ATM Machines Bankrupt Shovel-Manufacturers

Oh Hell, let's just do away with the limo and Airforce One and just have a flotilla of boats powered by rowing slaves carry King Obamses 0 down the Nile, er, the Potomac on his way to bestow his glowing visage on the unwashed masses.

And as they said about the cow with it's head in the kid's toy "How did he get in there?"

Of course what Obama really means is tht ATMS and airport check in kiosks cant unionize, wont use ato check off to gather union dues and wont use those union dues to provide contributions to the Democratic party.

Didn't know becoming more efficient was an "economic structural issue". Does this mean the return of the family farm and stronger rural communities with conservative values too?

Obama's is right. I am not advocating going back in time and getting rid of modern technology but this is going to be a bigger problem as time goes by that I don't think anyone is going to solve. There was a time in Canada when 80% of the population was involved in agriculture. The tractor was invented and most people moved into manufacturing. Then we invented the robot and the computer and those jobs disappeared and we have been told that the new jobs will be in "service industries". The problem is that service industries don't create wealth, they just redistribute it. To create wealth you have to grow, mine, build or help in those businesses. We have now become so good at those things that the economy doesn't need very many people to perform those tasks. Its a problem that we have lost a lot of our manufacturing to other countries but from an employment perspective its just as important that we have gone from an economy where it took one man one day to make a pair of boots and now one man can make 10,000 pairs of boots a day.

Most people are not that smart or ambitious. In the past that mass of humanity would have been employed harvesting grain with a scythe chopping trees with an ax or bolting on the front left wheel of a car. They can`t all be telephone sanitizers or hedge fund managers

As a person in a technical trade I am as safe as anyone is going to get, but in that capacity I worked in the Chrysler plant in Brampton. The plant has been there since the 1950`s. It has four huge cafeterias. Now they only need half of one of those cafeterias because even though they build more cars than they ever have they don`t need that many humans. one of the reasons that the government worker class is as big as it is is that the rest of the economy relatively speaking is getting smaller through productivity growth. This doesn`t appear to have had much of an impact on the government

In the 1960`s people saw this coming and the assumption was we would all be free from the drudgery of work and have lots of free time to enjoy our lives. What no one seamed to think about was what people were going to do for money.

Obama has quite a few "blanks" besides those involving his biography.
Whether they are self inflicted or natural in origin will take some time to sort out.

Machines don't require U.S. employers to pay into ObamaCare on their behalf.
Want to find a real damper on the U.S. economy, especially hiring?
Look no further, Barack.

Minuteman, you are right, and this is indeed what productivity growth means. Sylvania is a good example. It had a plant somewhere in the US southwest that made camera flashbulbs. It produced the continent's entire supply of these, and less than two dozen people worked on any given shift.

You also have to remember that the economic system has absorbed huge numbers of women entering the workforce in about two generations.

However, a solution was proposed for what people were going to do for money. It's called redistribution through income tax otherwise known as modern socialism. Now as we know, that doesn't work for all sorts of reasons. This is why the socialist argument remains strong. It has presented a solution to the problem to the public, but the capitalist/free enterprise argument is not nearly as clear or simple as this, particularly under circumstances where economic growth has become so stunted in OECD nations.

minuteman and cgh - I think you are both ignoring, as is Obama, that jobs shift their location and type as a society increases its size and complexity.

So, ATMs, which were indeed in place long before Obama's Reign, may remove a teller from the bank, but the production and servicing of these machines opens jobs in this area..rather than in the bank.

Furthermore, one has to consider the size of the population and the demand for services. In the good old days, you'd have one bank with maybe two tellers. Open from 10 to 3 pm and closed on weekends and Wed. afternoon. That was when the population was 1/3 of what it is now. Can you even house a bank with the number of tellers required for these quick cash withdrawals? No.

So- machines are used. And these set up jobs in their design, manufacture, selling, shipping and servicing. And the raw materials required for these machines set up other jobs.

So, Obama is not only profoundly ignorant, and we all know that anyway, but he is arrogant and indifferent. We know that too...

"checking in at the gate"

And the gaffes just keep on coming. You can't proceed to the gate until after you've checked in at the aptly-named check-in counter where you're told your gate number.

