Should "job killing" technologies be banned?

Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

TheHeretic -> Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:11:18 AM)
If it wasn't for the ATM, our President likes to remind us, a lot more people would have jobs at the bank counters. If it wasn't for the robots, a lot more ex-autoworkers would still be autoworkers. I don't know how widely they have spread, but here in California, automated checkout at the grocery store is the new express lane. How many jobs might those wind up killing? Should these things be banned, or, at least in these difficult times, should there be a moratorium on new ways to replace human labor with technology?

Lucylastic -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:13:58 AM)
Rich, its way to late this should have been the "thought of the day" back in the 70s, along with all the wonderful retraining possibilities

DarkSteven -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:14:16 AM)
I'd love it, in theory. But any ban on labor-reduction devices would only apply nationally. It would simply accelerate the bleeding of production to offshoring.

tazzygirl -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:25:02 AM)
quote: automated checkout at the grocery store is the new express lane. Here too. Unless I am only getting a few items... less than 5... I wont use them. Inevitably, something wont ring up and I have to wait on someone to come ring it in for me. Why waste the time.

Sanity -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:26:26 AM)
In theory, a lot of leftist daydreams sound like some kind of dreamy fairy tale Obama is insane, this is just another case of him letting that fact slip quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I'd love it, in theory. But any ban on labor-reduction devices would only apply nationally. It would simply accelerate the bleeding of production to offshoring.

MusicalBoredom -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:32:46 AM)
The "job killing" didn't come from the technology. The world consumes labor and time saving devices at an incredible rate and those devices are being made by or with the assistance of real people. The problem is that we all think we need those devices all over and for cheap. That means they are being made in factories not in the US. If we as consumers were willing to pay a descent price for technology then the work could be done by American workers at a fare wage that people can afford food, shelter and health care on. However since American Greed means that we should all get as much money as we can then that means jobs leave. We as consumers could insist on buying one American made TV instead of 4 foreign made models but we wont do it. So WE are the job killers, not the Government, not the EPA, not the banks and not technology.

Sanity -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:33:33 AM)
To follow through with his line of thinking we need to ban electricity and the internal combustion engine Even horses and mules cost jobs, dont they Obama, what a fucking blithering moron... [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If it wasn't for the ATM, our President likes to remind us, a lot more people would have jobs at the bank counters. If it wasn't for the robots, a lot more ex-autoworkers would still be autoworkers. I don't know how widely they have spread, but here in California, automated checkout at the grocery store is the new express lane. How many jobs might those wind up killing? Should these things be banned, or, at least in these difficult times, should there be a moratorium on new ways to replace human labor with technology?

LaTigresse -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:35:26 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If it wasn't for the ATM, our President likes to remind us, a lot more people would have jobs at the bank counters. If it wasn't for the robots, a lot more ex-autoworkers would still be autoworkers. I don't know how widely they have spread, but here in California, automated checkout at the grocery store is the new express lane. How many jobs might those wind up killing? Should these things be banned, or, at least in these difficult times, should there be a moratorium on new ways to replace human labor with technology? I don't believe so. I do think that the companies that create the technologies should be more 'strongly' encouraged to invest in educating the people who's jobs they've killed So that they are no longer as obsolete as the items, tasks, etc...

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:39:12 AM)
quote: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? You mean like the automobile, which directly impacted farriers? NO ONE is being honest about this, Rich, and no one wants them to be. How about automotive robots, and Detroit jobs? There are more automobiles in the U.S. than there are drivers. What should we do in a free market? Why, let those businesses go under and let the market absorb that labor pool in other areas. If you want to argue for growth, that's the reality in a laissez-faire model. There's also the argument for letting/forcing companies to innovate, rather than rely on cost cutting and regulatory/subsidy help. Fuel efficient cars could have been designed in the 70s...instead, the Big Three invested cash in high returning money markets at the time while German, Swedish, and Japanese companies invested for the future. Even today...China will build the new economy cars...and NOT because the U.S. can't, but because the companies here want to continue propping up an outdated business model. And that's just one industry. Smart companies continually strive to make their own product obsolete, staying ahead of the business curve. Dinosaurs continue statically, complaining about the very conditions that are sparking exciting new start-ups. Google grew rapidly when the dot.com market crashed. Why? Better business model, one based on where things were going, not were they had been. And they created far more jobs because of it. Many other companies have done the same, starting in depressions, when capital goods were cheaper and competition falling away. People are STILL whining about NAFTA, which created a HUGE net surplus of jobs, and provided job retraining. The only waste here was, honestly, the job retraining, which FAR outweighed the income those jobs provided (and I'm OK with that, just saying)--for example, saving $20,000/yr. jobs with $145,000 average outlay. [ETA--local example...Smith Corona went to Mexico, and took those jobs with them. Now....if they had stayed, would they still be making typewriters at pre-computer boom level? This is a market change, not a policy snafu.] People do not like change. But healthy economies...and healthy lives...are about growth and change. Static is stagnation. Legislating stagnation, whether through banning new technology or restriction imports/exports, is just economic suicide playing to the victim/complaining atmosphere/mood of the people/climate in this country. Help people. Retrain them. Pay for educational benefits. Give them a hand up. That's OK with me. But to try to "help" them by restricting the economy is ridiculously counter-productive, whatever the restriction du jour, without offsetting net benefits (i.e., safety/environmental regulations to balance negative market externalities).

