futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837 
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Oct 4, 2018 21:17:13 GMT
Once we will have mass automation taking away a lot of jobs, are we going to see much more support for restricting immigration in developed countries?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,000
|
Post by stevep on Oct 4, 2018 22:09:41 GMT
Once we will have mass automation taking away a lot of jobs, are we going to see much more support for restricting immigration in developed countries?
I don't think increased automation is that important in itself as most of the developed west has already missed the boat there and would have to put in a lot of work to get back on a level playing field with E Asia. Also you would have the real barrier to automation in the Anglo-American world at least in terms of the mentality for 'management' - i.e. a closed shop for managing executives and the desire for forcing down wages for the employees to the lowest possible level. Automation failed in Britain because the dominant elite rejected it as an option.
In the short term and probably the medium one immigration will be restricted both because of the sheer numbers possibly involved, the use of it by the establishment to distract from their failures as its a suitable scapegoat and because in Europe there is the additional problem of the super-nationalism of the EU's leadership which is generating a revival of countering local nationalism feeling at the old state level.
|
|
futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Oct 4, 2018 22:45:34 GMT
Once we will have mass automation taking away a lot of jobs, are we going to see much more support for restricting immigration in developed countries?
I don't think increased automation is that important in itself as most of the developed west has already missed the boat there and would have to put in a lot of work to get back on a level playing field with E Asia. Also you would have the real barrier to automation in the Anglo-American world at least in terms of the mentality for 'management' - i.e. a closed shop for managing executives and the desire for forcing down wages for the employees to the lowest possible level. Automation failed in Britain because the dominant elite rejected it as an option.
In the short term and probably the medium one immigration will be restricted both because of the sheer numbers possibly involved, the use of it by the establishment to distract from their failures as its a suitable scapegoat and because in Europe there is the additional problem of the super-nationalism of the EU's leadership which is generating a revival of countering local nationalism feeling at the old state level.
Hang on--why exactly did Britain's elite reject automation as an option? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,000
|
Post by stevep on Oct 5, 2018 9:50:46 GMT
I don't think increased automation is that important in itself as most of the developed west has already missed the boat there and would have to put in a lot of work to get back on a level playing field with E Asia. Also you would have the real barrier to automation in the Anglo-American world at least in terms of the mentality for 'management' - i.e. a closed shop for managing executives and the desire for forcing down wages for the employees to the lowest possible level. Automation failed in Britain because the dominant elite rejected it as an option.
In the short term and probably the medium one immigration will be restricted both because of the sheer numbers possibly involved, the use of it by the establishment to distract from their failures as its a suitable scapegoat and because in Europe there is the additional problem of the super-nationalism of the EU's leadership which is generating a revival of countering local nationalism feeling at the old state level.
Hang on--why exactly did Britain's elite reject automation as an option?
Because that means a lot of investment and a smaller but trained workforce and also some emphasis on those people. The Thatcherite alternative of cheap labour with long working hours and glamorising 'management' allowing the latter to grab an increasing proportion of total income and avoid competition and changing its complacent world view.
I remember back in 1970 there were a number of projects about what life might be like by ~2000 and a lot of emphasis on automation and advanced technology but that all got junked in favour of increased 'competition' by cutting costs [which largely meant wages and investment] and allowing management to 'manage' i.e. become all too often bloated egotists. Hence the collapse of much of British industry and the fact that much of what is left is foreign controlled.
|
|
|
|
Post by Middlesex_Toffeeman on Aug 6, 2019 7:31:00 GMT
I think automation will be opposed by most politicians as it essentially makes 25% of the workforce redundant. Anyone who doesn't want to be signing on after the election will put limits in place - I can forsee a limit of 10% robot workers in any given factory, for instance.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,000
|
Post by stevep on Aug 6, 2019 7:37:17 GMT
I think automation will be opposed by most politicians as it essentially makes 25% of the workforce redundant. Anyone who doesn't want to be signing on after the election will put limits in place - I can forsee a limit of 10% robot workers in any given factory, for instance.
It might depend on the circumstances. If your talking about existing industries in the west then that's a significant factor. However if you were proposing generating new industries or reviving old ones, e.g. say commercial ship building in Britain, then if it was properly planned - which would seem to be unlikely with recent generations of politicians and managers  - it would be a practical option. Wouldn't be sure of success as a lot of factors to be considered but definitely a possibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Middlesex_Toffeeman on Aug 6, 2019 8:11:33 GMT
I think automation will be opposed by most politicians as it essentially makes 25% of the workforce redundant. Anyone who doesn't want to be signing on after the election will put limits in place - I can forsee a limit of 10% robot workers in any given factory, for instance.
