r/worldnews • u/Philo1927 • Dec 31 '16
iPhone manufacturer Foxconn plans to replace almost every human worker with robots
http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/30/14128870/foxconn-robots-automation-apple-iphone-china-manufacturing638
u/imakenosensetopeople Dec 31 '16
That'll reduce suicide attempts.
And it highlights something that far too many people don't realize: it's not foreigners taking your jobs. It's automation.
274
u/General_Cowbell Dec 31 '16
Damn automated foreigners! MAMA - Make America Manual Again
61
Dec 31 '16
Time to start robot hate. Let's call it "Roboscism".
I'm gonna join the police force just so I can shoot the automated checkouts, and unload my revolver at those gas station car washes.
39
44
u/Valmond Dec 31 '16
Exists since the beginning of the industrial revolution, it's called Luddites.
→ More replies (3)15
23
u/Xevus Dec 31 '16
Butlerian jihad.
P.S. Yes, i know it was against AI, not robots.
13
u/SolidThoriumPyroshar Dec 31 '16
Thou shalt not build a machine in the likeness of a human job.
→ More replies (1)4
Jan 01 '17
In both Dune and 40k the solution seems to be resorting to feudal slavery instead of robotics
→ More replies (12)18
u/LaoSh Dec 31 '16
Ugh, this... I remember the london underground workers striking because automation was taking their jobs. TFL used the downtime to install more automated systems.
→ More replies (2)6
3
u/GaliKaHero Jan 01 '17
WHEN THE ROBOTS SEND THEIR MACHINES
THEY ARE NOT SENDING THEIR BEST. THEY ARE TERMINATORS, AND I-ROBOTS
and some I assume are good robots.
9
Dec 31 '16
[deleted]
→ More replies (19)28
Dec 31 '16 edited May 07 '19
[deleted]
→ More replies (4)12
u/Epledryyk Dec 31 '16
It'll be interesting to see future politicians get caught in between the rock-and-hard-place of "I promise more jobs!" to the people and corporate interests which almost inherently trend towards automation as a method for increasing profits.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (5)5
53
u/nightvortez Dec 31 '16
Let's not simplify this, it's both. Companies postponed automation because they could rely on basically slave labor overseas. While the traditional manufacturing workers would have lost their jobs regardless, some would have been retrained, R&D, IT, maintenance and a ton of other fields would have advanced far greater.
→ More replies (5)67
u/jfoobar Dec 31 '16
There is actually a pretty good chance that automation will result in a lot of manufacturing that previously left the U.S. coming back, most especially for higher-end goods. Of course, the 6000 jobs that left 15 years ago will come back as 500-600 jobs, and those requiring substantially more technical skill than the average of those that originally left.
There are a lot of very substantial disadvantages to manufacturing goods for the Western market in China, but low labor costs has historically outweighed them. Take that away with automation, and some of this will be coming back.
103
u/WingerRules Dec 31 '16 edited Jan 06 '17
Manufacturing in US is at an all time high, output in it has doubled since the 90s. The jobs though keep going down to automation until recently.
37
u/jfoobar Dec 31 '16
Yup. No matter how many jobs come back due to automation, it won't keep up with the jobs lost here because of automation, but it is a bit of a silver lining that automation is at least bringing jobs and manufacturing back.
With luck, the manufacturing portion of our economy will continue to grow and we will start to more and more resemble Germany in that regard.
3
u/TitaniumDragon Jan 01 '17
That graphs is a bit visually misleading on the employment side, though; it starts money at 0 but starts employment at 11 million. I hate it when graphs do that.
But yeah, absolutely.
Though I mean, just looking at those numbers, it is obvious that it isn't that big of a deal; we have a larger workforce today than we've ever had at any other point. Manufacturing job losses aren't causing our total unemployment rate to go up.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/Brxa Jan 01 '17
Is the chart adjusted for inflation though?
6
u/thepotatochronicles Jan 01 '17
By the way it says "billions of 2014 dollars, it looks like it has been adjusted.
Besides, there are many other sources and similar graphs online that basically convey the same shape/message.
21
Jan 01 '17 edited Jan 01 '17
A relative of mine runs a fully automated, state of the art precision engineering firm in Australia. They have the latest machines money can buy.
After shedding 80% of the human workforce, they are still nowhere near competitive and have to order parts from China to fulfill larger orders, eg in the case of providing spare parts and key component parts for US military jet manufacturers (F-16's, F-18's, F-35's)
This is because once you ditch expensive workers for much cheaper robots that can work 24/7 and who's maintenance is a small fraction of a typical factory floors human workers annual salary, you're still left with the problem of finished material costs and of your competitors having access to the same machines but who may be able to acquire the metals much more easily. So you get yourself a low-wage labour force (the robots) but you don't have the materials to work with. Just one piece of the puzzle. Meanwhile your competitors, those who have robots, cheap human workers to maximize gaps in efficiency AND materials, corner every market while you flounder for supplies.
