is coming, and there's no time to waste. Cities are crumbling for lack of good jobs. Nations are in revolt because their people can't get good jobs. The cities and countries that act first -- that focus everything they have on creating good jobs -- are the ones that will win.

Usually what fixes that is a massive war.