Will Robots Drive Human Unemployment?

Automation is gaining steam, and economists are worried

Advancements in robotics and software have, and will, play a strong role in the economy by displacing workers. That's not the basis for some science-fiction novel, it's our likely future, writes New York Times columnist Paul Krugman. And economists are still grappling with the implications.

Automation of labor will drive massive income inequality in the future, Krugman writes, by concentrating wealth in assets owned by a few. The theory hasn't been taken seriously because of its association with Marxism, but it's gaining steam now.

Robots, Krugman warns, will automate more than just manufacturing jobs, it'll affect other high-skill high-labor jobs too, such as translations and legal research.

Kevin Drum of Mother Jones posits similar worries. Drum fears that if the production of goods grows cheaper at a rapid pace, it could put many out of a job and on welfare with no plan.

Izabella Kaminska of the Financial Times, however, has a less pessimistic view of the future. Automaton and advances in technology cause goods to become essentially free. In this economy, she warns, the most value would be driven to patents and panent enforcement, which could stifle innovation.

Via the New York Times and the Financial Times

Do you think automation is healthy for the economy?

[Neo_NtheMatrix]

I'm not worried about being replaced by a robot. Those who work hard and keep their skills sharp know there will always be a need for their talents. Those who sit around and expect success to be handed to them are the ones that will be in the most danger. Humans will always have needs, and as long as you have the skills to fulfill those needs, you will have a job. obama is not frightening me with this propaganda.

[RobertJHarsh]

Agreed. What really scares me are knuckleheads like Krugman getting into positions of authority. Why does that guy keep getting interviewed for their opinions? Krugman is consistently WRONG, his predictions are WRONG, and frankly he is a socialist disguised as a economist.

[PNWest]

@RobertJHarsh Well for one thing Krugman has one more NOBEL PRIZE in economics than anyone posting around here.

[Zazziness]

I admire your confidence but feel it's based on wishful thinking more than considering the future. For one, you can't work harder than a robot. That's one of the reasons they're so useful on assembly lines. As for your "skill set" -- well, yes, being skilled in a field robots cannot fill is a good idea. But what fields do you think those are?

[NO-BAMA]

@PNWest We all know the standards for Nobel Prize is very high huh? Was that his reward for going along with the proven to fail Utopian ideals?
What did Barry do again to "earn" his?

[Neo_NtheMatrix]

@Zazziness - How about designing, engineering, and assembling robots? Robot repair, robot sales, robot maintenance and programming. Lots and lots of high skilled high paying jobs, for those who are willing to work hard to master those skills. There may come a day though that being a cashier at Walmart is a thing of the past. The highly skill though, will always be employable.

[tomincali]

nope! it will do what the internet has done to a lot of businesses. this will have the same effect as those who stopped doing things on paper which put folks out of work. robots have already put folks out of work.

[MBernard]

Welcome to the future.

[marine1]

Yep and no more flatulents in the work area.

[Sharpshooter]

Worried about ROBOTs causing unemployment? Wasn't this concern first raised during the industrial revolution?

Unless we import these ROBOTs from China, many jobs come from the manufacture of the ROBOT and it's component parts. How about the jobs from Selling and Servicing ROBOTs?

In most cases, the human mind is capable of doing things the ROBOT cannot, starting with reason and invent.

Uneducated, stupid people may find ROBOTs taking their jobs requiring them to find either higher or lower skill jobs. I don't think we'll have Landscaper or Carpenter ROBOTs as both jobs require reason and imagination.

[Zazziness]

They already have robots that will mow the lawn. They work the same way those little vacuum robots work.

[Sharpshooter]

@Zazziness Those vacuum ROBOTs suck.(for the slow kids here, that is a play on words, also known as humor).

Mowing the lawn is a good example of my argument, the ROBOT can do that part of the job, but selecting the length of the lawn relative to weather forecasts or customer desire for a specific appearance, is beyond the reasoning ability. Choosing the correct plants for an artistic flowerbed isn't a job for automation.

[Zazziness]

@Sharpshooter You know for every landscape designer there are many more people who are actually execute the work. It's those actually doing the work who are going to lose their jobs, as the landscape designer merely punches the correct robot buttons to tell it how long the grass should be. It's a dilemma, it truly is and it has been since automation worked its way into assembly lines. Now that it has moved outside assembly lines because AI gets better by the day, its impact is only stronger.

[Sharpshooter]

@Zazziness I don't entirely disagree with your definition of the problem... The issue is what one does when faced with losing your job to automation. One group will sit in the corner and suck their thumbs while they wait for the Government to step in and hand them a ready made solution.

