Where are the new jobs coming from?

[yorkie]

There are no *new* jobs being created. .

Repeating a ludicrous claim does not make it true. I know of people who have recently been appointed in *new* jobs. I note you have no answer to the points Bald Rick made earlier and are just repeating obviously untrue claims.

 

[Bald Rick]

Question to those who believe the economy always adapts to tech evolution. If that is the case why are we seeing destitution around some parts of the country which used to have thriving industries? Arguably tech and automation has caused huge amounts of poverty where major employment hubs have disappeared. Trump got elected as US President on the back of promise to bring jobs back to the US. I'm starting to believe the answer to my original question is basically none. There are no *new* jobs being created. So I definitely don't believe the Government should be pumping money into tech that will make even more people redundant. And I more than ever believe we should be trying to keep as many jobs in the economy as possible, as there are no new stable well paid jobs for these people to go to. I think either this Government or the next one will have a very very big problem on their hands.

You've obviously reached your own conclusion and won't listen to evidence presented by me and others.

In my lifetime, 600,000 jobs have been 'lost' in this country in just two industries - steel and coal. Yet in the same timescale, 7.5million more people are in work.

In the early 70s it was commonly believed that computers and robots would rapidly take over most jobs, and lots of people would be out of work. To a certain extent the first did happen - whole swathes of jobs were computerised, but, yet, many more jobs exist. The economy changed, just like it did during the industrial revolution, and has been doing ever since. You could spend a long time listing the jobs that have practically disappeared. What has happened to all the milkmen? Chimney sweeps? Railway Telephone Enquiry Bureaux operators (there were thousands of these!). As technology and the economy moves on, so do the types of jobs available.

In the last 30 years we have seen a huge increase in the number of people employed in some sectors. Indeed some of the sectors barely existed. If you said to my Dad 40 years ago that by now the mobile communications and IT industries would employ 5 times more people than mining did then, he would have assumed you were mad. There has been a big increase in the creative industries - media, arts etc. A huge increase in the leisure industry. Bio-tech. Aviation. The list goes on.

Yes the locations of industry and jobs have changed. That is a natural consequence of the economy changing. And it will continue.

Another thing that has happened in the last 30-50 years is that the average hours worked has reduced. Which means more jobs for a given level of output, but also more leisure time. Which leads to the macro-economic point...

The primary point of automation is that it makes a given output cheaper to produce. This makes it cheaper to buy. Which means life gets cheaper. There's a great article on the BBC Website about how much effort it has taken (over history) to produce a given unit of light. For 'light' read most manufactured goods - food, clothes, cars, TVs* the list goes on. Because life gets cheaper, you can then spend more of your income on the nicer things - e.g. leisure, media, arts. Spot the theme?

* I bought my first TV in 1984 for £140 (almost £450 in today's money) - it was the cheapest colour TV on the market; 14", no remote control, no teletext. Today you can buy a 55" 4K Smart TV for less than £400. But you need technological progress!

Yes many types of jobs will go, but there will be others to do, in other industries, including some that have yet to be invented. People will, on average, work fewer hours. Average incomes may not rise - but with technological progress they don't need to as life gets cheaper.

Finally, the Government is funding tech research in certain areas to keep pace with the rest of the world. Yes, the £2bn a year Government committed sounds a lot. But it's a drop in the ocean. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Intel and Apple spent £50bn on R&D between them last year. Stopping the government research will do precisely nothing for the pace of technological change, and simply mean that we in the UK will miss out on some of the the benefits, not least the new research jobs it brings. It is naive to think otherwise.

The world will change. For the better. Deal with it.

Failing that, take a conversion course on how to fix robots.

(Edit: yorkie, I started this before your post; you have summed it up much more succinctly!)

 

[Mutant Lemming]

.



As above. Get rid of admin / management staff and you just end up with everyone else having to chip in (and have time taken away from their actual work) to deal with it so you create an inefficiency.

In a lean environment you do your actual work and the admin and manage yourself along with various other tasks as well - or hasn't that idea reached your workplace yet ?

 

[Dave1987]

You've obviously reached your own conclusion and won't listen to evidence presented by me and others.

In my lifetime, 600,000 jobs have been 'lost' in this country in just two industries - steel and coal. Yet in the same timescale, 7.5million more people are in work.

In the early 70s it was commonly believed that computers and robots would rapidly take over most jobs, and lots of people would be out of work. To a certain extent the first did happen - whole swathes of jobs were computerised, but, yet, many more jobs exist. The economy changed, just like it did during the industrial revolution, and has been doing ever since. You could spend a long time listing the jobs that have practically disappeared. What has happened to all the milkmen? Chimney sweeps? Railway Telephone Enquiry Bureaux operators (there were thousands of these!). As technology and the economy moves on, so do the types of jobs available.