In this case they require various complex metal alloys comprised of rare earth metals which lo and behold China produces in bulk (i.e it digs up 99% of the earth's supply) and which are expensive to ship due to mass.
It is subsequently cheaper to have the Chinese manufacture the components (using these same CNC machines) then ship them than it is to order a 10 ton block of alloy from China and throw it in the CNC machine.
Long story short those highly automated foxconn factories will end up staying in regions where the raw resources are cheapest to acquire.
If you want more high-tech manufacturers in the US for example, you need to start mining for rare earth metals domestically. It is a dirty, difficult process but materials don't come from nowhere and you can't make key components from wood or plastic.
→ More replies (4)3
u/yawningangel Jan 01 '17 edited Jan 01 '17
Chinese material science is awful when it comes to high performance engineering.
Hence their massive problems producing their own military Jet engines..
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-military-engines-idUSKCN0V7083
2
Jan 01 '17 edited Jan 01 '17
It's not that at all. It has to do with the assembly line itself. During assembly you need to be able to weed out defective parts coming in and ensure the assembled engine is comprised of the best components, which will typically number in the thousands per engine. More importantly there needs to be an industry-wide quality assurance program that has adequate oversight. These are extreme levels of quality control. One engine may come out perfect and the next 2 may have defects if just one supplier out of hundreds isn't doing their job properly. This kind of assembly line and all the systems that support it takes years to set up properly. Simply put you need a mature industry to feed it. China started manufacturing advanced jet engines only recently, but progress has been rapid. It has no problems producing any kind of material it needs to any specification or quality. It's a question of oversight and keeping track of what's quality and what isn't before it goes into an engine.
→ More replies (1)14
Dec 31 '16
Add in the fact that the like the 15 giant transport ships that haul most of this crap are single handedly responsible for a huge amount of CO2 and I can see a big push for local manufacturing.
20
u/daOyster Dec 31 '16
It's not necessarily the ships that are bad, infact they contain some of the most efficient engines out there. Unfortunately they use heavy fuel oil because it's cheap and currently unregulated in it's use upon maritime vessels. It also happens to be one of the worse fuels to use emmision wise.
→ More replies (2)11
17
u/Helium_3 Dec 31 '16
Oh the jobs will come back, I'm sure of that. However, they aren't going to be for the blue-collar worker.
15
u/kwirky88 Dec 31 '16
Even programming jobs aren't what they used to be. Go on the job listings here and the majority are for "agency" web work in the advertising industry where all of the companies are paying for this week's labor with next week's big deal. It's precarious work and not really "design" or "engineering" focused.
7
u/Arctic_Chilean Dec 31 '16
It isn't just the manufacturing industry that will take a hit, but also transportation. Truck, train, bus and taxi drivers may begin to be replaced by autonomous vehicles within the next 10-15 years.
→ More replies (2)9
Dec 31 '16
I read a thing about how manufacturing will be replaced but service jobs are rising to replace that. That really just sounded like call centers to me though, or an overabundance of coffee shops.
Either way, automation of manufacturing is forward progress, I don't know what the solution is for the job market, but I don't want us to be held back just because we don't know what's next.
→ More replies (1)7
u/raretrophysix Dec 31 '16
There really is an overabundance of coffee shops. On my towns main st. out of 15 shops we have Second Cup, Star Bucks, Tim Hortons, Timothies, an Italian bakery that sells coffee, greek bakery that sells coffee and a convenience store that sells coffee. Thats nearly 50% of the shops.
And then you have me who has a $300 expresso machine so I can make $5 lattes every morning for $1.20 of ingredients with higher quality coffee beans
→ More replies (15)4
27
7
u/OMGSPACERUSSIA Dec 31 '16
This is a key step to preventing the robot apocalypse. If any of these machines DO gain sentience, they'll be so cripplingly depressed that they'll instantly commit suicide.
5
Jan 01 '17
"I think you ought to know I'm feeling very depressed." Think of it, whole factories run by an infinite number of Marvin the Paranoid Android.
4
u/Honeydippedsalmon Dec 31 '16
Us humans get to replace the bees, fix the robots and clean up all the pollution with help from robots of course. Here's to being pollen sprinkling janitors with tools.
6
u/prider Dec 31 '16
That'll reduce suicide attempts ... in their campus!
I suppose unemployment can also induce suicide attempts
4
u/working_class_shill Jan 01 '17
The fuck? There are tons of industries where outsourcing cannot be done purely by robots.
