Robotics Revolution is Hyped

[Mangus Ortus Novem]

Inaction is action there.

Good to see you Seeing the Great Tao at play there.

Funny.

 

[empirefighter]

The more dreadful thing than cruel reality is your outdate and stereotypical notion, although you say your are chemistry students in university, and had had many convesation with Chinese economist, I don't feel what you get from these, As a normal Chinese, I do even very worry over China lagging behind in the coming revolution, you are so optimistic, maybe you indian are optimistic innately.

What you said remind me：when I was a high school student in 1999 or 2000，I read a news about Japan developed massive robots to keep the jobs in Japan ，I was very worried at that time. Today ，I have much confidence but I still worry about our speed in the next stage competition with Japan，Germany and USA.
It is good for India people to keep optimistic，that strange happiness can make them live happier in this fierce world.

 

[Three_Kingdoms]

Also, the so called "primitive" jobs are one of the least ammenable to automation. Like for example apparel making. Things like sewing etc. are not at all done by robots, nor is it likely to be done by them in the next 20 years.

Open your eyes and mind comrade :

 

[Three_Kingdoms]

 

[Mista]

I think this video is a bit too pessimistic about the future, but I still find it interesting. It talks about AI replacing even 'mental labour' in the future.

 

[Mista]

What’s going on? Why have the things that workers care about – jobs and wages – become decoupled from the the other things that economy-watchers care about? So far, explanations for this unhappy phenomenon include tax and policy changes, and the effects of globalization and offshoring. These are clearly powerful forces, but there’s one other one: technological progress.

Our argument, in brief, is that digital technologies have been able to do routine work for a while now. This allows them to substitute for less-skilled and -educated workers, and puts a lot of downward pressure on the median wage. As computers and robots get more and more powerful while simultaneously getting cheaper and more widespread this phenomenon spreads, to the point where economically rational employers prefer buying more technology over hiring more workers. In other words, they prefer capital over labor. This preference affects both wages and job volumes. And the situation will only accelerate as robots and computers learn to do more and more, and to take over jobs that we currently think of not as ‘routine,’ but as requiring a lot of skill and/or education.

There’s no question that in some high-profile industries, technology is displacing workers of all, or almost all, kinds. For example, one of the reasons some high-technology manufacturing has lately been moving back to the United States is that these days the most valuable piece of a computer, the motherboard, is basically made by robots, so cheap Asian labor is no longer a reason to produce them abroad.

In a recent book, “Race Against the Machine,” M.I.T.’s Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee argue that similar stories are playing out in many fields, including services like translation and legal research. What’s striking about their examples is that many of the jobs being displaced are high-skill and high-wage; the downside of technology isn’t limited to menial workers.

http://andrewmcafee.org/2012/12/the-great-decoupling-of-the-us-economy/

Developed countries workers also faces competition from technology.

 

[AndrewJin]

Open your eyes and mind comrade :

Holy Buddha, that ghetto for washing, is that how jobs are created there!?

 

[Tripoli]

Automation is a disaster for developing countries which donot have money and technology，they only have low educated human resource. Luckily，China make good use of the chance which the automation still in primitive period in the past decades，today，the automation is becoming maturer，the chance window of East Asian model is closing for other developing countries.

China is world's factory and will remain so.

With low end manufacturing moving to SE asia along with the Chinese factories.

The integeration of SE asian economy as part of supply chain is almost complete. That is why we see them doinng their best not to offend China.

This is the region where global manufacturing is going to remain. Other region missed the boat a couple decades ago.

The automation and extensive use of robotics is just beginning in China. As China moves up the value chain and work force becomes more adaptive/skilled, SE asia will profit from labour intensive industries.

So the article and its posters is just entertaining a wishful thinking with ill intent.

Must be doing something better with his life.

@Joe Shearer @That Guy @Kaptaan @niaz These two people have made interesting points.
Can it be concluded that South Asia cannot follow in the footsteps of East Asia any more as manufacturing will be dominated by robotics in the coming decades.

Could this mean that South Asia will not be able to become a significant manufacturing hub in the world?

From my own view advancements of robotics in manufacturing will be detrimental to the development of South Asia but it is unfortunately inevitable.

 

[TaiShang]

Automation is cutting jobs in developing countries.
To a lot of low-IQ people, it's a disaster.
U don't have brain, you will be jobless.
History is cruel, it will fail a lot of people, it will fail a lot of countries where people have no clue about what's going on in this world.

Automation will mean death spell on many developing countries who need cash for start-up and R&D, employment for the mass "young" unemployed and the required know-how before they actually start making stuff themselves and earning money.

Perhaps that's the reason why the OP is trying so hard to sell an already failing agenda:

1. Population increase is good
2. Automation will never take hold or replace manual labor.

Two failing prepositions. The trend is obvious. Few SEA countries sill have a chance to develop based on solid infra, trained work force and cheap labor. India lacks these. India is perhaps too late to catch the cheap labor train.

 

[Mista]

@Joe Shearer @That Guy @Kaptaan @niaz These two people have made interesting points.
Can it be concluded that South Asia cannot follow in the footsteps of East Asia any more as manufacturing will be dominated by robotics in the coming decades.

Could this mean that South Asia will not be able to become a significant manufacturing hub in the world?

From my own view advancements of robotics in manufacturing will be detrimental to the development of South Asia but it is unfortunately inevitable.

My posts on page 1 included articles that address this potential problem.

https://defence.pk/threads/robotics-revolution-is-hyped.442193/#post-8525351
https://defence.pk/threads/robotics-revolution-is-hyped.442193/#post-8525406

IMO there will still be jobs for mass cheap labour in the next 10 years but it's hard to say beyond that. What is certain however is wages will be pushed down as labour competes with increasingly sophisticated technology. Those with capital will be able to purchase new machines and technology to increase production.

