Beoz

Only 50%. That figure seems a little low considering most occupations are automated in one way or another already. Take the humble accountant. We have a much wider variety of accountancy today than we did 50 years ago. Many of the accountants roles are automated anyway. And sure there's offshoring. And many trained accountants aren't doing traditional accountancy anymore. The role will just vary and deviate.

I can't help believe traditional jobs will just deviate into undiscovered roles that aren't in existence today like they always have.

I also believe the worlds increasing desire for things like tech, automation, and energy will generate employment in other areas we are yet to see.

For now the major issue is what to do with localized employment issues where automation and offshoring have depleted entire towns. Detroit as an example.

GarryP

It's 50% of jobs automated out of existence. So the accounting firm has half the number of physical bods, but they are primarily sales for throwback customers. Most of the work gets done by semi-AIs, and much of the time the sales is AI talking to AI as well.

You've suggested the 'something will turn up' idea before; so here's a challenge. Come up with just ONE possible new job creating area that fits the following requirements:

1. Must grow from nothing to 2% of the population inside a decade or two (given the 50% number, it's no good identifying roles that will only need 0.001%)
2. Must be well paid (minimum wage doesn't sustain an economy)
3. Must be within the intellectual scope of the existing middle manager type, or less (not everyone can be rocket scientists)
4. Must have some reason why it's here, not in India (otherwise it would be).
5. Cannot by automatable (natch)

Just one.

If you can't, then recognise you are expect 25 such 'miracle happens here' magic tricks over a time period that encompasses your working career to date. How many such employment miracles have you seen?

...of exactly how its easier for business to just up sticks and leave - if there is no need for them to stay anymore. Trusting to miracles, or business generosity, is a mug's game.

Beoz

If only I had a crystal ball 10 years ago. I certainly don't have one for 10 years time.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/meghancasserly/2012/05/11/10-jobs-that-didnt-exist-10-years-ago/

I'm sure you don't need to be a rocket scientist to be a Chief Listening Officer.

GarryP

Only one of those passes the first hurdle (Elderly Care), and falls at the second. It's also fairly automatable in its own right.

Chief Listening Officer is a makework post for someone you can't sack right now, but don't want anywhere near the real C-level posts. It's an 'easing out' post that signals you should be sending your CV around.

Beoz

But the point is, automation has generated some of these jobs. Without automation, ie sites like BE, some of these jobs would not have existed. The future is changing and its rosey

ABCD......

It is never rosey to the person who does NOT want it to be rosey

xizzles

Hear hear! Truer words have hardly been spoken . The right mindset is half the battle won.

Amazulu

Spot on

Haters gotta hate

GarryP

Nah, the point is they are mostly jobs in the ones and twos - not the 100-200,000s - and are McJobs that don't really add any value. You can't build a society on telephone sanitisers.

The usual person who sees things as rosy is the person wearing rose-tinted glasses....

Beoz

Depends on whether the topic is about automation and jobs or whether the poor will got poorer and rich get richer. Jobs no issue. As for the other, well jump on board and its a happy life.

GarryP

It's kind of interesting.

The responses here seem to make it clear how we will address the issue. It seems that it's going to be similar to other existential threats (climate change, peak oil, etc.) which are causes by the system 'as is' - to split along ideology lines with those who are invested in the status quo trying to reject that the problem even exists. The paralysis thus induced means no action it taken until the problem beginnings to manifest undeniably, whereupon the solution seem to be to impose MORE of the system that was creating the problem in the first place.

It's similar to the EU and the warnings of problems resulting from unequal economies. The problem was ignored until it blew up, whereupon the solution proposed was to double down on exactly the problem that caused it in the first place.

Thus we can fairly confidently say that, despite the warnings of economists and the obvious advances being made in automation, we will collectively ignore it until is undeniable - whereupon we'll blame those affected and induce more of the automation and inequality that causes the problem in the first place.

If it's not an economic law, it should be. If nobody else has claimed it, I christen it "Garry's Law of Perverse Threat Politics" - that large scale predictable problems are ignored till it's too late to act, and that then the exactly original problem will be employed to 'fix' it (and so make it worse).

Where's that Nobel?

scrubbedexpat098

Rising population + reduced need for skilled labour /( too late in life to re train x Not computer minded) = rosy. Does it bollocks. I really hope those that honestly think the future is rosy find themselves on the scrapheap wondering WTF went wrong with their vision of the future. It's bright for some, but only some. The rest of the population is destined to serve or be unemployed

Amazulu

Ridiculous. This argument has been used for centuries and it has never happened

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

If you are 'Not computer minded' you are probably already serving or unemployed - or unemployable

scrubbedexpat098

This is different to what's happened before, automation doesn't create enough jobs to replace the ones it dispenses with, and on the scale we're talking about now, the only pockets being lined will be those belonging to people gifted in only afew occupations. Not a thing I can do about it, progress is progress I suppose, but the likes of you and Beoz will then complain about people drawing benefits, you can't have things both ways.

Not computer minded doesn't equal thick you know, to imply that is truly ridiculous.

Beoz

Its not about computers per se. Hey you are posting on a forum. You can't be completely remote to technology.

You said it yourself 'too old to retrain'. Well that's not really an excuse is it?

I'm probably too old to re-train too but I would love the opportunity to do so.