OT: future of jobs or lack thereof

[Hangtime84]

Luckily for me, the world will still need good bartenders for a long time!

You don't think a machine will replace bartenders like soda dispensers.

Only the upscale places will use them. But we are a long way off of that.

That's the obvious answer, and certainly a large percentage of drinkers would be OK buying a pint from a machine at a game, but my career is about 2% pouring-a-pint and 98% tending a bar. Star Wars and Star Trek have space bars! My niche will survive!!

I think with the more automation more humanistic our jobs will become. It's all about "tending the herd" or problem-solving. Not doing the same repetitive tasks over.

[dice]

If it ever gets to that point universal basic income will be a thing.

UBI will come regardless. in america it will be after all other options have been exhausted and countless millions of people have unnecessarily suffered

[League Circles]

I'm undisciplined with regards to spending, saving and investing myself, but nonetheless I'd highly, highly recommend to everyone to save and invest as much as you can. You are likely to live decades longer than you think, and quite likely to be economically unproductive for the vast majority of it. Nothing from the economic experience of the last couple generations should really guide us.

Most of us just burn through money on poor choices, myself included. It will be a catastrophe for us and is likely to result in desperation on wide scales.

It's an interesting question, do you spend for when you are in your best health and can enjoy it, or do you want to have a safer landing when you are elderly rather than relying on a system which will likely be questionable?

I'm fortunate enough that my wife and I both have high level jobs and aren't choosing between those two outcomes, but for many people that really becomes a choice. I think we save about 30% of our net income every year, but I get that isn't possible for many people.

I don't think it's a safe assumption that one's health and ability to enjoy spending money will meaningfully decrease in the future. As you alluded to, it's very plausible that we may live hundreds of years or indefinitely. And it's also plausible that having real capital will be the only way to survive in such a world, at least during a transition period of indeterminate length.

My goal is to save and invest enough such that I can live relatively comfortably off of the interest of my wealth invested as conservatively as possible. Not that I plan to necessarily eventually be ultra conservative with investments, but if society changes to the point where doing so is prudent, I want to be able to do so effectively and live off of it indefinitely to the extent anyone could (to the extent that there are stable investments paying positive dividends or interest).

So basically imagine being 100% invested in treasury bonds, and making perhaps 0.5% - 3% return. As such, my goal is to amass something in the range of 3 - 20 million dollars in today's money. IF I continue to increase my earnings, am way more prudent than I have been in life with spending, invest aggressively and successfully for the next 30-40 years til I "retire", I might have an out side shot at the very low end of that range.

It's a goal not an expectation, but I don't plan to stop until:

1. Society's future structure becomes much more clear

Or

2. I physically or emotionally cannot handle working anymore

Or

3. Society doesn't need me anymore (I have no opportunities left)

I'd suggest everyone get good at all sorts of indoor and outdoor gardening too. Cause while I think we won't have to work anymore within the next few decades, I do think food, especially desirable foods like fruits and vegetables, will be hard to come by. I can easily imagine a world where we all have robot butlers and flying cars but basically all have to eat pooridge mush every day.

I just want to be ready for the uncertain future to the extent I can for as long as a I can. But like I said, I talk a good game. My habits are just like most of us. It just concerns me more than it does most people.

[League Circles]

If it ever gets to that point universal basic income will be a thing.

UBI will come regardless. in america it will be after all other options have been exhausted and countless millions of people have unnecessarily suffered

I think universal basic rations will be, and should be, more likely to come about than universal basic income. To take the profit margins out of our basic necessities of food, water and shelter. I think there will be, and should be, major state run industries for these.

People generally spend money very unwisely on an individual level, even if they're smart. UBI would exacerbate that problem and cause excessive inflation IMO.

[League Circles]

You don't think a machine will replace bartenders like soda dispensers.

Only the upscale places will use them. But we are a long way off of that.

That's the obvious answer, and certainly a large percentage of drinkers would be OK buying a pint from a machine at a game, but my career is about 2% pouring-a-pint and 98% tending a bar. Star Wars and Star Trek have space bars! My niche will survive!!

I think with the more automation more humanistic our jobs will become. It's all about "tending the herd" or problem-solving. Not doing the same repetitive tasks over.