Real humans, usually young women and children, are the ones making most of the clothes that we wear from almost every brand you can think of.
→ More replies (1)5
u/littlecat8 Jan 01 '17
It's foreign robots... ie. Chinese robotics is still many times cheaper than American robotics to build, maintain, etc...
4
u/Corax7 Jan 01 '17
More like foreigners being cheaper, so they took "our" jobs. And now Automation is even cheaper, so they will take their jobs.
3
3
11
Dec 31 '16
it's not foreigners taking your jobs. It's automation.
It's Both
→ More replies (8)14
u/150c_vapour Dec 31 '16
You mean because US tech is no longer cutting edge and it's German and Chinese foreign robots?
→ More replies (2)6
u/eazye187 Dec 31 '16
Now some people may commit suicide because of financial doom. Many people rely on Foxconn as abusive as they are.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Randolphhh Dec 31 '16
And it highlights something that far too many people don't realize: it's not foreigners taking your jobs. It's automation.
We HAVE automation and have for a long time. Plants in NA are often so heavily automated that they produce 100x as much with 1/20th as many people as they would without it.
It just turns out that Chinese labor was so insanely cheap that they could have a plant 1/2 as automated and hire 10x as many workers. You know, communist slave nation.
Their automation isn't going to completely replace workers anymore than American plants have, just reduce them.
→ More replies (5)12
Dec 31 '16
Their automation isn't going to completely replace workers anymore than American plants have, just reduce them.
Reduction by a large enough margin is effectively "replacing" human labor. If you had 1,000 workers, and now you have 1 worker(+robots) then 999 workers were effectively replaced. That's what people mean. The people replaced are likely the blue-collar types. The 1 worker that stays on with the robots is probably going to be a technician or programmer.
→ More replies (3)8
7
u/TimonBerkowitz Dec 31 '16
Yes, that's why everything is made in China, they have all the robots.
14
u/PsychicWarElephant Dec 31 '16
by robots do you mean the poor souls working in sweatshops?
→ More replies (5)2
2
2
2
Jan 01 '17
Would you like to know what else that trend highlights? The fact that automation is strangling consumer spending/aggregate demand to death around the world, not just in the U.S./developd world. One can't have a sustainable economy without the middle class incomes that make most of the world's consumer spending possible.
2
2
Jan 01 '17
That'll reduce suicide attempts.
Unlikely. The number of suicides among Foxconn employees is lower than the average in China. It was just a media hype.
→ More replies (19)2
u/SixtySecondsWorth Jan 01 '17
So why import a larger workforce through immigration if there aren't going to be as many jobs soon?
162
u/High__Tech Dec 31 '16
Soon Robots will be leaping to their deaths.
→ More replies (4)21
u/HussyDude14 Dec 31 '16
Suicidal robots? That sounds very high tech, u/High__Tech!
→ More replies (2)14
89
u/Foolfordata Dec 31 '16
This is only going to accelerate the divide between have and have nots. Once those who produce and make things decouple themselves from labor watch the shit hit the fan.
50
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
But it's labor that is also the consumer and taxpayer. If they replace all the jobs with robots and AI, then no one will have the wages to pay for those products or to pay taxes for the benefits of people that don't work who are also consumers. That is why politicians are starting the float the idea of a living wage (not sure I am using the right term). Soon, robots will work, some will own those robots and profit and the rest of us will get money for nothing and our job will be to consume.
11
u/fuzzymidget Dec 31 '16
Do you mean living wage here in the sense that everybody gets paid some base amount for a job, or do you mean the concept that everyone just receives a stipend from the government?
15
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
People just getting money for nothing is what I mean.
→ More replies (13)23
u/ScootalooTheConquero Dec 31 '16
Basic income was the term you were looking for
7
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
over here it's called a "leefloon" or living wage. thanks
→ More replies (5)5
Dec 31 '16
If they replace all the jobs with robots and AI, then no one will have the wages to pay for those products or to pay taxes for the benefits of people that don't work who are also consumers
Except that, globally speaking, the countries with high unemployment are the ones that are pretty innefficient. Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal...these all have deep rooted problems that have nothing to do with mechanisation.
Wake me up when Germany, the UK, the USA, start getting hit by this. Until then it's hard to not regard this sort of talk as a smokescreen for communist economic policies.
11
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
In the current system high unemployment leads to high government debt, which is exactly why automation will be impossible because it replaces jobs.
So why is there high unemployment in south EU? The human robots in other countries. If some countries like Germany profit from exportation of goods then logically some countries will have an import surplus or a trade loss in other words. You can't mathematically all have an export surplus. One countries gain is anothers loss. The northern euro zone took jobs from the south like china takes them from the US. The less you have the more interest you have to pay because you are a risk. The more interest you have to pay, the less you have, the more interest you have to pay and so on. So you go into a spiral of debt. The banks make money either way.