I think minuteman has it right. Some 25 years ago, I worked in Ottawa for a telecom maker. I was young and unattached, so I went out on the town a lot. Silly me, I thought I would meet a lot of vibrant young women. Instead, I heard this story over and over: "I finished Grade 12, and then my dad got me a clerical job at RevCan/Public Works/DND/etc. It's boring but the pay's good. I went to Toronto once - I didn't like it. There's so much traffic!" Now, most of them were smart enough to be bank tellers, but they aren't going to be designing ATM's, or servicing them, any time soon.

And I blame the teachers' unions. For years, they have fought against any kind of accountability, measurement, or testing. The result has been a dumbed-down generation, who can't do simple arithmetic without a calculator, can't write a coherent paragraph, and whose idea of a novel thought is "Whazzzzuupp?"

I agree with ET that the types of jobs shift as a society progresses. The problem is the new jobs of today and tomorrow will require intelligence, creativity, and independent thought. If it's something that can be done with just a few lessons, it's going to be recreated in silicon or a robot. There are plenty of bright young people who've gained education despite their schooling, but the vast majority - as we saw in Vancouver - are drunken louts with only the thinnest veneer of civilization. They are going to be the problem going forward, for they will want to elect governments that promise them "money for nothing". (Luckily, Quebec has stopped having babies, so their population and hence political influence will decline.) If Bambam goes ahead with his plan to make instant citizens of Mexicans, he'll gain millions of new voters, who won't be putting very much into the system, and who will want to take a lot out of it. In The Atlantic last year, there was an article about the growing underclass of (mostly black) young men, raised without fathers, dropped out from their indifferent schools, and living a life of small time drug use on the public dime. Imagine what's going to happen when they realize they can vote?

Of course, in older times, when the population of angry young men got too high, they were sent off to war, with the concomitant decrease in the number of young men, and their never-to-be-born children. Today, the concept of another Great War is too terrifying to contemplate (and we even have problems with little ones - 10 years in Afghanistan?). I sincerely fear the US will have another civil war, and it won't be pretty.

Further to Rush's comment. My uncle went to Mexico for the first time 30 years ago. He watched the Mexicans building a road. They had modern earth moving technology. They would take one of those self loading scraper buggies to their source of dirt. The driver parked the rig and a bunch of labourers would grab shovels and throw dirt into the buggy. When it was full, the driver took the buggy to where they needed the dirt, parked the buggy and waited while another group of men with shovels unloaded it. Based on the rate of construction my uncle guestimated that the driver would retire before the road was complete.

The reason why you have automation and continued automation is because unions price themselves out of the market. When labour costs go up, industry will find a way to cut costs.

In addition to low cost automation industry just finds a lower cost way of doing their business like building things in China, India and Brazil.

Makes sense to me.

Obama's Great Leap Backward!

minuteman, cgh, ET and KevinB all have good points. Obama's musings remind me of the Luddites revolution of the 1700s.

It was the onset of the industrial revolution in the late 1700s and the resultant pressure on cottage industries that led my ancestors to emigrate from the Danzig area of Royal Prussia to the what was then know as Little Russia. My ancestors turned a negative into a positive.

The jobs displaced by some technological advancements will never be replaced,and the few people it takes to maintain a machine doesn't compare to the number displaced.

I used to work in the logging industry,where fallers and buckers were replaced by harvesters and feller-bunchers. The machines do the job of about ten men,one operator, one mechanic back at the shop.

Deng Xiaoping addressed this phenomenon years ago when China first opened up to international trade. He was asked if China intended to import all the modern machinery in use in the West. Deng replied,"no, we need to keep people working".

Deng foresaw that idle hands are the tools of the revolutionary devil. We just replace people, create a few new jobs,and wonder why the welfare rolls grow.

We've created a permanent underclass,on the dole, a result our leaders and the good folks at the futuristic magazines (Popular Mechanics) never foresaw when they cheered for mechanization.

No, minuteman, Obama is not 'right.' His midget level intellect is showing. Am I going to get lambasted if I bring up Ned Ludd?

Allocation of capital and labour resources to various parts of the economy is always in flux. A bank teller job may have been eliminated at a bank, but how many other jobs have been created as computers have been introduced to every aspect of that business?