Tending bar is about as humanistic and "tending the herd" as you can get IMO.

[League Circles]

On a very vaguely related note, I am three episodes into Westworld. My fellow futurist - minded friend said I'd love it. Just OK so far IMO. Does it get awesome?

[dice]

I'm undisciplined with regards to spending, saving and investing myself, but nonetheless I'd highly, highly recommend to everyone to save and invest as much as you can. You are likely to live decades longer than you think, and quite likely to be economically unproductive for the vast majority of it. Nothing from the economic experience of the last couple generations should really guide us.

Most of us just burn through money on poor choices, myself included. It will be a catastrophe for us and is likely to result in desperation on wide scales.

It's an interesting question, do you spend for when you are in your best health and can enjoy it, or do you want to have a safer landing when you are elderly rather than relying on a system which will likely be questionable?

I'm fortunate enough that my wife and I both have high level jobs and aren't choosing between those two outcomes, but for many people that really becomes a choice. I think we save about 30% of our net income every year, but I get that isn't possible for many people.

i don't think it's ever a bad idea to live modestly. not only from a financial perspective but a psychological one as well. the last thing you ever want to have to do is reduce your standard of living

i made a lot of money when the market crashed in '08. i told nobody, gave a chunk to charity (wish i had it back!) and spent nothing on material stuff like clothes or a new car. it's a good thing, because i ended up losing a lot of that money. now i'm looking for the next in what might be a long line of crappy jobs

[dice]

If it ever gets to that point universal basic income will be a thing.

UBI will come regardless. in america it will be after all other options have been exhausted and countless millions of people have unnecessarily suffered

I think universal basic rations will be, and should be, more likely to come about than universal basic income. To take the profit margins out of our basic necessities of food, water and shelter. I think there will be, and should be, major state run industries for these.

People generally spend money very unwisely on an individual level, even if they're smart. UBI would exacerbate that problem and cause excessive inflation IMO.

the UBI should be tied to GDP and (obviously) phased in. market forces would create an equilibrium. and perhaps, as you say, there should be a basic necessities option provided by the government en lieu of cash (housing, food). but obviously those things wouldn't be necessary for those who are doing OK financially. maybe if someone squanders their cash they can get an advance on their next distribution, but only in the form of government-provided basic necessities

[League Circles]

UBI will come regardless. in america it will be after all other options have been exhausted and countless millions of people have unnecessarily suffered

I think universal basic rations will be, and should be, more likely to come about than universal basic income. To take the profit margins out of our basic necessities of food, water and shelter. I think there will be, and should be, major state run industries for these.

People generally spend money very unwisely on an individual level, even if they're smart. UBI would exacerbate that problem and cause excessive inflation IMO.

the UBI should be tied to GDP and (obviously) phased in. market forces would create an equilibrium. and perhaps, as you say, there should be a basic necessities option provided by the government en lieu of cash (housing, food). but obviously those things wouldn't be necessary for those who are doing OK financially. maybe if someone squanders their cash they can get an advance on their next distribution, but only in the form of government-provided basic necessities

I think GDP is to economics what points per game is to bball stats, or worse frankly. It's a nonsense measure that tricks society into confusing activity with productivity.

If you could get free food, shelter, clothing of adequate quality, I don't know why anyone would work all day. Work sucks for 99% of people.

[League Circles]

UBI will come regardless. in america it will be after all other options have been exhausted and countless millions of people have unnecessarily suffered

I think universal basic rations will be, and should be, more likely to come about than universal basic income. To take the profit margins out of our basic necessities of food, water and shelter. I think there will be, and should be, major state run industries for these.

People generally spend money very unwisely on an individual level, even if they're smart. UBI would exacerbate that problem and cause excessive inflation IMO.

the UBI should be tied to GDP and (obviously) phased in. market forces would create an equilibrium. and perhaps, as you say, there should be a basic necessities option provided by the government en lieu of cash (housing, food). but obviously those things wouldn't be necessary for those who are doing OK financially. maybe if someone squanders their cash they can get an advance on their next distribution, but only in the form of government-provided basic necessities

Why even give them the opportunity to squander the cash wasting it on the profit margins of those who sell garbage? Why not just give them what they actually need and cannot squander, without profit margins?