Others will get off their ass and FIND a way to make money with the new technology.

ROBOTs won't drive human unemployment, people drive unemployment. Some people will NEVER be unemployed for a significant length of time because they possess the drive to invent jobs if necessary.

[Zazziness]

@Sharpshooter This will be politically incorrect but it is the truth: many people are not lacking willpower, as conservatives always say. They lack intelligence. The people who will never be unemployed will be the smart ones. OK. How about those of average or below average IQ? Where do they go? What do they do? They don't know how their refridgerator works -- they are not going to go into robot repair no matter how much training you throw at them. Conservatives always talk as though everyone's brain is exactly the same when it isn't even close. Neo_Matrix blithely waves his hand and says "Sure, Walmart jobs may go away but..." But nothing. What are all those people who do very well as retail clerks but who don't have a lot of other options going to do when their job goes away? It's worrisome.

[NO-BAMA]

Yup. Who makes the robots? People do. Who repairs the robots? People do.
The only thing we have to worry about is when the robots want to become unionized. Once that happens Barry will support robots fully. Until that happens Barry will blame them for everything,(ATMs, kiosks).

[Zazziness]

People design the robots. But once designed and the assembly line set up, robots are more than capable of building more robots, as instructed.

[woodtick57]

@Zazziness Who does the "as instructed" part? Robots are incapable of independent thought, they only follow installed programs. It is people that make the programs.

[Neo_NtheMatrix]

@Zazziness - Sounds like fun, designing robots that design robots that design robots. What a joy!

[Zazziness]

@woodtick57 Yes, but it's a pyramid. It might take 100 workers to build a robot and twelve people to design one. But since the robots replace the workers on the assembly line, we're down to twelve employed people. And not just any people. People who were gifted at birth with the right kind of intelligence to do that kind of work and who were fortunate enough to receive the training it took to develop it.

[Dan_Tien]

"Robots, Krugman warns, will automate more than just manufacturing jobs, it'll affect other high-skill high-labor jobs too, such as translations and legal research."

You don't need a robot for translations and legal research, just a computer, and computers are already being used in those fields. There is no AI program that I know of that can translate as well as a human. Try depending on a translation program like Google Translate to get you through a foreign language class and see what happens. It is hard enough for human beings to understand idioms originating in other cultures to expect AI programs to do it. I'm not worried about it happening during my lifetime.

[Neo_NtheMatrix]

You've been sounding more and more conservative lately. I like it.

[Zazziness]

Interesting. As far as I'm concerned, computers are just a robot component. And language? Hasn't Rosetta Stone replaced far more language teachers than it employs?

[PoliticalSpice]

Computer legal research is no substitute for intelligent reading of the cases. There are reported instances where lawyers with shoddy work ethics do computer research. They find and cite a case based on a quote, what the computer could not tell them was thd quote was from the dissent. They quoted the losing side in support of their argument. Computers lack a brain, and unfortunatelly people increasingly fall prey to the sane affliction.

[Dan_Tien]

@Neo_NtheMatrix I never said that I was a liberal or a Democrat, neither do I follow the conservative or Republican party line. Every issue should be considered independently from party dogma, in my opinion. I call myself a moderate and an independent voter, but few people seem to believe it. Partisanship is damaging to reasonable problem solving.

[Dan_Tien]

@Zazziness "Robot" was derived from the Russian word for "work". Robots integrated into industry is described as Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM). I have never used Rosetta Stone. I would imagine that it will teach you enough of a foreign language to ask for directions and order food at restaurants, but I would not rely on it to teach you the nuances of language necessary to negotiate business deals, political solutions or even everyday conversations. My Chinese language instructor told me that if I really wanted to know common Chinese then I should go to China and hang out at a fish market. Next time I saw him, I greeted him with "Hey bro! How's it hangin'?" He stared at me with nothing to say.

[PNWest]

Those Who Ignore History are Doomed to Repeat It. Look back to what happened during the Industrial Revolution to see what our future holds. There was a major upheaval in society when we went from a primarily rural to a primarily urban society. Those who think that their jobs are safe are deluding themselves. Things are changing rapidly and people will need to adapt quickly. How much does the worlds best buggy whip maker make today?

[PoliticalSpice]

You know there are still companies in that business. Seen buggies and buggie whips catalog catoring to amish...i asume they make enough, as they are still in business.

