Hacker News Reader

Comment by pm90 | Hacker News Reader

> We don’t need to look to Rome for that. It’s happened a dozen times in the United States. This isn’t a new scenario.

I think you're being too optimistic. The only time I can think of where the US made the switch successfully was when creating entirely new job sectors. e.g. from Agriculture to Industry meant there were similar numbers of jobs in Industry, and then to the Services. But Automation seems to be a dead end: one worker is so productive he/she can manage an entire fleet of autonomous trucks (e.g.)! So there will most certainly be a lot of people losing their jobs and the kind of jobs opening up for them... don't seem to be many.

View on HN

A few decades ago the most common job title in the USA was secretary. It certainly isn't anymore. Now it's truck driver.

Secretary went away (and wasn't simply replaced with a new title like admin assistant) because of IT. We don't have a secretary shaped hold in the economy. They mostly got other jobs, or retired.

Secretary didn't go away. Hot-type printing is a better example. Look at how healthy and well-performing the economy is doing. Real wages stagnating for almost fifty years, speculation enriching the gamblers. Millions of people have already given up finding work. Whole communities have become drug-infested hellholes. America is falling apart. Visit these towns where industry is obsolete or shipped abroad. Look at that, and then say "yep, accelerating this process will be wonderful".

> America is falling apart. Visit these towns where industry is obsolete or shipped abroad. Look at that, and then say "yep, accelerating this process will be wonderful".

Genuine question (not trying to flamebait): why are these failing communities "America" any more than the metro regions are booming like crazy and creating prosperity for so many Americans? Again, I'm not blaming them for their predicament, but I've met many Americans who grew up in rural areas but migrated to other places to seek work. Why should the rest of us be heavily taxed and regulated just to preserve these anachronistic, unproductive communities?

> why are these failing communities "America" any more than the metro regions are

They aren't. They do represent more of the population and land area. Also many cities, probably most, are awful. Memphis, TN or Dayton, OH are much more representative of the nation then New York or San Francisco.

> Why should the rest of us be heavily taxed and regulated just to preserve these anachronistic, unproductive communities?

That really hasn't been a question in this discussion. The international order is built on nation-states. Whether you like it or not, the nation implies collective responsibility. This was the "fraternité" part of the French revolution, for example. Your remarks reflect the prevailing liberal sentiments that we are all just individuals. If we are these atomic subjects, why should we be obligated to help some random other atoms? This is one of the reasons why liberal democracies are failing. The left and establishment have no good response to this. The alt-right has pushed people to revive ethnic (Richard Spencer) or civic (Steve Bannon) nationalism.

Perhaps I didn't phrase my question correctly. I wasn't advocating abandoning middle and rural America; my concern is that we shouldn't be pouring money (in the form of tax incentives and debt that hides the true cost of rural living) into sustaining rural America as it is now. I am certainly all for investing in retraining programs; hell perhaps even having a rural specific health insurance system.

But increasing tariffs to protect coal miners? Killing solar and renewables for the sake of those communities? That is not a tradeoff I want to make.

You do make a good point about why liberal democracies seem to be in crisis though. I'm kind of embarrassed to say that I too was influenced very strongly by libertarian beliefs (specifically Rand's system of less Government) in most of my youth and only recently have started understanding how poisonous and selfish that can be when taken to its extremes.

> I am certainly all for investing in retraining programs; hell perhaps even having a rural specific health insurance system.

> But increasing tariffs to protect coal miners? Killing solar and renewables for the sake of those communities? That is not a tradeoff I want to make.

What you've said in general makes sense. I'm only responding to point out that the question isn't just rural people and coal miners. Cities, suburbs, and towns are also affected. A few economic centers are doing well while _everywhere else_ is not.

Automation and the changing economy threaten the vast majority of Americans. Technical jobs will increasingly become critical, and tech workers can organize together to gain significant influence. If we don't, it will be up to the "masters of the universe" – Zuckerberg, et al. This industry is transforming politics, society, and culture. My hope is that we technicians take our role seriously.

The truck driver thing is not true: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/no-truck-driver-isnt-the-m...

That was literally the argument people made about electricity, tractors, steam engines, etc.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com