[dougthonus]

I don't think it's a safe assumption that one's health and ability to enjoy spending money will meaningfully decrease in the future. As you alluded to, it's very plausible that we may live hundreds of years or indefinitely. And it's also plausible that having real capital will be the only way to survive in such a world, at least during a transition period of indeterminate length.

Yeah, I think for my generation (42 presently), it's pretty unlikely we will get there before it is too late for me.

My goal is to save and invest enough such that I can live relatively comfortably off of the interest of my wealth invested as conservatively as possible. Not that I plan to necessarily eventually be ultra conservative with investments, but if society changes to the point where doing so is prudent, I want to be able to do so effectively and live off of it indefinitely to the extent anyone could (to the extent that there are stable investments paying positive dividends or interest).

I have the same goal.

So basically imagine being 100% invested in treasury bonds, and making perhaps 0.5% - 3% return. As such, my goal is to amass something in the range of 3 - 20 million dollars in today's money. IF I continue to increase my earnings, am way more prudent than I have been in life with spending, invest aggressively and successfully for the next 30-40 years til I "retire", I might have an out side shot at the very low end of that range.

More or less the same goal. You have to think of the safe return after subtracting out inflation so that you are putting enough back in principle every year to keep the return stable. I think ~10 million or so in today's dollars is probably about what I would need for that to happen.

[League Circles]

I don't think it's a safe assumption that one's health and ability to enjoy spending money will meaningfully decrease in the future. As you alluded to, it's very plausible that we may live hundreds of years or indefinitely. And it's also plausible that having real capital will be the only way to survive in such a world, at least during a transition period of indeterminate length.

Yeah, I think for my generation (42 presently), it's pretty unlikely we will get there before it is too late for me.

My goal is to save and invest enough such that I can live relatively comfortably off of the interest of my wealth invested as conservatively as possible. Not that I plan to necessarily eventually be ultra conservative with investments, but if society changes to the point where doing so is prudent, I want to be able to do so effectively and live off of it indefinitely to the extent anyone could (to the extent that there are stable investments paying positive dividends or interest).

I have the same goal.

So basically imagine being 100% invested in treasury bonds, and making perhaps 0.5% - 3% return. As such, my goal is to amass something in the range of 3 - 20 million dollars in today's money. IF I continue to increase my earnings, am way more prudent than I have been in life with spending, invest aggressively and successfully for the next 30-40 years til I "retire", I might have an out side shot at the very low end of that range.

More or less the same goal. You have to think of the safe return after subtracting out inflation so that you are putting enough back in principle every year to keep the return stable. I think ~10 million or so in today's dollars is probably about what I would need for that to happen.

Regarding the inflation impact, while I'm very mindful of it in general, I believe that in the scenario I'm painting, there would likely be deflation. I find it highly likely that most people will essentially have no money and be unable to bid up the prices of things. But yes your point stands, I was just kind of already factoring it in im a sense.

[Jahensle]

This is some external locus of control type thinking. If you are complacent, it is not unlikely that your skillset will become outdated and/or replaced. Grow, learn, adapt...like humans did back in the day before the advent of modern civ. Own your destiny and stop blaming the advancement of society.

[dougthonus]

i don't think it's ever a bad idea to live modestly. not only from a financial perspective but a psychological one as well. the last thing you ever want to have to do is reduce your standard of living

i made a lot of money when the market crashed in '08. i told nobody, gave a chunk to charity (wish i had it back!) and spent nothing on material stuff like clothes or a new car. it's a good thing, because i ended up losing a lot of that money. now i'm looking for the next in what might be a long line of crappy jobs

I think generating as much enjoyment out of life that you can is my goal. Do you get more enjoyment by doing stuff now with money or later with money is the question?

So you could live very modestly and still enjoy life a ton. I don't think money = happiness, but to the extent there are some things you can purchase to enhance that be it necessities like food/housing or experiences like vacations or material possessions like nice cars then you prioritize whether its good to have those now or later.

I'd hate to not have food/housing at 80 to have a nice car now. However, I might rather have a nice vacation now than a bank account that's large at 80 and nothing left that I can spend it on to improve my life then.

