Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Valid questions.  But the manufacturing jobs in question aren't shop/factory-floor jobs.  They're things like engineering, marketing, etc. that are traditionally considered degree-holder jobs.

Old-time manufacturing provided lots of jobs for halfwits and morons.  Now now so much.  We're still gonna have the moron problem.

We could solve this problem by attracting the best and brightest from other countries to fill these jobs and . . . . aw shit, never mind.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
21 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Valid questions.  But the manufacturing jobs in question aren't shop/factory-floor jobs.  They're things like engineering, marketing, etc. that are traditionally considered degree-holder jobs.

Robots/automation may never replace skilled workers entirely, but they've already replaced a lot of unskilled jobs in manufacturing.

Old-time manufacturing provided lots of jobs for halfwits and morons.  Now now so much.  We're still gonna have the moron problem.

 

One thing to keep in mind is how the government classifies this kind of stuff when talking about data and understanding the difference between Industry Classification vs. Occupational Category. In other words, where people work vs. what people do.

As you correctly point out, you can work in the manufacturing sector, but have an occupation in marketing, building maintenance, engineering, accounting, etc., and never see a factory floor. The kind of factory jobs most people think about in that industry, however, are production occupations (i.e., making stuff), and each of those occupations obviously requires different skill sets, education, and training.

I know that sounds pedantic, or whatever, but that distinction really matters from the perspective of tallying official job counts and whatnot for data collection.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
47 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Engineering jobs. Most postings for skilled trades are looking for trade school degrees or certifications.

Yeah, I was thinking more of floor/operating machinery positions. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Yeah, I was thinking more of floor/operating machinery positions. 

Automation means fewer of those positions. Depending on the company and industry, some prefer people with degrees for those jobs. That's my experience from almost 15 years of working in operations for various companies.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, bolverk said:

 

One thing to keep in mind is how the government classifies this kind of stuff when talking about data and understanding the difference between Industry Classification vs. Occupational Category. In other words, where people work vs. what people do.

As you correctly point out, you can work in the manufacturing sector, but have an occupation in marketing, building maintenance, engineering, accounting, etc., and never see a factory floor. The kind of factory jobs most people think about in that industry, however, are production occupations (i.e., making stuff), and each of those occupations obviously requires different skill sets, education, and training.

I know that sounds pedantic, or whatever, but that distinction really matters from the perspective of tallying official job counts and whatnot for data collection.

My wife works for a large American manufacturer and is a licensed interior designer. She has never stepped foot inside one of her company’s factories.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Automation means fewer of those positions. Depending on the company and industry, some prefer people with degrees for those jobs. That's my experience from almost 15 years of working in operations for various companies.

I've shared this before, but I have a friend who does some pretty basic and rote factory floor work at a Peterbilt plant. He essentially screws on 9 industrial screws (I could be exagerating, maybe its 15, but it's not much work) to the chasis or something as it hits his part of the line, does like 15 trucks a night (works the 3rd shift I think which is nights) and between the Union negotiated wages, perks and bennies, OT and 3rd shift stuff makes more than most pediatricians and state attorneys. It's a racket. Soooo....there is that extreme as well, I guess, is my point.

But good for him, he just reupholstered his seats on his 2 year old boat. Must be nice.

Edited by Vegas64
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

I've shared this before, but I have a friend who does some pretty basic and rote factory floor work at a Peterbilt plant. He essentially screws on 9 industrial screws (I could be exagerating, maybe its 15, but it's not much work) to the chasis or something as it hits his part of the line, does like 15 trucks a night (works the 3rd shift I think which is nights) and between the Union negotiated wages, perks and bennies, OT and 3rd shift stuff makes more than most pediatricians and state attorneys. It's a racket. Soooo....there is that extreme as well, I guess, is my point.

But good for him, he just reupholstered his seats on his 2 year old boat. Must be nice.

I'm union. I make probably 1.5 times or so more than I'd make if I wasn't. I wouldn't expect most of the theoretical newly created manufacturing jobs to be union. That's the part that actually made them good, middle class jobs. Maybe the electricians will be IBEW.

Edited by Schulz2.0
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Tim Apple scared of Dotard

 

d368ba90-500c-4175-bd61-e1b6d7e495b9.thumb.png.e1205d0672bfa9f60b74442557f060f4.png

We decided to upgrade to the 16 Pro this past weekend instead of waiting for the newest one in September. I dropped my old one so many times I could basically see some of the components in the back of the phone from it breaking. I didn’t want to be left with a broke phone along with new phones costing way more in a few months

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

I'm union. I make probably 1.5 times or so more than I'd make if I wasn't. I wouldn't expect most of the theoretical newly created manufacturing jobs to be union. That's the part that actually made them good, middle class jobs. Maybe the electricians will be IBEW.