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:40:27 AM)
quote: To follow through with his line of thinking It's a line of thinking common across parties. Only the rhetorical form changes. See above post.

mnottertail -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:44:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity To follow through with his line of thinking we need to ban electricity and the internal combustion engine Even horses and mules cost jobs, dont they Obama, what a fucking blithering moron... [:D] quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic If it wasn't for the ATM, our President likes to remind us, a lot more people would have jobs at the bank counters. If it wasn't for the robots, a lot more ex-autoworkers would still be autoworkers. I don't know how widely they have spread, but here in California, automated checkout at the grocery store is the new express lane. How many jobs might those wind up killing? Should these things be banned, or, at least in these difficult times, should there be a moratorium on new ways to replace human labor with technology? you haven't any idea what he said. you havent any idea of the context. he said in response to the question: you’re here encouraging private sector hiring. this just after “the new york times” just passed this past friday reported that since the recovery began, businesses have spent just 2% more on hiring people, while at the same time spending 26% more on equipment. so why at a time when corporate america is enjoying record profits have you been unable to convince businesses to hire more people, mr. president? i don’t think it’s a matter of me being unable to convince them to hire more people. they’re making decisions based on what they think will be good for their companies. a couple of things happened. look, we went through the worse crisis since the great depression. we are now in a process where the economy is growing again and we created 2 million jobs over the last 15 months. but it’s not as fast as it needs to be to make up for all the jobs that were lost. the other thing that happened, though, and this goes to the point you were just making, is there are some structural issues with our economy where a lot of businesses have learned to become much more efficient with a lot fewer workers. you see it when you go to a bank and you use an atm, you don’t go to a bank teller , or you go to the airport and you’re using a kiosk instead of checking in at the gate. so all these things have created changes in the economy and this counsel is identifying where the jobs of the future are going to be, how do we make sure there’s a match between what people are getting trained for and the jobs that exist, how do we make sure that capital is flowing into those places with the greatest opportunity. we are on the right track. the key is figuring out how do we accelerate it. so, factless harangues.

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:50:54 AM)
It is also an increase in productivity, which will pay off in the long run, even as it's slowing employment recovery in the short run.

TheHeretic -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:54:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You mean like the automobile, which directly impacted farriers? Or maybe the computer, on file clerks and mailroom staff?

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 9:57:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery You mean like the automobile, which directly impacted farriers? Or maybe the computer, on file clerks and mailroom staff? That's an interesting one, because yes and no. Productivity in this case soars, but physical mail and data input people remain, even as computers make the product better. Farmers use computers too, for a number of things today. Doesn't replace the farm labor, though--just improves the information and data management possible.

TheHeretic -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:17:39 AM)
But if saving the file clerks and copyboys had stalled the development of the computer, would those benefits have ever developed for the farmer?

mnottertail -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:20:56 AM)
Yes, and in a different form, they got a screen of futures, hedges and markets, they got a gps that they sent in to a company to plot their fields and a screen they could look at it on. Software advanced and now they do that themselves, remove the gps module from the tractor and equipment, and plug and download the gps info into the computer, and so on.... a changing environment

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:21:40 AM)
Asked and answered, Rich. Don't turn into another version of a poster who shall not be named. ;-)

TheHeretic -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:30:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Asked and answered, Rich. Just trying to get you to expand on the theme, Muse. Not everyone seems to see the big picture.

Musicmystery -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:35:06 AM)
Ron's on top of it, no worries.

fucktoyprincess -> RE: Should "job killing" technologies be banned? (1/14/2012 10:40:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MusicalBoredom The "job killing" didn't come from the technology. The world consumes labor and time saving devices at an incredible rate and those devices are being made by or with the assistance of real people. The problem is that we all think we need those devices all over and for cheap. That means they are being made in factories not in the US. If we as consumers were willing to pay a descent price for technology then the work could be done by American workers at a fare wage that people can afford food, shelter and health care on. However since American Greed means that we should all get as much money as we can then that means jobs leave. We as consumers could insist on buying one American made TV instead of 4 foreign made models but we wont do it. So WE are the job killers, not the Government, not the EPA, not the banks and not technology. I very much agree with this. If people want to keep jobs in the U.S. then stop buying cheap goods from other countries. For everyone who has any piece of technology in their home or pocket (i.e., mobile phone or computer) understand that if not the entire thing, many major components were manufactured outside of the U.S. And that is why they are affordable to a vast majority of people. So it is a trade-off. If we want to keep jobs here, and pay people decent wages, then we also have to be prepared to pay more for "our stuff". How many of us would be willing to pay significantly more for our phone, or our computers, clothing, etc. in order to protect jobs here? Things like clothing are not made in China because the Chinese are better at it - they are made in China because the country has a very cheap labor pool. On the margin, I try to avoid buying things made in certain countries where I know they treat workers poorly (e.g., China), there are entire stores, like H&M that I avoid, but the problem is many things I own (like my phone) have parts that were manufactured in China. It's almost impossible to find electronics that are not partially made there! But we should still each do our part and refuse to support economies that exploit their workers (because ultimately, it affects jobs here, too). If everyone stopped buying cheap Chinese made goods (I use this only as one example), manufacturers would change the way they make their products. But as MusicalBoredom said, "we won't do it".

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625