In the last 30 years we have seen a huge increase in the number of people employed in some sectors. Indeed some of the sectors barely existed. If you said to my Dad 40 years ago that by now the mobile communications and IT industries would employ 5 times more people than mining did then, he would have assumed you were mad. There has been a big increase in the creative industries - media, arts etc. A huge increase in the leisure industry. Bio-tech. Aviation. The list goes on.

Yes the locations of industry and jobs have changed. That is a natural consequence of the economy changing. And it will continue.

Another thing that has happened in the last 30-50 years is that the average hours worked has reduced. Which means more jobs for a given level of output, but also more leisure time. Which leads to the macro-economic point...

The primary point of automation is that it makes a given output cheaper to produce. This makes it cheaper to buy. Which means life gets cheaper. There's a great article on the BBC Website about how much effort it has taken (over history) to produce a given unit of light. For 'light' read most manufactured goods - food, clothes, cars, TVs* the list goes on. Because life gets cheaper, you can then spend more of your income on the nicer things - e.g. leisure, media, arts. Spot the theme?

* I bought my first TV in 1984 for £140 (almost £450 in today's money) - it was the cheapest colour TV on the market; 14", no remote control, no teletext. Today you can buy a 55" 4K Smart TV for less than £400. But you need technological progress!

Yes many types of jobs will go, but there will be others to do, in other industries, including some that have yet to be invented. People will, on average, work fewer hours. Average incomes may not rise - but with technological progress they don't need to as life gets cheaper.

Finally, the Government is funding tech research in certain areas to keep pace with the rest of the world. Yes, the £2bn a year Government committed sounds a lot. But it's a drop in the ocean. Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Intel and Apple spent £50bn on R&D between them last year. Stopping the government research will do precisely nothing for the pace of technological change, and simply mean that we in the UK will miss out on some of the the benefits, not least the new research jobs it brings. It is naive to think otherwise.

The world will change. For the better. Deal with it.

Failing that, take a conversion course on how to fix robots.

(Edit: yorkie, I started this before your post; you have summed it up much more succinctly!)

Why would I pose a question if I had already made my mind up to ignore the responses :roll:

You have actually made a very good post here with some very good points. What I have highlighted bold, saying that to people who have lost their jobs and now live in poverty is the exact reason we have Trump as US president!

Ow and just dispel your presumptions as well as being a train driver I have other skills that will see me through to retirement in decent employment. But like I said before I'm not narrow minded enough not to be concerned about those in the wider economy.

 

[Bald Rick]

What I have highlighted bold, saying that to people who have lost their jobs and now live in poverty is the exact reason we have Trump as US president!

No it isn't. Silly thing to say.

I've lost my job three times. Every time I've moved on to bigger and better things. There are those that embrace change for the opportunities it presents. And there are those who blame it for their ills.

 

[HSTEd]

There is apparently a growing sense amongst the workforce that their own jobs are entirely pointless - apparently half the workforce feels like this (although I doubt it is quite that high).

This is obviously awfully corrosive to their self esteem.

 

[Jordeh]

Two poor examples in my opinion as both are low wage jobs and neither generate any wealth for the economy.

Context is everything seeing as I did provide other examples.

Costa Coffee employs over 20,000 people and it's owner, the Whitbread group has a revenue of almost £3bn, so how can it be the case it generates no wealth for the economy?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Context is everything seeing as I did provide other examples.

Costa Coffee employs over 20,000 people and it's owner, the Whitbread group has a revenue of almost £3bn, so how can it be the case it generates no wealth for the economy?

Okay is it possible to export the coffee that Costa sells? Revenue is nothing without profit so how much profit are they making? You cannot run an economy on selling coffee and providing social care for those in need. In my opinion our economy relies way too much on the service industry and that's why we get found out when we have an economic slump.

The Germans have the right idea in that they have a healthy mix of industry and services. Its all very well saying that we have all these jobs in the leisure sector but that's no use nor ornament if people can't afford to eat out / visit Thorpe Park because their car plant is exporting less cars and they've seen their working week cut.

 

[RichmondCommu]

No it isn't. Silly thing to say.

I've lost my job three times. Every time I've moved on to bigger and better things. There are those that embrace change for the opportunities it presents. And there are those who blame it for their ills.

I'm guessing here that you've had a decent education (possibly degree level) which would have undoubtedly helped. For one reason and another not everyone finds themselves in that position.

