Politics

[John Wasmuth]

Strange Electronic glitches happening on both Trump & Vances plane?

Just remember, awhile back I said that a Trump plane disaster could be a method used to take him out.

No .....I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

They aren’t conspiracy theories if they are true……..,

 

[Hunt anything]

When we go to the grocery store my wife tries to get me to use the self checkout. My statement is "why? I don't work here."

When at Costco and the rep tries to steer me to the self checkout option I ask them if I get a discount.

Their facial expressions reassure me that these subtle lessons in the economics of transferring indirect cost to the customer are always appreciated.

When I take my truck to the dealership for anything they always want to put a dealership sticker on the tailgate, I always tell them to take it off unless they want to pay me for advertising. They remove it ASAP.

 

[sgt_zim]

I can see both sides of the automation discussion to be honest.

On the one hand, automation is an absolutely crucial tool to maintaining our standards of living. It keeps costs down for consumers, it maintains profitability for businesses which in turn keeps tax revenues up for the government to in theory use to maintain infrastructure (and in reality squander). In that way it is essential to the viability of the nation. Plus of course, most of the products we buy are only available at all because of automation, and certainly they're only affordable to the average Joe because of it. Food, cars, technology, clothes, a multitude of others. I can't fault any business for investing in it, even at the loss of jobs. It's a necessary evil in that respect.

However, there are disadvantages. The simple fact is that, even if automation DOES generate new jobs, and it does of course, they're not jobs that the person being replaced on a production line, or in a grocery store, or in a warehouse are realistically able to 'just pick up'. The skill sets aren't always there, they're much more technically complicated jobs, they require a great deal of extensive training, and often they're a lot easier to offshore.

As an example, I did a case study during my MBA on a project run by a FMCG company to optimize one of their production facilities, integrating IoT, centralized data collection, and Machine Learning based optimisation tools. Once it was complete, they'd increased capacity from that site by 30% with no nominal increase in head count and a substantial reduction in COGs. The dirty secret (not reported in the 'official' case study I might add) was that the business case was contingent on being able to close two of their smaller, less efficient facilities as a result. The project was successful, and 500 people lost their jobs. Of course, the new, more automated facility with its IoT integrated equipment DID create new jobs. In the end, they hired 4 optimization engineers, 8 coders, a statistician, and a machine learning specialist (at the corporate location), plus 4 additional maintenance specialists and 4 additional technical personnel (on site). Their suppliers probably had to hire a couple of technical support personnel as well.

But that's no comfort to the 500 people out of work, especially as they'd need to move across the country at the minimum, and to the Netherlands for most, to take those positions. Plus of course, a guy with 10 years on the job experience running a packaging line, or a spray dryer, isn't realistically going to take a machine learning position.

But, the efficiency went up, and the cost of goods went down enough that it allowed them to keep price hikes to a minimum during COVID, soaking up a lot of raw materials inflation through increased production efficiency. It also went some way to keeping the business commercially viable during that period, which maintained many more jobs in country and gives consumers more choices on shelf.

This is a pretty typical example of automation in manufacturing in 2024. Some pros, some cons, probably necessary for a business to be competitive, but coming with a net head count reduction.

Roll this up to the national level, and especially when you consider the influence of Big Tech in this space, and I think it becomes problematic. Take Amazon. It's a great benefit to consumers. Very cheap goods, delivered right to you door very quickly. But, also consider that every $1 in revenue that goes to amazon is coming straight out of the pockets of traditional retail. Amazon delivers that service with substantially less people. The true COST of Amazon's business model is a loss of retail jobs, warehouse jobs, delivery and courier jobs. Millions of them across the nation. Plus Amazon taking that order doesn't increase the size of that order (much). You buy the same bog roll, or the same jacket, or the same TV as you did before, just for less money, so upstream benefits to manufacturers are fairly minimal.

It's the same story with Tesla's self driving tech. If they really can manage self driving semi-trucks, the benefits are evident, but the COST, is again, millions of well paid jobs disappearing. If AI truly takes off, we'll see the same thing with paralegals, and accountants, and coders, and many other white collar jobs. Social media has already done this for many traditional news outlets, and it will continue to eliminate those jobs, and marketing jobs, and consumer insights jobs, and sales jobs, and broadcasting jobs as it grows. I can't see any of those jobs magically creating more jobs than they take. After all, cheaper trucks doesn't really mean we will move more goods, nor does AI tools mean we'll door do more tax returns, or need more legal services, or read more news. Affordable mechanisms are already in place to serve these needs, these are just more profitable.

This takes me on to the overall point of this post. This wave of automation isn't (IMO) like the last industrial revolution, or even the slow creeping industrial automation of the past few decades. Those worked to create jobs because standards of living were low enough, and export markets were numerous enough that making more things more efficiently allowed more of them to be sold. Henry Ford and the car is a good example of that, as is industrial glass blowing back in my hometown in the UK in the 1800's, or even the proliferation of affordable home computing that the advances of the 80's and 90's enabled. Automation provided entirely new markets, opening up those goods to a slew of new consumers, which in turn lead to increased prosperity.