Right, but the point being that "bringing back manufacturing jobs" is going to be expensive relative to the value you get, if you are trying to help humans have a middle class job (versus automation and/or paying a very low wage that is competitive globally and for the skill level e.g. screwing in screws).

Edited by Vegas64
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
12 hours ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah. A 30% tax on tons of imported goods. Awesome.

And that is during the 90 day "pause"

What are we supposed to accomplish in this pause? Is that when businesses are going to invest billions in US manufacturing to try to avoid the tariffs that are totally coming back in 90 days you guys!

The only thing the pause seeks to accomplish is the stupid American public forgetting what this tariff thing was all about which will help dotard paint himself as an economic hero when he proclaims the return to the status quo ante. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Robots/automation may never replace skilled workers entirely, but they've already replaced a lot of unskilled jobs in manufacturing.

Old-time manufacturing provided lots of jobs for halfwits and morons.  Now now so much.  We're still gonna have the moron problem.

The first sentence is key.  To the extent manufacturing is "coming back" to America, it's not going to bring many unskilled jobs with it.  You don't get a good job at the chip fab with an 8th grade education.

And the second sentence is the much bigger picture.  Historically, all human societies have had plenty of work for "unskilled" type people.  And I mean, actual work.  First, societies were largely agrarian, and much of farm labor (as that labor existed in the pre-large scale mechanized farming era) could be done by unskilled/uneducated folks.  You don't need a high IQ and fancy learning to plow fields, thresh grain, gather eggs, etc.  Sure, you didn't make much or have much, but it was a living.  Then, as societies transitioned to early industrial, it was similar -- most manufacturing jobs didn't require high intelligence or lots of training.

The US is no longer an agrarian society.

It is also no longer an unskilled labor-heavy manufacturing society.

Those ships have SAILED, and they aren't EVER coming back.  That's true for most such societies (western Europe, Canada, Japan, South Korea, etc. etc.).  

So the question is, now that many countries have economically moved beyond having lots of jobs for unskilled types....what do we do with our unskilled types?  Yes, there will always be a real number of such jobs (putting on a roof in the summer sun, cleaning out stalls at the dairy farm, all that stuff), but not nearly as many jobs as there are unskilled people to fill them.  And, we can't just tell that guy with a 100 IQ  (or lower -- remember, 100 is the MEDIAN IQ - half of people are below that, as a matter of statistics) "learn to code!  Or be a stockbroker!  Get a degree in engineering!"  He's not cut out for those things.  He will fail.  Just like if you'd told Brisket "if you want to make millions, learn to play football like VY!"  It wasn't ever going to happen -- I don't have the tools in me.

So, what does that guy do?  What do economically advanced societies do with the 50% of their population with an IQ of 100 or below?  We haven't even come close to working up a well thought-out answer to that question.  And until we do, we're flailing, faking it, and getting it very wrong.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

What do economically advanced societies do with the 50% of their population with an IQ of 100 or below?

A small part of that segment can always go an alternative route:

 

download.png.f0f757d7a299d1631bbd8e508ec02354.png

  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

A small part of that segment can always go an alternative route:

 

download.png.f0f757d7a299d1631bbd8e508ec02354.png

Did you miss the proposed legislation to ban porn?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I stopped reading here.  Are y'all hiring?

They are hiring 20 operators. They stopped accepting applications last night at midnight.

Posted
1 hour ago, Schulz2.0 said:

I'm union. I make probably 1.5 times or so more than I'd make if I wasn't. I wouldn't expect most of the theoretical newly created manufacturing jobs to be union. That's the part that actually made them good, middle class jobs. Maybe the electricians will be IBEW.

In my opinion one of the most important things we could do to improve the health of the US economy (and ultimately corporate America by improving and streamlining price discovery the labor market) is for national policy to encourage most companies and businesses to organize.
Most non-management workers should be members of a collective bargaining entity, working on an hourly rate. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, royiv said:

Did you miss the proposed legislation to ban porn?

Not porn, rather "Free expressionism" which will be tastefully done.  Ala the current First Whore, Melanie, showing her gash all those years ago.

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In my opinion one of the most important things we could do to improve the health of the US economy (and ultimately corporate America by improving and streamlining price discovery the labor market) is for national policy to encourage most companies and businesses to organize.
Most non-management workers should be members of a collective bargaining entity, working on an hourly rate. 

Bozo, seen here as I WISH he actually looked:

sally1979.jpg

  • Haha 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

The first sentence is key.  To the extent manufacturing is "coming back" to America, it's not going to bring many unskilled jobs with it.  You don't get a good job at the chip fab with an 8th grade education.