 

[Dave1987]

I'm guessing here that you've had a decent education (possibly degree level) which would have undoubtedly helped. For one reason and another not everyone finds themselves in that position.

Very much so!

Saying to others who might not be academically gifted "your job is being automated, technology moves on, deal with it!" is highly likely to leave that person despondent and end up being a burden on the state. Then no doubt others who enjoy the benefits of tech progression will bemoan those who become economically inactive because they will be paying for their benefits through their taxes.

 

[Jordeh]

Okay is it possible to export the coffee that Costa sells? Revenue is nothing without profit so how much profit are they making? You cannot run an economy on selling coffee and providing social care for those in need. In my opinion our economy relies way too much on the service industry and that's why we get found out when we have an economic slump.

The Germans have the right idea in that they have a healthy mix of industry and services. Its all very well saying that we have all these jobs in the leisure sector but that's no use nor ornament if people can't afford to eat out / visit Thorpe Park because their car plant is exporting less cars and they've seen their working week cut.

The actual coffee is fairly obviously imported but Costa Coffee operates in numerous companies and is profitable, so I hope that answers your question.

You're glossing over (once again) a lot of the manufacturing that goes on in this country. Car production is at record levels in the U.K. for instance (and btw that's even more vulnerable to an economic slump than most other sectors).

 

[RichmondCommu]

The actual coffee is fairly obviously imported but Costa Coffee operates in numerous companies and is profitable, so I hope that answers your question.

You're glossing over (once again) a lot of the manufacturing that goes on in this country. Car production is at record levels in the U.K. for instance (and btw that's even more vulnerable to an economic slump than most other sectors).

Where have I "glossed over" manufacturing in this country?

I think your wrong regarding car production given that up to 80% of the cars produced in this country are exported and so are less exposed to an economic slump in this country. However I would say that car production is facing difficult times as PSA have big decisions to make regarding the future of two plants and BMW have yet to decide where the electric Mini will be built. And that's before we leave the Single Market. On the other hand you can't export the services of a personal trainer.

Indeed you cannot expect personal trainers to sustain our economy for two reasons; the money that they are earn is next to nothing and with household incomes coming under more and more pressure personal trainers will be one of the first things to be ditched.

 

[Jordeh]

Where have I "glossed over" manufacturing in this country?

I think your wrong regarding car production given that up to 80% of the cars produced in this country are exported and so are less exposed to an economic slump in this country. However I would say that car production is facing difficult times as PSA have big decisions to make regarding the future of two plants and BMW have yet to decide where the electric Mini will be built. And that's before we leave the Single Market. On the other hand you can't export the services of a personal trainer.

Indeed you cannot expect personal trainers to sustain our economy for two reasons; the money that they are earn is next to nothing and with household incomes coming under more and more pressure personal trainers will be one of the first things to be ditched.

You're all over the place. One post you're wrongly on about how coffee shops generate nothing for the economy, the next you're saying we need to be more like Germany and shouldn't be dependent on the leisure industry - and now you rightly point out we export 80% of cars manufactured in this country. Clueless.

Plus you are naive if you think car manufacturing is not susceptible to economic downturn - look at the 2008 crash!

As for your bizarre rant about personal trainers, no one is saying we should sustain our economy on them.

 

[RichmondCommu]

You're all over the place. One post you're wrongly on about how coffee shops generate nothing for the economy, the next you're saying we need to be more like Germany and shouldn't be dependent on the leisure industry - and now you rightly point out we export 80% of cars manufactured in this country. Clueless.

Okay if you're going to resort to insults you sound like a bit of a muppet to me. I've consistently said that we should not dependent on coffee shops, personal trainers and social care workers to drive our economy. I've also stated that they employ their workers on very low wages. This country depends far too much on the service sector and that we need to broaden our economic base, by following the successful German model. Which bit of that did you not understand?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Plus you are naive if you think car manufacturing is not susceptible to economic downturn - look at the 2008 crash!

Please don't put words into my mouth. I didn't say that car manufacturing wasn't susceptible to economic downturn but I did point that when our economy is struggling you can at least export those cars to other countries. Which you can't do with personal trainers. And for what its worth the car industry would have suffered much more in 2008 if we'd not had such a large export market.

 

[RichmondCommu]

As for your bizarre rant about personal trainers, no one is saying we should sustain our economy on them.

First of all it was you who suggested personal trainers were a source of sustainable job creation. That was no rant; my wife uses a personal trainer which is how I know that they are poorly paid.