But today, I don't think that'll happen in nearly the same way. Much of this wave is about either selling the same amount of stuff to the same consumers cheaper (eg Amazon, automated self check out, automated warehouses, self driving trucks), or providing the same intangible goods more cheaply (advertising on FB vs cable, AI driven accounting services, or legal services, or market research). It's all bottom line focused, not growth focused, at least within western nations, and let's be real, if the market your AI guided micro chip design tool opens up is affordable smartphones for Indians, Nigerians, or the Chinese, you aren't adding much headcount in America as a result, nor are you drastically increasing living standards for Americans.

As such, I don't see a world where the current wave of automation CREATES more jobs than it destroys, at least in the West. Therefore it's my opinion that the conversation around a universal basic income is going to become a genuine policy point in the US within my lifetime as a result.

It'll be a fantastic thing for developing nations though.

Growth always means pain in the near term. It is as monotonously predictable as gravity.

Who would have thought in the days of buggy whip making that job titles in the future might be
optimization engineers
coders
statistician
machine learning specialist
maintenance specialists
technical personnel

Automation absolutely wiped out jobs in agriculture. But it led to (today's market price) corn being around $6/bushel. An actual bushel of corn is 56# (I'll spare the boring ag part why it isn't necessarily 56#, but close enough for the purpose of this discussion).

Compare the price of corn to the foodstuffs that are WAY, WAY more expensive. There is no way you're ever getting a bushel's worth of broccoli or peaches or bananas for $6. And the reason is because there's no way to automate away one of the most crucial functions of those commodities - harvesting them.

Almost every job function in existence today owes itself to a very long string of technological advances and automation that were inconceivable a century ago. Few of the jobs which existed a century ago still exist today. And thank God for that. If ag hadn't been heavily automated, we'd still have around 90% of our population directly involved in it in some way, which would mean far fewer doctors, engineers, coders, rough necks, directional drillers, welders, electricians, pilots, et al.

I'm now 56 and have re-tooled 4X in my life. I'd hate to have to do that again, but I know I could if I needed to. Most people can, they just have to decide to get it done if life makes it a necessity.

 

[Tanks]

Compare the price of corn to the foodstuffs that are WAY, WAY more expensive. There is no way you're ever getting a bushel's worth of broccoli or peaches or bananas for $6. And the reason is because there's no way to automate away one of the most crucial functions of those commodities - harvesting them.

Exactly, our family farms is a citrus farm, mandarins, lemons, oranges. At harvest time we get hundreds of migrant workers for harvesting and sorting.

Today, we have a lot less workers to grow stuff due to increase in technology. Still have to have people to pick stuff out of the trees.

 

[sgt_zim]

Exactly, our family farms is a citrus farm, mandarins, lemons, oranges. At harvest time we get hundreds of migrant workers for harvesting and sorting.

Today, we have a lot less workers to grow stuff due to increase in technology. Still have to have people to pick stuff out of the trees.

At some point, I believe even that will be automated. Imagine "robots" tall enough to reach the tops and with enough AI built into them they can pick all that quickly and without bruising them or damaging the trees. It's coming. It won't look anything like a 60' corn head, but it'll serve the same purpose.

 

[WAB]

Growth always means pain in the near term. It is as monotonously predictable as gravity.

Who would have thought in the days of buggy whip making that job titles in the future might be
optimization engineers
coders
statistician
machine learning specialist
maintenance specialists
technical personnel

Automation absolutely wiped out jobs in agriculture. But it led to (today's market price) corn being around $6/bushel. An actual bushel of corn is 56# (I'll spare the boring ag part why it isn't necessarily 56#, but close enough for the purpose of this discussion).

Compare the price of corn to the foodstuffs that are WAY, WAY more expensive. There is no way you're ever getting a bushel's worth of broccoli or peaches or bananas for $6. And the reason is because there's no way to automate away one of the most crucial functions of those commodities - harvesting them.

Almost every job function in existence today owes itself to a very long string of technological advances and automation that were inconceivable a century ago. Few of the jobs which existed a century ago still exist today. And thank God for that. If ag hadn't been heavily automated, we'd still have around 90% of our population directly involved in it in some way, which would mean far fewer doctors, engineers, coders, rough necks, directional drillers, welders, electricians, pilots, et al.

I'm now 56 and have re-tooled 4X in my life. I'd hate to have to do that again, but I know I could if I needed to. Most people can, they just have to decide to get it done if life makes it a necessity.

The driver that pushes companies to relentlessly pursue efficiency to survive is investor dollars. Investors direct their money to the companies that provide the optimal point of risk/reward for their portfolio. If you have a 401-K, you are an investor. You need look no further than the mirror to determine why companies drive shareholder return.