[dougthonus]

Regarding the inflation impact, while I'm very mindful of it in general, I believe that in the scenario I'm painting, there would likely be deflation. I find it highly likely that most people will essentially have no money and be unable to bid up the prices of things. But yes your point stands, I was just kind of already factoring it in im a sense.

Yeah, I think the math still holds the same if you are subtracting a negative number, but of course the problem also becomes in a deflationary environment there is no easy way to make money with capital either.

[League Circles]

i don't think it's ever a bad idea to live modestly. not only from a financial perspective but a psychological one as well. the last thing you ever want to have to do is reduce your standard of living

i made a lot of money when the market crashed in '08. i told nobody, gave a chunk to charity (wish i had it back!) and spent nothing on material stuff like clothes or a new car. it's a good thing, because i ended up losing a lot of that money. now i'm looking for the next in what might be a long line of crappy jobs

I think generating as much enjoyment out of life that you can is my goal. Do you get more enjoyment by doing stuff now with money or later with money is the question?

So you could live very modestly and still enjoy life a ton. I don't think money = happiness, but to the extent there are some things you can purchase to enhance that be it necessities like food/housing or experiences like vacations or material possessions like nice cars then you prioritize whether its good to have those now or later.

I'd hate to not have food/housing at 80 to have a nice car now. However, I might rather have a nice vacation now than a bank account that's large at 80 and nothing left that I can spend it on to improve my life then.

One thing that can reasonably differentiate people is that some prioritize maximizing enjoyment, while others such as myself theoretically prefer to minimize suffering, at least long term.

[PaKii94]

I'm fine with the automation/robotics takeover. It'll push towards a overall smarter society which can focus on more specialized things. People waste away their lives working mundane jobs. This was inevitable

I agree but I also think the advancement of technology will cause society to be even more mundane.

Basically every industry can be automated. Maybe not all of them in 2018, but it could down the line. The middle class to lower class economy sector will feel it the most in a few years.

Oh yeah there definitely will be turmoil as jobs become too specific so the manual laborer can't do much but the upcoming generations are prepped for it I think. Kids are being taught coding in elementary school! I am 24 and didn't start until middle of high school. The generation before me didn't start until college and even then it was a niche.

These upcoming people in the workforce now instead of being 60% manual labor & 40% skilled labor (idk what the breakdown is don't quote me. I just put random numbers out)will becoming closer to 90% skilled labor which should help society in the long run

[dougthonus]

One thing that can reasonably differentiate people is that some prioritize maximizing enjoyment, while others such as myself theoretically prefer to minimize suffering, at least long term.

I would also prioritize minimizing suffering, though I think I have likely achieved this already. There comes a point to where you are trying to minimize your kids suffering.

[dougthonus]

These upcoming people in the workforce now instead of being 60% manual labor & 40% skilled labor (idk what the breakdown is don't quote me. I just put random numbers out)will becoming closer to 90% skilled labor which should help society in the long run

Are there enough skilled labor jobs to support that shift?

[PaKii94]

These upcoming people in the workforce now instead of being 60% manual labor & 40% skilled labor (idk what the breakdown is don't quote me. I just put random numbers out)will becoming closer to 90% skilled labor which should help society in the long run

Are there enough skilled labor jobs to support that shift?

See I think eventually there will be and then even farther future, probably not but at that point humanity is approaching utopia where the standard of living is high enough that not everyone needs to 'work' as we know it. Our 'work' would be more for natural human curiosity vs making money to reach a minimum standard of living.

How much do you really need to live a 'decent' life (as you said before, not suffering)? I would say for me, I need 1) safe/clean/warm place to sleep, 2) internet connection + access point (computer/phone), 3) nourishment outside of those things, everything else is a luxury in life. With more and more automation, I feel like the cost of those things will continue to come down until it's negligible (obviously still far future and not our lifetimes...probably).

Some people are 'living to work', work doesn't provide enough to become a surplus so people are living paycheck to paycheck and surviving... this is slowly changing to 'working to live', you do the work because it gives you self-fulfillment.

Right now the problem is inverted. More and more jobs will be 'skilled' but the current workforce is more 'manual'. Immigrants won't be the ones taking jobs, automation will.