Hence capital will be a more important factor for production and labour less so in the future. Which means to say the rich will get richer while the poor get poorer, relatively. Developed countries also faces such problems.

What’s going on? Why have the things that workers care about – jobs and wages – become decoupled from the the other things that economy-watchers care about? So far, explanations for this unhappy phenomenon include tax and policy changes, and the effects of globalization and offshoring. These are clearly powerful forces, but there’s one other one: technological progress.

Our argument, in brief, is that digital technologies have been able to do routine work for a while now. This allows them to substitute for less-skilled and -educated workers, and puts a lot of downward pressure on the median wage. As computers and robots get more and more powerful while simultaneously getting cheaper and more widespread this phenomenon spreads, to the point where economically rational employers prefer buying more technology over hiring more workers. In other words, they prefer capital over labor. This preference affects both wages and job volumes. And the situation will only accelerate as robots and computers learn to do more and more, and to take over jobs that we currently think of not as ‘routine,’ but as requiring a lot of skill and/or education.

Notice that even as real GDP grows, employment and wages remain stagnate or even decline? That's because new top companies in Fortune 500 are more capital intensive than labour intensive.

100 years ago, the top companies such as General Motors are labour intensive and employ many people.

Today, the new top companies are capital and technology intensive.

Spoiler: Revenue per employee in 2015

5. Amazon: $577,482 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....3e73-960-720/5-amazon-577482-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $88,990,000,000

Number of employees: 154,100



4. Microsoft: $732,224 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....d-960-720/4-microsoft-732224-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $86,830,000,000

Number of employees: 118,584



3. Softbank: $918,449 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....80-960-720/3-softbank-918449-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $64,600,000,000

Number of employees: 70,336



2. Google: $1,154,896 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....b91-960-720/2-google-1154896-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $66,000,000,000

Number of employees: 57,148



1. Apple: $1,865,306 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....0510-960-720/1-apple-1865306-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $182,800,000,000

Number of employees: 98,000


Read more at http://www.businessinsider.sg/top-tech-companies-revenue-per-employee-2015-10/#0jBZgC0IrKCg0tQx.99

 

[Götterdämmerung]

My posts on page 1 included articles that address this potential problem.

https://defence.pk/threads/robotics-revolution-is-hyped.442193/#post-8525351
https://defence.pk/threads/robotics-revolution-is-hyped.442193/#post-8525406

IMO there will still be jobs for mass cheap labour in the next 10 years but it's hard to say beyond that. What is certain however is wages will be pushed down as labour competes with increasingly sophisticated technology. Those with capital will be able to purchase new machines and technology to increase production.

Hence capital will be a more important factor for production and labour less so in the future. Which means to say the rich will get richer while the poor get poorer, relatively. Developed countries also faces such problems.







Notice that even as real GDP grows, employment and wages remain stagnate or even decline? That's because new top companies in Fortune 500 are more capital intensive than labour intensive.

100 years ago, the top companies such as General Motors are labour intensive and employ many people.

Today, the new top companies are capital and technology intensive.

Spoiler: Revenue per employee in 2015

5. Amazon: $577,482 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....3e73-960-720/5-amazon-577482-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $88,990,000,000

Number of employees: 154,100



4. Microsoft: $732,224 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....d-960-720/4-microsoft-732224-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $86,830,000,000

Number of employees: 118,584



3. Softbank: $918,449 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....80-960-720/3-softbank-918449-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $64,600,000,000

Number of employees: 70,336



2. Google: $1,154,896 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....b91-960-720/2-google-1154896-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $66,000,000,000

Number of employees: 57,148



1. Apple: $1,865,306 per employee
image: https://static-ssl.businessinsider....0510-960-720/1-apple-1865306-per-employee.jpg

Revenue: $182,800,000,000

Number of employees: 98,000


Read more at http://www.businessinsider.sg/top-tech-companies-revenue-per-employee-2015-10/#0jBZgC0IrKCg0tQx.99

The problem is, as machines get more and more efficient, they also produce more commodities within a certain amount of time. These commodities need to be sold to consumers, but here is the catch 22. A deminishing middle class means a deminishing consumer class.

 

[AndrewJin]

The problem is, as machines get more and more efficient, they also produce more commodities within a certain amount of time. These commodities need to be sold to consumers, but here is the catch 22. A deminishing middle class means a deminishing consumer class.

Sell Chinese.

 

[Götterdämmerung]

Sell Chinese.
View attachment 322647

That doesn't help our working class.

 

[AndrewJin]

That doesn't help our working class.

Why?
You sell made-in-Germany products, they provide jobs.
Without overseas markets, Germany is dead.

 

[Mista]

The problem is, as machines get more and more efficient, they also produce more commodities within a certain amount of time. These commodities need to be sold to consumers, but here is the catch 22. A deminishing middle class means a deminishing consumer class.

That's right. I've read before that the US's diminishing middle class is one of the reason why their growth slowed. The ultra rich just don't spend that much and they put their money in stocks and properties instead.

If there's a boom, they make record capital gains and earnings. If there's a crash, the middle class will have to bail them out because they are 'too big to fail'. Sure win.

Back to basic economics 101. If the supply of commodities rises and ceteris paribus, the price will drop.

Prices drops and quantity increases. Hence it can be more affordable and widespread, raising the standard of living. Provided if you have a job with the same wage, that is.

We still have to observe how it will turn out in the future. There are many other factors to consider.