What is supposed to happen in times like these is that the cost of labour is supposed to decrease as supply goes up. That isn't happening anymore with government manipulation of the job market (like setting minimum wages, lucrative unemployment benefits, etc.).

You can't look to the government to "sop up" the unemployed during an economic downturn because all that you are doing is saddling the productive parts of the economy with weight, working against it. Also, there is no reverse process because the government doesn't layoff workers. And when the economy does turn around and labour is scarce in the private sector, all of these new 'public service workers' will be totally assimilated and will be useless when it comes to private sector work. Not to mention their posh benefits , absurd levels of time off, and complete job security. I see it all the time - people leave my place of work and head to a private company, only to return a few weeks or months later. Going from a unionized, government job to the private sector is like a bucket of cold water over their heads. Working for the government totally destroys work ethic.

Alvin Toffler's "Future Shock", written in 1970 and required reading at my high school back in the '70s, predicted that people would need to retrain and follow a number of different career paths in their lifetimes.

It was understood back then that many people would not be able to get a job that they would keep all their lives.

Economies are not static, their is no fixed pie that every person will get an ever dwindling smaller piece of.
There are many factors that have limited opportunities.
I don't think that machines are the great limiters.
I think bureaucracy, politics, and individual inflexibility are the problem.

If you want a perfect example of an ATM taking someone's job, go to any Home Depot, or Walmart, and count the self-checkout lines.

I've seen worker numbers shrink in so many industries. In the oil and gas industry, the number of workers on almost every type of crew has been cut by around 1/3. The remaining workers have been expected to take on extra duties, and work longer hours. There are new opportunities, but most of the new jobs are parasitic, as in safety, environmental, etc.

Remember when every police car had two cops in it? Now they have so many electronic devices on board, there's no room for a second body.

I read a comment once, from a young blogger, who was convinced North America should abandon its manufacturing, and focus on the information industry. What these whiz-kids don't understand is, any country with a healthy manufacturing base has no need for third party technical management.

China will fail when it reaches the same tipping point America, Japan, and others have reached. When the number of people willing to pick up a shovel is no longer greater than the number who manage those people, their economy will collapse.

I'd argue that if your job can be replaced by a machine then you have no one to blame except yourself.

Of course we have setup safety nets to remove the true consequences of having the skill set equal to a pile of steel with hrydalic hoses.

If your main job training is 'righty tighy lefty loosy' somewhere there is an engineer looking to replace you with automation

What minuteman and BO fail to mention, is today I can go home after work, sit in front of a computer and create a computer app for the Itunes store and become a millionaire. If I can’t program, I can go to the library, grab a programming textbook, learn, and then become a millionaire. Today, anyone can learn anything for free!

Today, the 'sky is the limit' for anyone with a dream and some work ethic. Ask Justin Beeber. For those that think, plan, and educate themselves, the world is their oyster. For those that want to work at the Cheese Sandwich Factory and simply punch a clock, suck it up, or move to India.

Today, regardless of your age, you must be willing to re-train and re-educate, even if you're 80. Once you accept that you are going to be forever re-training and re-educating yourself, the sooner you'll get to the work of doing so.

I wouldn't trade today's ‘opportunity’ for yesterday's "good ol days" for all the tea in China.

I would tell those who gripe about the modern economy the same as I tell my daughters, "suck it up princess".

When Obama is talking about "ATMs" he's talking about "Aryan Taxpaying Machines"

LOL

dmorris comment is a good evolution of the discussion from the equally good points made by minuteman, cgh, ET and KevinB...

We are seeing the effects of this worldwide. Unemployment rising but the 'system' still 'providing' and increasing.???...Money printing by Government and 'creative accounting' is everywhere...The math does not add up anymore and we are coming to the point where capitalism is in the hands of so few that competition is all but stifled. Competition helps growth IMO.
We are going to eventually witness very soon either a phenomenal change in human interaction (Is this what our masters are "globalizing" about?) Or we are heading for the usual wars and conflicts to "Rebuild from scratch" afterwards.