[twinertia]

Automation is the natural evolution of modernity. It WILL result in a rising streak of worldwide unemployment. Thankfully, my Restorative Recompense Relief Renaissance program is completely immune to these harsh effects, and will take full advantage of them to secure permanent employment for everyone.

[Thegrif]

Think it may affect some in the future, but it will open the door for others. Those with robotic knowledge, electronics or computer experience, will see more opportunity.

[David944]

Sounds like a perfect match for people who want to sit home and live off pennies from heaven.

[Gtiallday]

Technology rapidly evolves quicker than we can learn. For example; someone who goes to college with some sort of technology major will find that within 2-4 years after their learning, what they have learned is practically obsolete.( I may be exaggerating a little but you catch my drift) What I'm trying to say is that robots of tomorrow will be far more involved and evolved from the ones of today. I can't see people keep paying to take classes to keep up with technology.

[Thunderchicken]

Do you think automation is healthy for the economy?

It is if you're the one installing and maintaining the automated system. At my work location we're ten guys doing the work that used to be done by twenty. Technology has provided me with a nice living but many of the newer guys are so far removed from the basics that if the high tech stuff failed, we’d be screwed.

[S-N-A-F-U]

If robots CAN REPLACE man, obviously, its not healthy for any economy. However, we have human O'bots in government now, if they can be replaced with a newer and more efficient model with advanced technology that can curb our enourmous spending and debt -- devoid of taking money from those who have earned and giving it to those who haven't -- that would be a giant step for mankind...<wink>

[Your_Name_Here]

As vice-president and business manager of the United Robots Local 34 I believe robots will eliminate some jobs but will create others in technology. We're not opposed to creating jobs but let's see what your side brings to the bargaining table.

[mudzangandoro]

On the short-term, not really. I do think automation is much more expensive than human labor. Not worth the investment. However, in theory, over the long-term companies could profit but the problem with that also, those jobs might become absolete. Not having the ability to think and solve problems could diminish usefulness also.

[PoliticalSpice]

Doesn't matter what I think, it is already under way and can not be stopped.

[DerivePI]

Has the internal combustion engine driven human unemployment?

[Zazziness]

Well, no, but then there weren't a lot of people involved in pulling around transportation. A lot of horses were put out of work, though.

[LGRepublican]

If you're THAT worried about robots taking your job, perhaps you should have considered a different skill set...

[DARSB]

Ms Kaminska's point of view reminds me of the early days of nuclear energy, when proponents predicted electricity would soon be so cheap it wouldn't even be metered.

[seedtick]

Absolutely not...however, the use of robots will make manufacturing processes more effecient and safer. And, the types of work done by humans will change. The advent of any change in work processes has always caused a lot of anxiety among workers, especially those who are not highly skilled. The typewriter, the automobile, and especially the computer and the components that made it possible, changed the work done by humans...and created many new jobs...and greatly improved the way we do things. Remember something...humans must build the robots, maintain them, and program their actions. Without human needs and ideas the robots will be idle.

[Denizen_Kate]

" ... humans must build the robots, maintain them, and program their actions." Not for long ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating... .

Also, even if a robot requires human programming, say for example an assembly line robot, it only requires one program, perhaps only downloaded one time. How many programmers does it take to change a light bulb? None -- that's a hardware problem.:)

[seedtick]

@Denizen_Kate I can tell that you know very little about process control...or maintenance.

[Denizen_Kate]

@seedtick - I can tell you know very little about programming.

[seedtick]

@Denizen_Kate But, I know that a programmer is part of the process. Process improvement, design change, and routine process control all demand what a robot cannot do. And, the programmer takes orders from someone else. The programmer is just one tooth on the big sproket that runs the line. The robot is set into place and programmed to do what it was designed to do....build widgets or parts of a widget. It will operate as programmed as long as it has power to do so or, until mechanical wear or breakdown causes it to stop working correctly. The robot is just another wrench in the toolbox.

[Denizen_Kate]

@seedtick - I said programming, not programmers. There is a difference. With the amazing advances in AI, it is feasible that machines may one day be able to program themselves. "The robot is just another wrench in the toolbox." - For now it is. It may seem fanciful, but consider this: back in the 70s I read a science fiction novel by Frederick Pohl called "The Age of the Pussyfoot" (don't let the title put you off). The main character in this work of fiction carried on his person a device that allowed him to access computers and information, make purchases, transfer money, take classes, listen to music, write letters, and communicate real-time with anyone anywhere in the world. It sounded really far-fetched at the time ... and yet here I sit today, "writing" this comment by speaking at my phone.