Yes it will impact the need for x-rays and other imaging. Doctors don’t order expensive tests unless they think there is a good chance the test will give important information. A cheap test can be done as a matter of routine even if there is only a slender chance the test will give important information. The cheaper and simpler the test, the more likely it is to be used.
And Sam Stone already provided you with what you were demanding.
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Industries with the fastest growing and most rapidly declining wage and salary employment
But all those other employers are also automating and outsourcing their jobs. Why, if Joe Businessowner is automating and outsourcing, should all his fellow business owners not follow Joe’s example?
Also, the owner of a business that can automate and cut jobs is not buying more of the same consumer products as his fired workers. The spending power of one person with fifty million dollars does not equal that of one thousand people with fifty thousand dollars each. Generally, the guy with fifty million lives in a much nicer home, or has several homes. But he doesn’t have one thousand homes. He eats three meals a day. He wears one suit of clothes at a time.
If he invests in starting a new business, he’s going to run that business as efficiently as possible. And that means automation and outsourcing. The business will likely be web based if it’s a service business. If it’s manufacturing or heavy industry, it’s going to be done in China or outsourced to a Chinese partner.
And where are they going to get the money to spend? I believe we agree that middle class spending has been the basis of our consumer culture. But if the middle class has been automated or outsourced out of a job, where are they going to get the money to spend? If poor and middle class Americans can’t afford to send their children to college, where are the people for the remaining high tech jobs going to come from?
Not necessarily. This kind of simplification will make it impossible for you to understand what people are telling you.
I order manufactured goods from Americans all the time. It’s not always more efficient to outsource. It isn’t like outsourcing is a benefit without any offsetting costs.
From their new jobs.
I went to college working full-time at McDonalds. Not everyone can go to Harvard. Not everyone needs to go to college. A good friend makes money he’s happy with doing work he enjoys working for a general contractor. Why should he go to college? To make you happy with his struggles?
They all will, if it works, or they’ll end up bankrupt.
In the end, though, what we’ll end up with is that
Nothing in the market is really finite except raw materials and humans. Which seems to imply that the only limit on jobs is the raw materials and the ways we can use them - unless we get to a state where we can produce basically everything for basically nothing, and we’re not there yet by a long shot.
Looking at only one particular region of the world when that region is connected to the rest of the world distorts our view. Sure it sucks if your job is outsourced to India, but the Indian who gets the job isn’t complaining, and the number of jobs hasn’t changed much.
Looking at one particular job isn’t insightful either. Oh right now I can’t make a living a blacksmith, but hey - there’s a car factory, and a tire factory, and the traffic police, and a road-building company, and a tarmac factory, and a company laying roads, building traffic signs, and would you look at all the stuff we can now sell all over the continent just by driving it there… etc
The number of people needing medical care is rising as the population ages, but medical decisions - as most of us are painfully aware - are not usually made lightly. I’ve not seen any evidence that the lower costs of medical diagnosis have been passed on to consumers in lower hospital fees or insurance rates.
Actually, no. Sam Stone’s post was to predictions made in 2006 about the next 8 years, made by extrapolating historical trends. I’d be very interested in historical data about how accurate the BLS has been in the past and how well their predictions in say, 1982 were about the job market in 1988. Or even how accurate their 2006 predictions have been for 2008? How’s that “Securities, commodity contracts, and other financial investments and related activities” sector doing compared to their prediction?
My point is that transformational change is happening, and this time it’s happening in a way that is not creating many new jobs in this country. The thing that is most telling about that list is how the jobs listed as “Most rapidly declining” had, in general, declined significantly prior to the period covered by the chart.
Money never goes “down a rathole”. It simply changes hands. What we are seeing at the moment is a disproportionate shift of this money. In simple terms, a few people are much richer, and many people are a bit poorer. The way out of the current economic mess is to get the rich to spend their money.
As I said, he might not. He might instead spend the money. I’m not sure if you know many business owners, but there’s no shortage of them who could readily use some more employees - if only they could afford to pay them.
Companies don’t need improved cash positions unless they intend to spend said cash. Once they start spending it, the economy will correct itself.
It didn’t go directly to new jobs, but it certainly went to keeping some existing ones, which in turn, will keep others.
It seems to me some people just have an apocalyptic view of the world and nothing will change their mind. Yes, the world is ending in 2012 and the fact that it has not ended the hundreds of times it was predicted in the past mean nothing. This time it is really ending.
If you are all set to be miserable nothing can stop you – and least of all good news. Oh well. Enjoy your misery as much as we enjoy our belief that there are better times ahead.
I go to trade shows, and there is usually a pavilion where I can find outsourcing partners. If I have a design for an electronic product, I can meet with manufacturers who will be able to supply me with cost estimates in a week, and a shipping container full of the product in a month or so. I’ll hire people in the US to market it, but you bet the manufacturing will be outsourced. Look at any electronic device around you. What percentage was made in the US?
As I said in the OP, if it can be automated, it will be. If it can’t be automated, but can be outsourced, it will be. Just curious, what products are you ordering from America? I know the US furniture industry is still centered in Cherry Point, NC. But I believe that has more to do with the bulk and relative fragility of the product than any desire to remain in the US.
Which are?
Right. Lots of people currently work at McDonalds (which has been lobbying hard for an exemption to minimum wage laws ever since they were enacted). As I mentioned in the OP, they are even outsourcing the drive-through speaker. As you know, the secret of their success has been their ability to turn food into, as much as possible, an assembly line. If they were able to replace the person on a speaker with a voice-response system or touch screen, they would. They have the machine mentioned in the OP to make drinks for the drive-through. They have an automatic fry maker. When, not if, they are able to completely automate food production, they will do so. It will improve consistency and sanitary standards, but most importantly will reduce head-count. Do you have any reason to believe that McDonalds will refrain from further automation, given their history of doing so?