 

[Hogpatrol]

At some point, I believe even that will be automated. Imagine "robots" tall enough to reach the tops and with enough AI built into them they can pick all that quickly and without bruising them or damaging the trees. It's coming. It won't look anything like a 60' corn head, but it'll serve the same purpose.

Hybridization and GMO have eliminated some hand picking of crops. The tech already exists to do away with picking fruit out of trees. Nuts are harvested by shaking the tree. Robots are in ag now.

Harvesting Robots: Automated Farming in 2025

From corporate agriculture operations to family-owned farms, automated systems enable the agriculture industry to become more sustainable, productive, and efficient. Learn how here.

howtorobot.com

 

[freefall]

Hybridization and GMO have eliminated some hand picking of crops.

That's why so many fruits and vegs taste like cardboard.

 

[sgt_zim]

Hybridization and GMO have eliminated some hand picking of crops. The tech already exists to do away with picking fruit out of trees. Nuts are harvested by shaking the tree. Robots are in ag now.

Harvesting Robots: Automated Farming in 2025

From corporate agriculture operations to family-owned farms, automated systems enable the agriculture industry to become more sustainable, productive, and efficient. Learn how here.

howtorobot.com

Sugary fruits are quite a lot different than nuts. As I said, it'll come, but the tech doesn't yet exist for it.

 

[Hogpatrol]

Sugary fruits are quite a lot different than nuts. As I said, it'll come, but the tech doesn't yet exist for it.

It's here, may be rudimentary but will advance rapidly. AI, it knows which one to pick and which ones to leave.

 

[John Wasmuth]

I had an uncle that owned a large orange and grape fruit grove in central Florida. I remember that in the 60’s there was a device that went around the base of the trunk with arms that stretched out with netting attached to it and arms that grabbed the tree and shook it to make the fruit drop…….. it was innovative at the time but I mostly remember my uncle and other grove owners complaining about the machines killing a lot of orange and grape fruit trees. I think they went back to pickers after the first year.

 

[WAB]

Sugary fruits are quite a lot different than nuts. As I said, it'll come, but the tech doesn't yet exist for it.

In addition to row crops, we grew for Green Giant when I was growing up on the farm. Sweet Corn and peas mostly. I helped our neighbors out with other specialty ag crops like tomatoes and tobacco. The advances in harvesting are mind boggling. I didn’t think I’d ever see anything but Mexican crews picking tomatoes. The first time I saw a tomato harvester I couldn’t believe it. We don’t see a lot of tobacco anymore, so I was really interested to see the automated priming machines and kilns when I was in Italy this year. These advances are pretty critical given how hard it is to get anyone to work that hard these days. I can’t even imagine trying to get one of these keyboard warriors to hang kill in tobacco!!!

 

[sgt_zim]

 

[John Wasmuth]

Ka Moa La………

 

[Hogpatrol]

Back in the '50s for extra money in the fall, my father would pick apples and I'd pick up the ones on the ground for cider. The pickers were mostly Puerto Ricans that would come over for the harvest season. They stayed in farm housing. Once the U.S. gave them (Puerto Rico citizens) eligibility for welfare, food stamps, and other government programs, they stopped coming. Now it's Mexicans and central Americans, countries without those "safety nets".

 

[sgt_zim]

Ka Moa La………

Kamala Ze Dong

 

[ActionBob]

The consumer is relentless in seeking ever better quality at ever lower prices. This will drive automation to its fullest extent possible in production and distribution. Businesses have no choice

Is it really the consumers? I'd argue it is simply another example of Capitalism at work

Rather than consumers being relentless in seeking even better quality at even lower prices.... I would contend that competition in a healthy Capitalist system provides opportunities for consumers to enjoy better quality at lower prices. It is the natural forces of good business and competition at work. Consumers always end up winning in such circumstances. You are correct that in an environment of competition, businesses do have the choice of stepping up and being ever more competitive. Or getting passed by and eventually going out of business.

 

[Datchew]

Strange Electronic glitches happening on both Trump & Vances plane?

Just remember, awhile back I said that a Trump plane disaster could be a method used to take him out.

No .....I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

There was that mysterious helicopter crash that took out the Iranian leader. Hmmm

 

[Saul]

Is it really the consumers? I'd argue it is simply another example of Capitalism at work

Rather than consumers being relentless in seeking even better quality at even lower prices.... I would contend that competition in a healthy Capitalist system provides opportunities for consumers to enjoy better quality at lower prices. It is the natural forces of good business and competition at work. Consumers always end up winning in such circumstances. You are correct that in an environment of competition, businesses do have the choice of stepping up and being ever more competitive. Or getting passed by and eventually going out of business.

This breaks down when Chinese companies flood the market with low quality products, and then retailers like Amazon train consumers to accept low quality because the cost to replace is so low.

 

[ActionBob]

This breaks down when Chinese companies flood the market with low quality products, and then retailers like Amazon train consumers to accept low quality because the cost to replace is so low.

Sounds to me like consumer choice. Doubling down on low cost and forgo quality.... or spend more and get better quality. Consumers still win.