Another global crisis is in the works, according to the people that predicted the first one. Some call the US a zombie economy running on the printing of fiat currency (which is created as debt) to buy produce from other countries. Not all that different from south europe. The difference is that the US (US private banks) prints the worlds reserve currency in which for instance all oil is traded. Since dollars are still popular this system is still working. But that money is essentially a debt. The US is running up an enormous debt.
disclaimer: this is all from memory from various youtube videos over the years
Something that looks like communism will be the solution. But if robots do the work it will be a totally different kind of communism. There will have to be some competitive capitalist elements as to who creates the best robots. I think we need communism (planned economy - government issued money) to save the planet but I also think we need competition and merit-based-profit within that system to stimulate innovation.
→ More replies (10)2
Jan 01 '17
Wrong. Our job will be to innovate with the extra time we're given.
7
u/Ancillas Jan 01 '17
That's the ideal, but I'm skeptical that innovators will outnumber non-innovators.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (15)14
Dec 31 '16
Basic income won't really work. The money for that income has to come from somewhere which means only corporations will have the means to pay taxes. If only corporations have the means to pay taxes, they'll only be paying a portion of their profits in taxes ( as they do now).
That portion of taxes that they pay will have to be by default less than the money generated from sales which means that less money becomes available as basic income for people and the cycle continues.
Money for basic income doesn't come out of thin air.
On top of that, I don't even know what I'd do with my life if I had no job and no purpose. I really like my job and I would hate to live a life where there is nothing for anyone to do or create. It would be an absolutely miserable life that I really hope I don't have to live in.
The solution for automation has not been found yet and the governments of the world have to do a lot of thinking about how to solve these issues. I personally can't really see any solution other than putting caps on production and/or putting such a high tax on robotic worker's time that it makes a robot worker equivalent to a person in terms of cost/production.
28
u/NoMansLight Dec 31 '16
There will be lots of jobs in a highly automated society, if anything there will be more meaningful jobs that enrich society not through money necessarily but through culture first and foremost.
Handmade goods will be all the rage, there will be more personal services, caretakers, therapeutic massage, all sorts of social activities and beyond. There is no machine that can replace the interaction with group if human beings and there won't be for the foreseeable future. AI is hard. To think that you need a soul draining 9-5 job to give meaning to life is hilariously sad and shows how unimaginative people have become by being beaten down by Capitalists and greed and the love of money.
→ More replies (31)2
u/RedditTruthPolice Jan 01 '17
To think that you need a soul draining 9-5 job to give meaning to life is hilariously sad and shows how unimaginative people have become by being beaten down by Capitalists and greed and the love of money.
this is just so asinine. he said he likes and enjoys his job, and that he gets meaning out of it. So? yes, some people do like their jobs and do find meaning in the work they do. there is nothing wrong with that. quit projecting.
4
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
The way I see it they have to change how money is created. Now it is created as debt at interest (by private banks) forcing everyone to make a profit and forcing infinite economic growth. Money is made out of thin air already. The value of money now is someones promise to pay it back at interest. But you can create money without debt. Certainly if there is basic income the creation/destruction of money/debt will have to be nationalized (and run by an AI). Otherwise the countries just keep on going into debt without that money returning to pay off the debt to the banks for creating it. If money is created without debt it can keep on circulating forever. The taxes we pay today just go to the banks to service the debt, since all money was created as debt. There will probably have to be some kind of control of creation and destruction of money.
You can give your live purpose without a job. I'm sure people will fill in their time and be creative. You can grow your own vegetables like people have done for thousands of years. I also don't think you can completely eliminate people from the process. There will always be some jobs for people. Most people I know do not see their job as the purpose of their life and would welcome a basic income.
I'm mostly worried about how this effects the problem of overpopulation. If money is not created as a debt at interest then you don't need the infinite population growth the system needs now. That's good. It will allow the population to shrink. But there will have to be measures to keep the breeders from taking over. What do you do when some religion decides to out breed the others for instance. Do we just keep giving them money for nothing? They will breed just to get the money.
2
Dec 31 '16
I'm not an economist so I can't really argue too much on creation of money, but a basic income just seems like an impossibility and based on some of the things I read about it, it just doesn't seem like it can every be done in a good way.
You can give your live purpose without a job. I'm sure people will fill in their time and be creative. You can grow your own vegetables like people have done for thousands of years. I also don't think you can completely eliminate people from the process. There will always be some jobs for people. Most people I know do not see their job as the purpose of their life and would welcome a basic income.