 

[Howardh]

I popped intot he town centre Barclay's bank and there wasn't a human in sight to assist me. I wanted info about registering power of attourney, and I couldn't even find a button to press to talk to a human.

Eventually after returning home; got through on the phone and went through their procedure (which meant meeting a real person by appointment in their branch) and finally registered it with them.

So first task was to close their Barclay's accounts and sell their shares and move the money to Lloyds, who have a branch with real people.

And a thought about jobs after Brexit. Will the restrictions on EU workers free up more jobs for Brits? What about the Brits such as students who now can't work overseas in the chalets, bars and kid's clubs - won't they want to fill in the rubbish part-time jobs that the EU can't fill? In other words, no net benefit??

 

[RichmondCommu]

You're all over the place. One post you're wrongly on about how coffee shops generate nothing for the economy, the next you're saying we need to be more like Germany and shouldn't be dependent on the leisure industry - and now you rightly point out we export 80% of cars manufactured in this country. Clueless.

Clueless? The only clueless one here is you. I've already made it very obvious that the economy cannot be sustained on coffee shops, social care or for that matter personal trainers! I've also made it very clear that we need to re-balance our economy and move away from being too reliant on the service sector, which we are at the moment.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Plus you are naive if you think car manufacturing is not susceptible to economic downturn - look at the 2008 crash!

Please avoid trying to put words into my mouth as it does you no favours. At no time have I suggested that the car industry is not susceptible to an economic downturn. However the very fact that so much of our car production is exported meant it lessened the affects of the crash on the car industry.

However the car industry is facing difficult times with the futures of the two PSA plants uncertain not to mention the decision on where the electric mini is to be built. If those two car plants close you have to worry for the personal trainers and local coffee shops.

 

[deltic]

When was the peak period for UK manufacturing? 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s? In fact manufacturing output in 2016 was higher than every single year in each of those decades - although admittedly its down by about 5% from its peak ever year - which happened to be in 2007. Source is the ONS index of production series K22A.

It is a myth that we dont produce anything in this country. Its just automation means that output per person has increased dramatically allowing costs to fall and enabling us all to buy more products.

Its also a myth that a country cant survive if it doesnt make anything. As long as we produce things that people overseas want to buy such as TV rights to the Premier League, financial service products etc in enough quantity to enable us to buy the manufactured goods we want then the economy is fine. I agree an economy needs to be diversified but there is no magic proportion of the split between agriculture, primary extraction, construction, manufacturing and services.

 

[dcsprior]

The Jimmy Reid Foundation (a Scottish left-wing campaigning group/thinktank) has released a paper about the impact of automation on workers - it had some coverage in today's Sunday Herald

Here's a summary of the paper from http://reidfoundation.org/scrutiny/automation-friend-or-foe-working-paper/ :

Authorship: The Politics, Research and Campaigns Unit of Unite Scotland
In a new Jimmy Reid Foundation working paper, authored by the Politics, Research and Campaigns Unit of Unite Scotland, an examination of the implications of new technologies for workers’ jobs and incomes is made.

Summary:
In recent years, the speed and nature of technological developments has led to talk of a new wave of automation, increasingly termed ‘Industry 4.0’. Advances in technology, especially in robotics, sensors, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and cloud computing, are helping to drive the current wave of automation.
Debate over the scale and extent of automation in the global economy is contentious, with widely differing figures for the labour market, in particular job reduction and replacement. Therefore, at the outset, it is important to state that there is no academic, industry or union consensus other than to acknowledge there is a process of deepening automation underway but its implications are at present fully unknown.
The potential solutions and strategies designed to address the consequences of automation require careful consideration in areas such as education, skills and the social security system. It is in this context, Unite is sympathetic to exploring the virtues of a Universal Basic Income policy as a complement to the social security system to mitigate the effects of automation, and, welcomes the introduction of trials in Scotland of the approach.
This contribution to generating an informed approach to the salient issues begins by reviewing existing research before discussing the certain aspects of productivity and control as well as a series of union demands articulated by the Unite union. The paper then moves to consider the case of Germany before articulating some policy proposals.

The full paper can be accessed @JRFUniteAutomationBriefMarch2017

I reckon this is likely to be an interesting read, however the link to download the full paper is broken. I've commented on their facebook page pointing this out.

 

[WelshBluebird]

In a lean environment you do your actual work and the admin and manage yourself along with various other tasks as well - or hasn't that idea reached your workplace yet ?

I am stating this precisely because it has, and I can safely say it does takes people away from their actual work. Every minute I spend organising meetings, or answering the phone, or signing for a package, is a minute less spent on my actual work (well more than a minute less actually due to the overheads of context switching).