And the second sentence is the much bigger picture.  Historically, all human societies have had plenty of work for "unskilled" type people.  And I mean, actual work.  First, societies were largely agrarian, and much of farm labor (as that labor existed in the pre-large scale mechanized farming era) could be done by unskilled/uneducated folks.  You don't need a high IQ and fancy learning to plow fields, thresh grain, gather eggs, etc.  Sure, you didn't make much or have much, but it was a living.  Then, as societies transitioned to early industrial, it was similar -- most manufacturing jobs didn't require high intelligence or lots of training.

The US is no longer an agrarian society.

It is also no longer an unskilled labor-heavy manufacturing society.

Those ships have SAILED, and they aren't EVER coming back.  That's true for most such societies (western Europe, Canada, Japan, South Korea, etc. etc.).  

So the question is, now that many countries have economically moved beyond having lots of jobs for unskilled types....what do we do with our unskilled types?  Yes, there will always be a real number of such jobs (putting on a roof in the summer sun, cleaning out stalls at the dairy farm, all that stuff), but not nearly as many jobs as there are unskilled people to fill them.  And, we can't just tell that guy with a 100 IQ  (or lower -- remember, 100 is the MEDIAN IQ - half of people are below that, as a matter of statistics) "learn to code!  Or be a stockbroker!  Get a degree in engineering!"  He's not cut out for those things.  He will fail.  Just like if you'd told Brisket "if you want to make millions, learn to play football like VY!"  It wasn't ever going to happen -- I don't have the tools in me.

So, what does that guy do?  What do economically advanced societies do with the 50% of their population with an IQ of 100 or below?  We haven't even come close to working up a well thought-out answer to that question.  And until we do, we're flailing, faking it, and getting it very wrong.

I suspect it's a blindspot for many of us, but what you described as being a virtue of agrarian society (i.e. being unskilled and not very smart, but being able to lift things or carry things or just do things physically) is very ableist. And I know that might make me sound namby-pamby around here, but ableism is a thing and the move of society to use your brains and skills versus just having two working legs or otherwise not being disabled in some way, was very equalizing for a lot of people.

It shouldn't be lost that while, you are right, the future of AI and devaluing of skills is a risk for all, it's the differently abled who are hurt the most.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In my opinion one of the most important things we could do to improve the health of the US economy (and ultimately corporate America by improving and streamlining price discovery the labor market) is for national policy to encourage most companies and businesses to organize.
Most non-management workers should be members of a collective bargaining entity, working on an hourly rate. 

Is the thinking, if consumer prices have to go up regardless (e.g. tariffs or profiteering or inflation or whatever else comes up), might as well go up in the service of paying the middle class better?

Posted
9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

In my opinion one of the most important things we could do to improve the health of the US economy (and ultimately corporate America by improving and streamlining price discovery the labor market) is for national policy to encourage most companies and businesses to organize.
Most non-management workers should be members of a collective bargaining entity, working on an hourly rate. 

Yeah, I see collective bargaining as essential.  It's just so much of the other crap that unions get into that can make them distasteful and corrupt.  But how do you curb the things that lead to corruption without hampering the essential purpose?

Posted
6 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Is the thinking, if consumer prices have to go up regardless (e.g. tariffs or profiteering or inflation or whatever else comes up), might as well go up in the service of paying the middle class better?

Well, that might be the result, but without collective bargaining, labor is completely at the mercy of management/corporate interest and that is rarely going to be to their benefit.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
9 minutes ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Most non-management workers should be members of a collective bargaining entity, working on an hourly rate. 

Years ago when I worked at a semiconductor manufacturer, the guys they initially hired didn't necessarily make great money. As they expanded, they had to pay less qualified guys more money to work there due to the local labor pool. Guys would get pissed knowing some new guy with no experience was making $2-3/hour than a guy who had been there 3-4 years. Management tried telling us we weren't allowed to talk about our pay rate or we'd get written up by HR.

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

I suspect it's a blindspot for many of us, but what you described as being a virtue of agrarian society (i.e. being unskilled and not very smart, but being able to lift things or carry things or just do things physically) is very ableist. And I know that might make me sound namby-pamby around here, but ableism is a thing and the move of society to use your brains and skills versus just having two working legs or otherwise not being disabled in some way, was very equalizing for a lot of people.

It shouldn't be lost that while, you are right, the future of AI and devaluing of skills is a risk for all, it's the differently abled who are hurt the most.

Fair point, but it's just an expansion of the notion that we have a goodly chunk of the population that's simply not capable of sustaining itself without help from society.