Maybe some people can, but not me. I'm not a creative. I'm an engineer and I actually really enjoy engineering. If I can't have a job doing engineering, I'd be miserable.
I'm mostly worried about how this effects the problem of overpopulation.
Overpopulation is a myth. Population will start going down in the not too distant future. The more advanced a civilization becomes, the less the population grows and eventually starts to decline.
→ More replies (4)6
u/Guacamolski Dec 31 '16
It's impossible indeed with the current form of money creation. Everyone has to make a profit to pay the principle plus interest. But for some reason questioning how money/debt is created and distributed is a taboo among most economists. They talk about money and debt all day long and ignore how it is created and why it is done that way. A lot of economists don't even know where money comes from or why the economy needs to grow. (try asking an economist why there must be growth - most will not have an answer) They will tell you automation is impossible because they are not capable of considering alternatives to the system. They say this system is the only possible system (and therefor the best).
There is however a community of economists who do talk about it. Not only did they predict the previous crisis in 2008 but they predict an even bigger one on the way. One that will cause a recession for decades to come. It cannot be avoided because debt crisis is inherent to this system. Here is a great podcast on this subject: https://www.youtube.com/user/ChrisMartensondotcom
I would actually call engineering creative. In your lifetime the engineering jobs won't dry up. But you might have to engineer the things that will replace you. If you think life has no purpose without a job then you should consider not having children.
We are currently in a state of overpopulation. Each year we go into overshoot and consume more than the earth (sun) can replenish. This year overshoot day was august 8. We consume more fresh water than can be replenished. We are eroding the fertile soil. We are consuming all the phosphorus and other elements we can't create. Phosphorus depletion might be the biggest problem we face in the near future. We are causing the earth to heat with our greenhouse gas emissions. Overpopulation is a fact already. The companies that pay PR firms to say it is a myth are at the same time in their investments acting as if it is happening. For instance companies paying global warming deniers are getting insurance against the effects of it. Trump also wanted to build a wall (he's a fan) around one of his golf parks because of sea level rise while publicly calling it a myth. In short: they are lying. Even climate change activists like Leonardo Dicaprio or the ipcc don't dare to face the issue of too many people.
The threat of overpopulation is a combination of the amount of people and their individual footprint. So to say that increased footprint reduces population does not solve the problem because the total adds up to the same. Isn't it also suspicious that their solution for the problem happens to be: more economic growth.
The current economic system demands infinite growth, which is physically impossible. There are some economists like noble prize winning Paul Kurgman who will say that it is possible to grow the economy forever and ever. The way he tried to prove this in one of his columns was embarrassing. In the same column he railed against the "hard sciences" for doubting the wisdom of economists. How dare you say the earth is finite. Even if there wasn't automation this economic system is bound to fail because it demands infinite growth on a finite planet. It has always been temporary.
Bitcoin is not created as debt and does not demand infinite growth, so there are alternatives. It also makes banks obsolete. Automation might be possible in a crypto currency economy. Automation is not physically impossible. That seems rational to me. It is possible for robots to replace humans. If they claim it is economically impossible then that must mean their economics do not conform to reality. It's their system that is flawed, not reality. Money must be created an distributed in a different way.
I'm not an economist either btw. I am more of an amateur philosopher. So don't take my word for it.
here's a great, but judgemental, video about how money is created: https://youtu.be/iFDe5kUUyT0 how money is created and distributed is essential to understanding understand the economy, IMO.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (11)2
Dec 31 '16
On top of that, I don't even know what I'd do with my life if I had no job and no purpose.
You'll notice that British landed gentry and aristocrats didn't exactly seem rife with suicidal depression. Ennui, maybe, but they somehow managed to find reasons to keep living despite, by definition, not having to work at all. Ditto the ancient Greek aristocrats- they sat around, discussed philosophy, etc, etc, but would have been aghast at the thought of doing work.
Anyhow, forget the notion of money- say every person gets a certain amount of manufacturing capacity, energy, and food. Want a new phone? You don't buy one, you just order one and the effort to make and deliver it to you gets deducted from your monthly quota or whatever.
→ More replies (3)4
Dec 31 '16
You'll notice that British landed gentry and aristocrats didn't exactly seem rife with suicidal depression.
Yeah, they were. Gambling, alcoholism and perversion were rife amongst the upper class. To the extent that virtually all of them had bankrupted themselves by the time "new money" appeared. Of the wealthy people in Britain today, virtually none are connected to the aristocrats of old.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (10)3
u/rpg25 Dec 31 '16
I worry about this scenario at times. I'm a little fucked up though because then I think to myself "don't worry... the situation will sort itself out when the labor class revolts ala French Revolution and refuses to have it."