I often think, naively if you wish, that advancements should have drastically slowed down after we walked on the moon...'Mad Men', those where the days! ;-)

Homez- That's a gold rush attitude, and you know what happens after a gold rush. A bunch of rich criminals move on to the next boom town, and the people who did all the work are left, wondering what happened to their dreams. If you look at any boom town, you'll see the point where the parasites take control, and the workers start to become secondary. After that, it's all downhill. It might be a long, slow ride down that hill, but make no mistake, it's all downhill. In almost every case, socialism moves in to "save" the day. Capitalism, in its purest form, has an expiry date. That's why I've lived in five cities during my business career.

Indy,

Justin Beeber's line of work employs between what the NHL employs player wise and job oppertunity for Astronaut work...For every tax paying self reliant Celine Dion there are thousands of "dreamers" who want to perform in front of others who are starving, on the public or mommy's dime.

Sure, follow your "dreams"...Many are flipping burgers now.

"Today, regardless of your age, you must be willing to re-train and re-educate, even if you're 80. Once you accept that you are going to be forever re-training and re-educating yourself, the sooner you'll get to the work of doing so."

Done that after 30 years in the Automotive sector, I'm 52 years old. I trained as a home inspector. I will be using my own savings to start my own business because no firms hire home inspectors. I knew, because of my age, it would be a handicap to be hired by an employer and that's why I chose to take a chance in that field and start working for myself...This is totally alien to me and like I say, a risk.

What you say will be in the future as the population ages. Right now though, human resources dept will often hire youth before experience because of costs. We are not there yet.

Yep, let's learn from China and India, where they use a gazillion workers at a construction site -- in fact these people don't even need shovels because there are so many of them, so what waste money on shovels? They scoop the dirt with their hands, make bricks with little sticks, and use rocks for hammers. Just as the neanderthals used to do before we discovered the wheel!

I can't until the Marxists succeed in taking us back to our utopian existence before the evil industrial revolution.

Whoa Whoa - did this thread ever go off the rails.

Productivity - that is what the Rob's post is all about. And productivity is what gives us our standard of living. A standard of living that allows for our so called "intellectuals" to have enough free time to dream up more socialistic nightmares.

I think Rob posted this to show how clueless Obama is. Obama is right if one is not concerned with productivity/lifestyle.

When technology advances require less people to perform a certain task, the socialistic-minded think of it as a bad thing. The more productive in our society think of it as an opportunity to do something more productive, to raise society's productivity even more, creating even better lifestyles that our beloved elite so cherishes.

Am I wrong?

So what are some advocating here - that we throw away all these so called 'job destroyers' like ATM's?

Not too many generations ago, there were no ATM's, Computers, IC engines, oil wells, tractors.

It required most of the population (except the Ruling Class types, of couse) to produce our food. As recent as the 1920s most people were employed on the farms of North America.

No one, no one had any free time to invent, to improvise ways to release the people from drudgery of their jobs and allow them to sit in an ivory tower teaching Obama how to take us back to .... the good times?

Read any book that takes place before fossil fuels provided the energy that created our cushy lifestyles of today. Their lives were not pleasant at all.

Am I wrong?

ron, you are right.

Ron,
Nobody is saying to go back before fossil fuel... just before windmills, solar panels, Volts and Prius, organic farming, Barry Soetoro and Lady Gaga...That's all. ;-)

And this fresh off the presses:

"SAO PAULO (Reuters) - The International Monetary Fund cut its forecast for U.S. economic growth on Friday and warned Washington and debt-ridden European countries that they are "playing with fire" unless they take immediate steps to reduce their budget deficits..."

Barry should reign in his own ATM (Fed Reserve).

RHTT

I agree that there is ageism, hence the need to be proactive; and, I believe it's imperative in today’s market to move out of the employee mode, to private business mode for self preservation(at some point). Everyone's goal should be to work for themselves at some point.

Justin Beeber was an example of how anyone can make it today. Once upon a time, you needed to know someone(or go down on someone) to get a record deal. It's sort of like blogs and the MSM. Today, the consumer decides who's listened to and read, not the editor and the A&R department. That was my point, not everyone should be a pop star.

In my industry, a large percentage of my colleges have a part time business out of the home, as there are unlimited opportunities and challenges to be solved. Many people end-up leaving their jobs to pursue their hobbies projects in the end because the market is so electric. It’s all about niche markets today. Find something to specialize in that only you can do. When we find obstacles in my industry, we often find solutions on our own time with the intent to sell those solutions in the future. We often subcontract ourselves to our employers as an easy and cheap way to get-off the ground.