You haven’t answered the question at all. Auto manufacturing employs - and this is a very, very generous estimate - two million Americans. That wouldn’t even account for the population growth since 2000, much less the displacement of the tens of millions of jobs that have been eliminated in the last century in agriculture, phone switching, secretarial work, and a thousand other jobs. You say lost jobs aren’t replaced. **Well, why isn’t the unemployment rate 90%? ** The automobile industry does not cut it as an explanation - that industry doesn’t employ enough people to account for all those jobs.
The idea that all manufacturing is being outsourced in preposterous; my job involves visiting manufacturing companies every week, and I can tell you there’s lots of them out there, many making items that did not exist ten, twenty, or thirty
And this (the rich are getting richer) is true in the U.S. (and some other places) - but the global middle class is quickly expanding. And its hard to see how, at a population level - that is a bad thing.
Of course, for someone whose factory is closing here in the U.S. today, who cares about global population and that someone in India can now afford a car when he couldn’t before.
I already posted that link, and some of the data from it. He ignored it.
See, any evidence you can give him is by its nature ‘historical’. Therefore, he won’t accept it. He demands that we ignore all evidence of the past and predict for him now exactly where every new job will be created in the future, or else he will continue to believe that suddenly and miraculously everything we know about how the economy works will somehow change and new jobs will no longer be created.
He believes this because he wants to believe it, not because he has a shred of evidence that this is the case. Certainly none that he’s presented in this thread.
This isn’t a debate - it’s witnessing. Facts are not welcome here.
Well…that’s a shame then because now that means your entire post doesn’t really make any sense.
Guess what. Without outsourcing, you would likely not have enough capital to set up a business manufacturing your product idea. And why do the domestic jobs selling and marketing your product somehow not count as real jobs? I once worked for a company that sold footwear. They had several thousand employees in the USA. None of the footwear was made here.
Hopefully they will, and society can enjoy all the benefits of an improved standard of living, that freeing up workers to do something else, will bring.
But he also spends up big on many things that Joe Average Income does not, creating jobs in those industries.
I’m going slightly off-topic, but I’d love to see this trend continue. Forget about giving aid to the 3rd world, let’s give them jobs instead. Makes sense to me! Sure, the western world will need to take a mild hit in their standard of living (or see a slowing of its steady increase), but the free-er the trade, the better for everyone.
They’ll get their money by moving to a new job.
This might help a bit if you have a better understanding of the economic concept of consumers having unlimited wants (part of the economic problem). It basically states that consumers will always find something to spend their money on - you can’t fully satisfy them.
I’ll try to give a quick, simple example.
Let’s imagine you, myself and Voyager all get shipwrecked on and island. There’s a stream of fresh water, and the tall trees provide some basic shelter, so our immediate want is food. Working together, and spending all day doing it, we are able to find a few crabs for food, and climb some of the tall trees to get some fruit.
But soon Voyager invents a great fishing net that bags an entire day’s catch in half an hour, and you invent a long stick with a sharp end that can easily detach fruit from tall trees. Do you think we are all now going to sit around doing nothing for the rest of the day? Of course not, pretty soon, we’ll start wanting other things: A better shelter, a more efficient method of creating fire, some clothing weaved from island materials… the satisfying of one want simply creates/realises another. This is the concept of unlimited wants in play. Once one want is filled, another is created/realised.
This is exactly what happens in free market economies. As long as you encourage people to spend their money (ie, pursue other wants), new jobs will be created.
You switch to an Australian-style university system where being from a poor family is not a barrier to entering university… but that’s for another thread
The serious answer to your question is that, well ok, the jobs simply won’t get filled. All this means is that the consumers who were going to spend their money on the services that were going to be provided by these tech jobs (but now don’t exist because there’s no one to fill them) will now… you guessed… want something else.
Employers will now divert those wages to some other job, or filling some other expense.
As long as everyone continues to spend their money, our jobs are safe.
But I don’t predict the economy will go all doom-and-gloom, meaning parents can no longer send their kids to College in the US.
More food for thought:
Let’s assume that for everyone who goes to work today, the collective wage bill is $1 billion.
The question is… did business pull in $1 billion today from consumer spending?
They did?
Excellent… we all get paid!
Let’s keep the money moving, folks. Let’s keep it moving…
No, you have been given plenty of answers, not only by me but by people who know quite a bit about how these things work, like Sam Stone, but you just discount it all. Only replies which fit into your gloomy vision count for you. Your vision is only shared by people who know little or nothing about the economy. You will not find anyone with a good education in economic affairs say such things. You will not hear any university professors say such things. Your analysis is extremely simplistic but you refuse to take anything which does not fit your thesis into account.
This is very true and many people need to learn this. The problem is that rich countries have conflicting interests and have schizophrenic policies. On the one hand they have protectionist policies which harm poor countries and on the other hand they have aid to poor countries (which is often just a way to sell them stuff). It would be MUCH better if those countries were allowed to make a living by selling us whatever they can produce. Aid just perpetuates their dependency on it. Jobs is what they need.
Could I trouble you for a cite for this? My researches, superficial as they may be, lead me to believe that the first minimum wage laws in the United States were enacted in 1938, whereas, Mcdonalds has only existed since 1940 in any form whatsoever, and arguably didn’t exist in its current form before 1955 (when Ray Kroc bought a franchise to open the ninth store, and began his aggressive expansion), or possibly even 1965 (when the company went public).