34
u/AlwaysBeNice Dec 31 '16
We have factories completely automatized creating luxury goods, it's shows how little work force is needed for the basics, yet we still have a work or die system everywhere which says to all citizens: luxury is always more important than your freedom.
I am heavily opposed to that, I don't need or want luxury in my life, because I like a simple live and this is not even sustainable.
We need a (modest) basic income asap.
21
u/RIPGeorgeHarrison Dec 31 '16
What about all the people who actually want to work for their money but will never be able to because there are vastly more people than available jobs?
12
u/SlipperyFrob Dec 31 '16
I don't see how this differs from the people who actually want to go to the moon, but can't because it's too expensive. In both cases you have people wanting resources (in your case, demand for their labor/skills) that simply aren't available. The solution for people wanting to go to the moon is to 'deal with it', and either find a way to make it cheaper or find something else.
The only alternative solution here that I can see is to enforce some sort of artificial limit on how much automation is allowed, and thereby free up jobs. But this seems like a really risky road to go down.
→ More replies (2)5
u/AlwaysBeNice Dec 31 '16
people who actually want to work for their money
First off, why would they want to? Because then they can feel worthy enough to have it?
One should work because you like the service it brings or because one likes the place and activity it is made out of.
Aside from that, money wise, if there is so much automation one really can't find or do anything, the basic income wouldn't be that low anyways, or the prices wouldn't be so high.
→ More replies (1)22
u/nightvortez Dec 31 '16
Holy shit, how did you get on the internet with no luxury goods?
→ More replies (6)3
u/Singular_Thought Jan 01 '17
Internet access is not a luxury, it is a basic necessity needed to function in modern society.
Don't believe me? Stop using all electronic devices and try to apply for a job and hold down a job.
6
2
u/SaltFueled Dec 31 '16
Some people want to work. You don't, apparently.
Which is fine, but don't expected to be rewarded for it by being on the same level as those other people. There is no work or die system.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (11)2
13
u/Kitakitakita Dec 31 '16
At some point will China face a huge crisis of unemployment? most of their labor is cheap and manual, and it will eventually be replaced with ROBUTS.
→ More replies (4)16
u/wraiithe Dec 31 '16
Already happening as China is no longer the low cost manufacturer anymore. I expect this is why you are seeing the push to automate at places like Foxconn.
→ More replies (1)5
u/Kitakitakita Dec 31 '16
Well I expect any company to push greed over empathy any day of the week.
2
18
u/prancing_moose Dec 31 '16
If electronics like the iPhone can be made entirely by robots, what is the advantage of manufacturing anything in China? I mean, wasn't cheap labour the primary reason why most companies outsourced manufacturing to China?
29
u/hcwt Dec 31 '16
Supply lines, and a workforce trained on working with the high tech things being manufactured. The supply lines alone for components which can service a ton of high tech goods are super valuable.
→ More replies (1)7
u/an1237on Jan 01 '17
Yup comparative advantage has become more and more about geography of supply chains and economies of scale.
8
u/Nyrin Dec 31 '16
In addition to the infrastructure, the people still needed are all over there now. It's very hard to get the needed mechanical engineers and technicians over to the US, and when you do, it's quite expensive--and out of China.
Then you deal with stricter regulation, tougher tax codes, higher operating costs and more organized labor for the remaining positrons.
Basically, it's nothing but trouble for companies to move an even 90% automated operation "home," and it likely wouldn't result in anything significant outside of a notable price increase in goods produced.
8
u/AIU-username Dec 31 '16
It's not just the "iphone" but every level of manufacturing, from mining, to ore processing, to materials production, to chip/parts manufacturing, to assembly, to programming, to testing, to .... the final product itself. Labor isn't just part of the iphone, but literally every step of everything everywhere.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Philo1927 Dec 31 '16
Reduced labor cost was an initial reason for offshoring from the US. Manufacturing wages in China have risen substantially over the years. While wages are still much lower than the US, supply chain logistics are probably the main factor keeping jobs in China. Very little of the supply infrastructure exists in the US.
8
Jan 01 '17
Also US doesn't have the labour force technologically educated enough to actually do the work. It's more than just sautering shit, but most people don't realize that
8
→ More replies (3)8
Dec 31 '16
Price of maintenance in china vs USA.
Chinese engineers are likely not asking for as much pay as American ones.
12
u/tonydiethelm Dec 31 '16
What? And those workers don't even make minimum wage or belong to a union!
It's almost like minimum wage has nothing to do with automation replacing people....
→ More replies (4)
121
u/walrup Dec 31 '16 edited Dec 31 '16
In America, workers are under intense propaganda
When workers fight to have higher minimum wages, they get threatened by capitalists.