Coach

I don't think it's the gold rush mentality, I think it's just today's mentality. Today, you are asking for nothing but hurt if you plan on working somewhere for 30 years and retiring. In fact, many people I know couldn't fathom staying in the same place, or doing the same thing for more than a decade at a time. Studies show that folks will have 3+ career changes in their lifetimes. This is likely because of the fast moving economy. There's no guarantee what you're trained for today will be in demand tomorrow. Anyways, a major factor in my job searches includes how my employer will contribute to furthering my education/experience. I feel I'm always learning on the job at my employers expense. I get paid to learn.

All of that said, I was very forward thinking in choosing my career, as I returned to school as an adult and had to be very practical. I'd rather have Charles Adler's job, but I digress. Who knows, as I am somewhat pursuing my other dreams on my own time and perhaps one day I might have that mic. See what I mean? That's an example of always training.

I have empathy for those folks from past generations who were raised to be loyal to an employer and work at one job forever. It must be very tough. That said, it is what it is, and the sooner those folks take the initiative that RHTT has taken, the sooner they'll have success. We must change with the times, as the times won’t pause to wait for us.

It is very humbling to have to start from the beginning; especially when you had clout and experience in you past industry. It is also very rewarding once you fight though the humbling experiences and you become an expert in another field. Learning and re-learning is a skill in itself; and when said skill hasn't been used in a long while, it takes a little bit of work to shake the rust off.

My experience as an adult student has taught me that you are never too old to learn something new and valuable if you are willing to dedicate the TIME and effort to do so. People must really focus on investing in themselves the same effort they would those they love.

I am very confident and optimistic about mine and my kids futures in the job market.

thanks for the chat guys

"Future Shock".....I had forgotten about that, Oz.
I'll have to find that and read it.

I have thought for the last 20 years or so that individuals need to have at least 2 or 3 vocations in order to make a living.
I am trying to encourage my kids to focus on learning a trade skill and what ever else they want to do they can pay for themselves.

What about the people that service and repair ATM's and the people that load the money into them, aren't we getting rid of their jobs if we get rid of ATMs?

"What minuteman and BO fail to mention, is today I can go home after work, sit in front of a computer and create a computer app for the Itunes store and become a millionaire. If I can’t program, I can go to the library, grab a programming textbook, learn, and then become a millionaire. Today, anyone can learn anything for free!"

I am now home from work and free to add to this thread again.

Indiana, you are right with that comment. What effect do you think that will have on the education industry?

I am not saying that the future is bleak for everyone, technological developments have made it very positive for people like you and I, people who have valuable skills and are prepared to learn new ones. There was a time in the past however, when bands of young men who didn't own land or have a skilled trade formed themselves into gangs and went raiding as a way to make a living, and cities had to build walls and arm citizen militias to keep them out. This was a common social model in many parts of the world in many eras. One was called "the Viking Age"

When our socialist entitlements are no longer sustainable, and all the people who work for governments or for non productive government mandated jobs - or in acedemia - because we will be able to learn everything we need off the internet, this is one possible outcome.

Must be nice to have that much power to say the most stupid things & never, ever, be called on it.
I doubt even the Roman Emperor who killed the Republic (Ceaser is overated ) ,was treated so well. In public he looked like a paragon of Roman dignity. Even acted like it for real. He was his wifes Livia's dummy.
Now we have another Republic killer idiot with even more pea brains behind him.
Both seem to have a simularity. Both where driven by power, with ruthless backers all endowed with utter distain for the populace. Both where puppets of others ambitions Both believed they where thier own Men.
The Media loves Power like a cold, old, man in winter.
They are driven with the same contempt for the "noraml" man.
Love power mongers. Are in love with peronality cults. Hence the quietude from them. They believe themselves of the same imagined class.
Becaus ethey buy into this Caste crap the power freaks spew.
JMO

Thanks for the reply MM.

I see your point that I missed at first.

My impression of BO's comments were "woe is me"; whereas you are “calling it as you see it” with regards to how you think things will play-out.