Just now, Schulz2.0 said:

Years ago when I worked at a semiconductor manufacturer, the guys they initially hired didn't necessarily make great money. As they expanded, they had to pay less qualified guys more money to work there due to the local labor pool. Guys would get pissed knowing some new guy with no experience was making $2-3/hour than a guy who had been there 3-4 years. Management tried telling us we weren't allowed to talk about our pay rate or we'd get written up by HR.

Godalmighty.  Name em and shame em.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, Vegas64 said:

I suspect it's a blindspot for many of us, but what you described as being a virtue of agrarian society (i.e. being unskilled and not very smart, but being able to lift things or carry things or just do things physically) is very ableist. And I know that might make me sound namby-pamby around here, but ableism is a thing and the move of society to use your brains and skills versus just having two working legs or otherwise not being disabled in some way, was very equalizing for a lot of people.

It shouldn't be lost that while, you are right, the future of AI and devaluing of skills is a risk for all, it's the differently abled who are hurt the most.

Unquestionably.  We can't design ANY element of ANY system that won't have outsized advantages/disadvantages for some subsets.  The virtue of agrarian society sucked for the disabled.  The virtues of our new information economy suck for those with a below-median IQ.

I'm really smart, and process information well and quickly....and also have lousy vision, and was never, ever going to be the most athletic/strongest man around.  In early agrarian societies, I would have been far from a "top performer."  Today, that same mix of attributes puts me in the top performer category.  A society that prized warriors and strong laborers would not be a great society for Brisket, or anyone physically disabled.  A society that prizes intellectual skills is much better for us....and is worse for Steve Strongman.

And my bigger point is that we shouldn't make broad value judgments, like "strong manual laborers are better" or "high-IQ people are better," or "fully abled [or disabled] people are better."  A high-functioning society has a place and mechanism for ALL of those people to live a relatively secure, dignified life.

Posted
21 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

The ones who have the inside scoop on making and selling prosthetics care.

Everything comes back to one singularity: oligarchs with the inside track in this admin will profit.  It is exactly like the Russian system.

Sorry in advance…

 

Big Prosthetics already charges an arm and a leg!
 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Automation means fewer of those positions. Depending on the company and industry, some prefer people with degrees for those jobs. That's my experience from almost 15 years of working in operations for various companies.

Tangent: Should have been employing people hanging car chargers from power poles. Should stop worrying about making sure the private sector makes a profit on the government's dime and create a new TVA instead. 

 

13 minutes ago, Schulz2.0 said:

Years ago when I worked at a semiconductor manufacturer, the guys they initially hired didn't necessarily make great money. As they expanded, they had to pay less qualified guys more money to work there due to the local labor pool. Guys would get pissed knowing some new guy with no experience was making $2-3/hour than a guy who had been there 3-4 years. Management tried telling us we weren't allowed to talk about our pay rate or we'd get written up by HR.

Wypipo's general aversion to discussing their own salaries benefits capital bigly.

Edited by elfenix
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

sally1979.jpg

Find a woman who looks at you the way Norma Rae looks at a fair wage and better conditions. 

44 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Is the thinking, if consumer prices have to go up regardless (e.g. tariffs or profiteering or inflation or whatever else comes up), might as well go up in the service of paying the middle class better?

No. But pause a moment and think about the elaborate framework of interconnected premises about the labor market that are baked into your question.  It’s not a criticism of you- the voting population has been intentionally programmed to think about the labor economy and organizing labor a certain way, and probably the majority of what they think they know is simply false. 
There is no necessary, causal relationship or direct link between union labor and higher prices. 

38 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

But how do you curb the things that lead to corruption without hampering the essential purpose?

Show me a bad union and I’ll show you bad management, and vice versa. 100% of the time. They are symptomatic of each other. And incidentally, that’s true with labor problems whether there’s a union or not. We just give management a pass when a union goes bad. 

In other words- if they commit crimes, they should be prosecuted vigorously. If it’s as simple as dysfunction, fuck ‘em. They won’t be competitive and somebody more capable will come along and eat their lunch. We don’t need to erect barriers to trade, all we’re doing is propping up incompetence. The hand of the market is faster and less subjective. 

 

Edited by Bozo_Casanova
Posted
12 hours ago, Firemans4Horn said:

Tim Apple scared of Dotard

 

d368ba90-500c-4175-bd61-e1b6d7e495b9.thumb.png.e1205d0672bfa9f60b74442557f060f4.png

That probably has more to do with the AppleTax being found to be an illegal act worthy of antitrust action. When they don't get to harvest 30% of EVERY transaction carried out on an iPhone they're invariably gonna raise prices.

It really is wild how much their business model relies on just seeking rents from their users that already paid over a grand for their device



×
×
  • Create New...