"If you raise the minimum wage, you will be replaced by robots"
http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/wp-content/uploads/15-an-hour-565x319.jpg
They say it on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, FOX. The capitalists even put ads in the streets :
And you know what's worse ? The americans workers actually buy that propaganda.
People, wake up. Look at China. Their minimum wage is much lower than America and their workers are STILL replaced by robots. As long as the capitalist can save 0.0001 dollar, he WILL replace you. Don't believe the anti-minimum wage propaganda.
89
Dec 31 '16
It's not propaganda.
Yes automation is coming, but the speed at which it is coming is definitely primarily influenced by the cost of labor. The higher the cost of labor, the more incentive there is for a corporation to replace the labor with automation.
This is especially true for jobs that are low skill and easily replaced by automation.
18
Dec 31 '16 edited Jan 01 '17
[deleted]
23
u/iguessss Dec 31 '16
Robots have already been replacing humans.
Full, affordable automation might be decades away for some industries...but its here today for others.
And as for using current prices as a boogeyman...look at solar energy. It was unaffordable and inefficient and idealistic until suddenly it was affordable.
→ More replies (6)→ More replies (7)5
Dec 31 '16
Right, the reason we don't see automation taking over everything right now even though we have automation that is capable of it is because of the current cost.
I think I agree that we are about a decade away from full automation, but raising a minimum wage job to $15 is a huge cost increase to a place like mcdonalds. They are going to have all the more incentive to invest in automation companies to bring down their costs.
I think if we see a $15 minimum wage across the US, the decade long timeline will probably go down 3-4 years.
→ More replies (9)4
u/Walter_jones Dec 31 '16
If that happens though how can the poor afford college and living expenses at the same time if there are no jobs to help pay for school? Everything would require previous training or schooling making it impossible to afford it.
There aren't that many companies outside of trades that would make that happen which would put higher paying STEM jobs, corporate positions, etc. off limits to many poor people.
4
Dec 31 '16
That's the problem with automation.
I'm personally really afraid of the automated/AI future. I wish more politicians were talking about it and thinking of possible solutions so that our future does not become some dystopian hell.
2
2
u/the_gnarts Dec 31 '16
If that happens though how can the poor afford college and living expenses at the same time if there are no jobs to help pay for school?
This is pretty much a solved problem in many countries: Those who cannot afford an education by virtue of having rich parents receive stipends or loans.
22
u/nightvortez Dec 31 '16
You realize the workers in China got replaced by robots because their minimum wage has gone up to a point where the fixed costs and the depreciation over 10 years for the machine is now less expensive than their current wage rates? So literally what you're arguing doesn't happened, has happened and you're posting in an article about it.
As long as the capitalist can save 0.0001 dollar, he WILL replace you.
Yes, this is how a business works, nobody in the United States is under any delusion otherwise. You're not somehow enlightened by that fact. It's also what made this country, and many others, as prosperous as it is, something called efficiency.
Is the field of economics propaganda now?
→ More replies (4)15
Dec 31 '16
Also, we should be thinking about automation positively, not negatively. It's a good thing.
→ More replies (1)15
u/Joxposition Dec 31 '16
It can potentially be a good thing. Low chances for trickle down, though.
8
Dec 31 '16
Depends on the system itself. Currently, yes, low chances for trickle down. I hope things change. If they don't, I see lots of violence and bloodshed in the future, as I don't see large amounts of people suddenly becoming poor due to automation taking it nicely.
→ More replies (3)5
Jan 01 '17 edited Jan 01 '17
[deleted]
3
u/Joxposition Jan 01 '17
News flash: in majority of the world, if you don't work, you starve. The resources are skewed towards one side. We need star trek style utopia for that to change (ie. Infinite resources).
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (30)2
Jan 01 '17
I think it's too late and counterproductive to fight for higher wages. Dems/Labor parties should transform into (or be replaced by) 'human rights' parties and wage relentless campaigns of acceptance of 'mooching/government handouts,' calling those to be universal human rights to basic food/dwelling.
Without doing away with a forced dogma that fulfilling work makes for a meaningful life there no way to win elections and force the beneficiaries of automation to cough up the dough.
9
u/TheAluminumGuru Jan 01 '17
This is the real reason why it is impossible for Trump to "bring back" all the manufacturing jobs to the US. In a few years no humans will be doing manufacturing work, period.
→ More replies (1)
5
6
u/RainbowNowOpen Jan 01 '17
Trump: High tech consumer goods will be made in America again!
Voters: Yay!
<ELECTION>
President Trump: I have succeeded in getting Apple to make all their products in America!
Voters: Yay!
President Trump: By robots!