I agree with you about this: something’s got to give. I personally believe that it's best to position yourself for what's to come, and that's what I impress on my kids. For example, I'm going to enroll my 12yr old in a computer hardware/programming camp since the public schools haven't adapted to today’s economy. I think it’s abhorrent that kids are not learning programming languages and creating their own programs by grade 6. This isn’t the 1900s, but our school systems haven’t seemed to notice, but I digress. I believe we are heading to an economy where most folks work for themselves in the capacity of a contractor; and I think it’s best to acquire the marketable skills required to sell to potential clients. You don't need a computer science degree if you own your own company. The quality of the work should speak for itself.

Also, I see an emergence of the black market for obvious reasons. It’s imperative to have marketable skills going forward; pulling levers ain’t going to cut it.

“technological developments have made it very positive for people like you and I”

While I agree with you literally, I disagree with you figuratively, as I perceive you comments as infering that “you and I” are special in some way. I’m not. I dropped-out of high school in the 90s, and returned to school in my late 20s. Only because of the sacrifice my family and I made can I make the comments I’ve made today. If you are saying that “most people are unwilling to make such a sacrifice and therefore there’s going to be hell to pay” then I’ll agree. But, if you’re saying that it’s not reasonable to expect individuals to make the ajustments in their lives to compete in the economy, then I disagree.

For me, it’s all about planning ahead, and being able to compete. Unfortunatly, the socialists running the public school system loath competition themselves; and therefore refuse to prepare the future workforce for the capitialist driven non union smaller public sector ecomomy that we’re marching towards. Other nations such as China and Korea are not hampered by such deluded folks, as they wouldn’t likely give such strategic planning authority to those that have graduated the one of the easiest course avaliable in University, and have an even easier job. It’s flat-out loony! What next, A Community Organizer as Potus? Gawd I hope I’m dreaming

If we’re to survive tomorrow’s dynamic world ecomomy we must teach our kids to compete. THIS is exactly what our kids are not learning in school, and what will likely bring forth that which you predict.JMO

http://sgtreport.com/2011/06/technological-unemployment-in-the-age-of-fiat-currency-debt-slavery/

A final thought:

In Marshall Macluhan's Understanding Media, he wrote "In the future, the dominant industry will be paid learning". Thinking about the huge R&D budgets in both industry and universities, I think he was correct. Even RHTT's home inspection vocation is a form of "paid learning", if you think about it. He enters the home knowing very little about it, learns the home's strengths and weaknesses, and writes up a report. All computer programming is a form of paid learning. All the process engineers working in the oil sands are engaged in paid learning.

What kids should be learning in school is how to learn. Computer programming is a good example; no matter what language you are taught, the basics of good programming are a solid understanding of the problem, the ability to break it down into small steps, and the creativity to think about all the possible scenarios and inputs the program might experience (this is often the toughest part!). Those skills can be carried over to a lot of different problems, not just programming.

I'm lucky; both my girls are in a gifted stream, where they actually have teachers who care, and classmates who are eager to learn (and who challenge my girls - my youngest wrote an essay on a novel that I thought was pretty good. When I asked what mark she got, she told me "91". I said that's pretty good, and she said "Not really - the class average was 92". And just to show that teaching pedantry isn't dead, the teacher took off four marks because Sabrina used "em" dashes instead of "en" dashes.) I'm not worried about them doing well, but the kids in the general stream - fuhgeddaboutit.

I think a few people (minuteman et al) need to brush up on Marx. Obama's comment draws on Das Kapital.

If Ohbummer is upset with the progress of labour-saving devices, then this is his most moronic comment to date. So it's disconcerting to find people agreeing with him.

If all the jobs allegedly destroyed by ATMs or any other technology never came back, the unemployment rate today would be 99.99%. In reality, it's only non-zero because of government intervention in the economy via unionism, minimum wage, etc., and the usual small amount of frictional unemployment.

Also, a fundamental concept of economics is that real wages rise with an increase in capital investment per worker.

I fear the Conservative press is becoming as bad as the regular everyday leftist press. Given the quote from Obama, he spoke reality. Limbaugh spoke conjecture.

"What kids should be learning in school is how to learn."

...Rather than lies agreed upon."

Perfect.

Don't worry people Obama plan is well into action slowly moving into all mid east countries and Africa in his so called Kinetic peace. He is also trying to pull China and Russia into these conflicts by the time the dust settles there will be a need for many workers for few of us will be left.