Comment by anexprogrammer | Hacker News Reader

Comment by anexprogrammer | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

If robots and AI are eliminating an entire sector (starting with driving for instance), what other manual or low skill jobs are there that aren't already targeted for AI replacement? We don't need 2m more car mechanics or farm workers. This time it seem likely a certain class of job is going away.

Half the population is below average intelligence, and perhaps 25% (total guess) might be best suited to a manual or semi-skilled role. What are we going to do with them?

When similar things have happened previously, the once semi-skilled (eg) shipbuilder becomes a low wage driver or call centre worker. Many in an area didn't get those few roles, so became unemployed (and often depressed) for the rest of their careers. Some steel or shipbuilding towns haven't fully recovered even today.

Longer ago the farmhand could get any number of manual roles in the growing industries. Blacksmiths became car mechanics, fuel attendants and so on.

Also when it's only a number of regional cities affected, like with coal, steel or shipbuilding, it's much easier politically than when it's national.

Relatively low margin, fragmented service jobs. Waiters/waitresses, fitness instructors, barbers etc. Those jobs are often still better than the jobs being automated away (truck driving), just less economic to build such specialty robots, at least in the near term.

Except none of those types of jobs offer the stability of the original industrial jobs, and are generally geared more toward younger workers, who have longer. So it's a much worse situation for those workers as the jobs are higher risk.

If you were a 55 year old long haul trucker, you aren't going to be able to replace the income/benefits you had with a $7/hr (pre-tip) service sector job.

Many service sector jobs are not minimum wage and not geared towards young people (any more than truck driving). They do often have utilization issues, but so do truck drivers. Generally that's probably more of an argument for those folks to organize themselves than anything else. Truck drivers certainly did (The Teamsters).

>$7/hr (pre-tip)

waitstaff isnt paid that much hourly. Its generally on the order of 2-3$ per hour.

edit: since im being downvoted i assume someone disagrees - here is a source:

from nolo.com:

>Employers must pay tipped employees at least $3.23 an hour in 2016, $3.38 an hour in 2017, and $3.52 an hour in 2018.

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/michigan-laws-tipped-...

Confused Brit question - how? That's below min wage, which I thought was national law. I imagine it's a bit lower for youngsters.

> Under federal law and in most states, employers may pay tipped employees less than the minimum wage, as long as employees earn enough in tips to make up the difference. This is called a "tip credit."

Technically you can sue your employer if they wont pay you the difference if you dont end up making enough in tips to end up at or above minimum wage - in practice however, suing your employer is generally not a great way to stay employed

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/michigan-laws-tipped-...

Damn, that's harsh.

Only way I know round UK min wage is to be self-employed, or one of the fake "self-employed" like some delivery drivers have had to become. Surprised the IR haven't slammed the door on that little scam yet.

Wait staff have their own minimum wages. Iirc it's under $3/hour.

That said, it's not uncommon to get at least minimum wage.

7 is an average - as some states have a minimum up to $10/hr

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tipped_wage_in_the_United_Stat...

Aren't most of those already down at min wage? At least a proportion of waiting jobs will be going away too.

Can they absorb another 10m (or however many there are) truck and van drivers who probably made quite a bit more? I know it won't be overnight, but it seems to be rapidly becoming a political rather than economic question.

Like must we learn to run at 20-25% unemployment instead of <10? We'd probably have to learn to stop viewing them as scroungers too and adjust welfare somewhat.

Many are, but not all. And I suspect waiting jobs as ratio compared with eating out gross revenue is shrinking (though eating out is growing and is more labor intensive than a grocery store still). Part of that is labor organization, the truckers have unions. And unions were (and are) a big political issue.

> Relatively low margin, fragmented service jobs. Waiters/waitresses, fitness instructors, barbers etc. Those jobs are often still better than the jobs being automated away (truck driving)

No, they aren't. Many "low-margin, framented service jobs" of the type you list are often effectively sub-minimum wage (possible because they are usually independent sole proprietorships renting facilities from the entity that looks like their "employer") highly-saturated already, increasing the proportion of the population trying to work them will further crash wages.

so in the face of massive layoffs of entire sectors of the economy - you are suggesting that restaurants will be hiring /more/ people?

Who is eating at these restaurants that wasnt before? Why would they suddenly be hiring millions of people at restaurants?

Who is suddenly attending more fitness classes now that there is massive unemployment, to the extent that we need millions more fitness instructors?

Your suggestions dont make any sense whatsoever. If you had said Campbells soup company would be hiring you might be on to something, but in the face of millions losing jobs, luxuries like restaurants, fitness classes, etc certainly wont be seeing massive growth in demand....

>Half the population is below average intelligence

Assuming intelligence is normally distributed, which I guess is a commonly accepted thing :-D

Reply on news.ycombinator.com