It might depend on the circumstances. If your talking about existing industries in the west then that's a significant factor. However if you were proposing generating new industries or reviving old ones, e.g. say commercial ship building in Britain, then if it was properly planned - which would seem to be unlikely with recent generations of politicians and managers - it would be a practical option. Wouldn't be sure of success as a lot of factors to be considered but definitely a possibility. I'm saying that with automation, quite a lot of jobs will be replaced by robots. Robots are the perfect employee as they don't get paid, cost around £50 pa in electricity, can't form trades unions and don't get sick or take annual leave. So any menial jobs that can be done by robots will likely be automated. The government can: 1) Place quotas on the number of jobs that can be automated 2) Give subsidies for not automating jobs 3) Revive heavy industry and keep it subsidised as a way to revitalise the North and keep people in jobs 4) Admit automation is a lost cause and set up a UBI system 5) Keep things as they are and just accept 25% unemployment rates. 1 would lead to the government regulating industry, which seems unlikely when British economics are more Britannia Unchained then Das Kapital. 2 seems like a good idea and will likely be chosen - it is the one I personally support. 3 is likely going to be backed by the ”ee bah gum, on Ilkley Moor baht at” faction of the Labour Party as it means Steptoe can have lots of photo ops where he puts a headlamp on and pretends to be a miner's friend. 4 means high taxes and won't work, as shown by the trial of basic income back in Finland. 5 means that the government will get chucked out quickly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2019 8:46:41 GMT
Capital owners will always cut the cake into six slices, take five of them, and then pay a politician to tell you an immigrant wants to take the last slice.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Aug 6, 2019 14:02:06 GMT
Even though there may be a wave of government regulations (at least meant) to reign in automation's negatives, could businesses' reputations probably take a hit if reports came out about them firing a bunch of workers in a short time span?
Sure, the Average Joe may not care all that much now, but I think they might catch on as automation becomes more and more prevalent.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,000
|
Post by stevep on Aug 6, 2019 19:27:28 GMT
Even though there may be a wave of government regulations (at least meant) to reign in automation's negatives, could businesses' reputations probably take a hit if reports came out about them firing a bunch of workers in a short time span? Sure, the Average Joe may not care all that much now, but I think they might catch on as automation becomes more and more prevalent.
Not just the average Joe. There seems to be a high probability that in the not too distant future advances in AI will enable the replacement of humans in a lot of high skilled professional roles that were previously thought likely to be immune to such developments.
Of course at least in the Anglo-American sphere the last few decades there has been systematic efforts to remove all senses of social identity and community so they could find themselves unable to moblise support for their plight and/or unwilling to link up with other, less prosperous communities.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Aug 6, 2019 19:41:15 GMT
Even though there may be a wave of government regulations (at least meant) to reign in automation's negatives, could businesses' reputations probably take a hit if reports came out about them firing a bunch of workers in a short time span? Sure, the Average Joe may not care all that much now, but I think they might catch on as automation becomes more and more prevalent.
Not just the average Joe. There seems to be a high probability that in the not too distant future advances in AI will enable the replacement of humans in a lot of high skilled professional roles that were previously thought likely to be immune to such developments.
Of course at least in the Anglo-American sphere the last few decades there has been systematic efforts to remove all senses of social identity and community so they could find themselves unable to moblise support for their plight and/or unwilling to link up with other, less prosperous communities.
Good points. However, my question is that if a lot of people—up to and including those who have seemingly automation-proof jobs that get replaced—are at risk, wouldn’t it be in businesses’ best interests to be careful about how fast they bring in the robots, due to the possibility that it could alienate a populace that’s more and more conscientious of the issue? |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,381
Likes: 12,000
|
Post by stevep on Aug 6, 2019 20:11:52 GMT
Not just the average Joe. There seems to be a high probability that in the not too distant future advances in AI will enable the replacement of humans in a lot of high skilled professional roles that were previously thought likely to be immune to such developments.
Of course at least in the Anglo-American sphere the last few decades there has been systematic efforts to remove all senses of social identity and community so they could find themselves unable to moblise support for their plight and/or unwilling to link up with other, less prosperous communities.
Good points. However, my question is that if a lot of people—up to and including those who have seemingly automation-proof jobs that get replaced—are at risk, wouldn’t it be in businesses’ best interests to be careful about how fast they bring in the robots, due to the possibility that it could alienate a populace that’s more and more conscientious of the issue?
It depends on how much power those businesses have - and also think they have as they could easily miscalculate and try something which doesn't actually work.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,120
Likes: 7,187
|
Post by Zyobot on Aug 6, 2019 20:29:16 GMT
Good points. However, my question is that if a lot of people—up to and including those who have seemingly automation-proof jobs that get replaced—are at risk, wouldn’t it be in businesses’ best interests to be careful about how fast they bring in the robots, due to the possibility that it could alienate a populace that’s more and more conscientious of the issue?
It depends on how much power those businesses have - and also think they have as they could easily miscalculate and try something which doesn't actually work.
Mm'kay. I'd guess that transnational corporations like Google would be far harder to hold accountable by consumers and the workings of the market, though more on that specifically is probably best left to 'Politics and Current Affairs'. |
|
kyng
Consul General
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 837
|
Post by kyng on Aug 10, 2019 22:56:22 GMT
In a world where mass automation already has taken away a lot of jobs, then I think it's pretty much inevitable that some kind of UBI system will be in place. And people won't be wanting 'their' UBI money to be going to immigrants - especially if their own jobs have already been automated or outsourced.
So, yes, I can definitely see anti-immigrant sentiment rising, especially in places that were hardest-hit by this automation.
|
|
|
|
Post by EwellHolmes on Aug 24, 2019 19:04:22 GMT
Automation is going to lead to more jobs, so it's hard to tell given the relatively independent nature of stances on immigration.
|
|
- it would be a practical option. Wouldn't be sure of success as a lot of factors to be considered but definitely a possibility.