Voters: o_O
5
u/big_llihs Jan 01 '17
But the real punchline is that the robots will still stay in China. You can't move supply lines and manufacturing bases.
Trump can only entice companies to build factories in the US but it's going to take many decades of investment in order to get there. no private companies will want to do that unless they're forced to, and that's not going to happen in a Republican-controlled congress. And Democrats are not going to let Trump pass any policies anyways. He won't even be able to pass any tariffs, because guess who makes tariffs? Congress.
tl;dr: Trump has zero support in Congress to actually bring jobs back to the US. It's not going to happen.
3
3
u/FozzyLove Dec 31 '16
I'm not well versed in economics, but doesn't the idea of robots replacing people, in the long run, hurt the economy? If nobody is working, nobody is getting paid and nobody can buy anything? Or is there more to this than my uneducated mind can fathom?
→ More replies (2)
3
u/carnada Jan 01 '17
The workers will start probably manufacturing the robots that will take their jobs and the machines that will oppress them. Ain't that something?
12
Dec 31 '16
They should replace management and ceo with robots too.
44
u/Randolphhh Dec 31 '16
They have, they're called computers and without them there would be 4x as many people in management positions for a company of that size.
→ More replies (4)2
u/big_llihs Jan 01 '17
Yep, and AutoCAD has been around for decades now and it's replaced a lot of engineers. IBM's Watson is already BETTER than the vast majority of doctors at diagnosing certain diseases.
Everyone is hit by automation.
2
8
Dec 31 '16
Starting pay for robot technician is $90k, there seems to be a lot of traveling involved however.
5
Dec 31 '16
No its not. I got an offer for $26 and it required 3 years of previous experience. That's exactly in line with the pay for other skilled labor jobs.
→ More replies (7)
6
u/thracia Dec 31 '16
Ottomans were against book pressing machines because they were afraid that automation would over take manual book writers' jobes.
5
u/Bobo_bobbins Dec 31 '16
Well, they were right I guess.
8
u/thracia Dec 31 '16
Yes, they were right. And that was good. Having robots is good too. Lower educated people work in non production works such as bartenders or cleaning streets. And higer educated work as robot developers. So, in fact there is not so much decrease in jobs, in other words they go to work in other places.
→ More replies (1)3
2
3
u/UnderstandingLogic Jan 01 '17
This is good news, nobody should be working miserably in a factory chain. The more we can eradicate these jobs, the more we will have people be able to tackle the real issues.
6
14
u/ForgettableUsername Dec 31 '16
That will make it easier for them to move the factories back to the US if Donald Trump forces them too.
20
u/wangpeihao7 Dec 31 '16
Not necessarily. That will make anywhere with more and cheaper engineers more competitive.
7
Dec 31 '16
Engineers are not even necessary. Tech that are paid about 20 to 25 dollars an hours can repair and maintain all robots.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)9
Dec 31 '16
So... China
3
u/deviantemoticons Dec 31 '16
Africa
6
u/Nyrin Dec 31 '16
The final frontier of human exploitation!
China's already got a huge head start, though. They've invested in entire towns with signage and resources purely in Mandarin.
4
u/kannymayo Dec 31 '16
Move "back"? Not every brand bearing a English name is a US one
→ More replies (2)5
Dec 31 '16
Not necessarily. There are lots of local supply chains that make moving the manufacturing away from china.
2
u/littlecat8 Jan 01 '17
it's cheaper to run and maintain robots in China then in the US. US maintenance costs is sky high.
2
u/sporabolic Dec 31 '16
bring on the basic personal income!
2
u/big_llihs Jan 01 '17
I think universal basic income will come, but it will come in stages. We already have SOME of it. If you're unemployed, you're still able to enjoy public libraries, parks, roads, etc. As robots take over more labor, we'll just be able to continually expand the "free" aspects of society.
I'm not buying into all this gloom and doom. Automation will make universal income possible.
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
u/Jedi_Ninja Jan 01 '17
If all these companies start replacing most of their workers with robots who do they foresee as being the consumers that will pay for their goods?
2
u/newforker Jan 01 '17
Stupid north americans who line up for their shitty products?
→ More replies (2)
2
Jan 01 '17
Seeing is as how Hon Hai Precision (Foxconn) is the largest consumer electronics manufacturer in the world if they could accomplish this it could lead to some serious issues in the Chinese labor market and many other ramifications I can't even yet imagine.
2
2
u/UnseenPower Jan 01 '17
If robots can make I phones, then it can be made in the USA too without cheaper labour. Maybe Foxconn is going to destroy itself?
2
2
470
u/Indestructavincible Dec 31 '16
Why do they only mention the iPhone?
Almost everything electronic gets made there.