Us auto sales uppppp!

[Johnny_P]

Um no excess capacity ? Bruh

You're at record levels of auto sales why the fuck would you have excess capacity ... need I remind you sales dipped to 9-10 million from 17 where they are currently ?!

Now I don't think it'll be that bad but this industry can't deal with a 30-40 % contraction period

Sure it can.

Close half the plants, fire 1/2 of remaining 5-figure-earning employees, then congratulate yourselves by giving executives 25% raises and more bonuses on top.

Yeah that would probably be the recovery plan. Then when production ramps back up don't staff it as much as it was previously = more profits.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

Sure it can.

Close half the plants, fire 1/2 of remaining 5-figure-earning employees, then congratulate yourselves by giving executives 25% raises and more bonuses on top.

Yeah that would probably be the recovery plan. Then when production ramps back up don't staff it as much as it was previously = more profits.

[max225]

Sure it can.

Close half the plants, fire 1/2 of remaining 5-figure-earning employees, then congratulate yourselves by giving executives 25% raises and more bonuses on top.

Yeah that would probably be the recovery plan. Then when production ramps back up don't staff it as much as it was previously = more profits.

Except this industry is incapable of running at sub 70% capacity, they start losing billions. Just the nature of the industry... scary stuff.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

[Davestr]

--The fact that Indiana taxpayers had to cough up millions to keep the jobs in-state—as well as the reality that automation will continue to make some human skills obsolete—paints Trump’s solution as a Band-aid. It is not a reasonable long-term strategy to retain manufacturing jobs. And as Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders pointed out, Carrier’s sweet deal shows other companies how to out-negotiate Trump.

But lost in this confusing situation is the solution. It’s been there, provided by Carrier and its parent company United Technologies since the beginning: education and training.

Carrier understands the real solution is to retrain employees for modern jobs

Buried in Carrier’s letter to its employees, there’s a promise to provide “four full years of the Employee Scholar Program post-employment, which pays for education to develop new skills in a field of their choice.”--

A corporation that might care! https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/the- ... 27508.html

[ChrisoftheNorth]

I really don't see how there's enough "modern jobs" to replace manufacturing. Not to mention, some people just simply aren't cut out for such work. Not everyone is made for school, etc. this utopian dream where everyone is college educated making salaries while day dreaming at Google is absolutely ridiculous.

Every single one of these people should be provided with trade school. We really need electricians, plumbers, builders, etc, etc. These aren't "modern jobs" BS, but they're not going away any time soon. A robot won't be able to come over and snake a drain or rewire a house, or fix plaster walls, etc. Why is the only option a "modern job"?

[ChrisoftheNorth]

We're also going to have to recognize eventually that the free market as we know it does nothing more than increase the income gap, decimate cities, and ruin lives. The fact that we have what we have as a president elect shows that people are realizing this.

Is paying to keep things inefficient so that entire towns/cities and continue to survive such a bad thing? I'm not so sure anymore...

[Davestr]

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernstei ... ns-2016-12

A touch scary but interesting. The end line about getting rid of workers is reality for any major Corporation
-------------------------------------
Analysts at global investment manager Bernstein believe the "age of industrialization is coming to an end," with robots set to destroy manufacturing jobs globally.

That may not sound seismic. After all, the industrial revolution happened hundreds of years ago and manufacturing jobs have been the minority of all jobs in the West for decades. But Bernstein is arguing that the nature of capitalism is undergoing a fundamental change.

Analysts Michael W. Parker and Alberto Moel argue that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the foundational textbooks of economics, is becoming redundant because of two trends: the rise of robotics and China's modernising economy.

Parker and Moel say Smith's book, published in 1776, "remained broadly relevant to capital allocation decisions globally" for the last 240 years but is fast becoming out of date. They say:

"Smartphones and online-to-offline apps give unskilled workers options for making a living that do not involve setting foot in developing market factories. Automation is making manufacturing activity cheaper and less labor intensive. Income inequality in developing markets will rise when work means competing against other unionizing."

Bernstein's central argument is that manufacturing jobs are effectively disappearing globally, replaced by robots. China is leading the way but the trend is global and it means promises made by politicians like Donald Trump to bring overseas industries back to America are unlikely to benefit working people generally.
'China is not getting rid of the work. It is just getting rid of the workers.'

[Davestr]

We're also going to have to recognize eventually that the free market as we know it does nothing more than increase the income gap, decimate cities, and ruin lives. The fact that we have what we have as a president elect shows that people are realizing this.

Is paying to keep things inefficient so that entire towns/cities and continue to survive such a bad thing? I'm not so sure anymore...

This one company at a time policy is classic cronyism. SO all Corps 'pay' the Don and kiss the ring to get their next good deals by not shitting jobs. Its simply bad policy and goes entirely against the famaliar Republican theme of let the market do the work etc etc. Its crap and his deal is not a good one. The taxpayers in Indianan now have to make up the 7 mil they just got stuck with. Sure its win....fkn hollow at that. Those jobs are going away and sooner rather than later. Thats how the world is going to work and has been for some time. Sucks and your point about trades is spot on.

[Davestr]

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernstei ... ns-2016-12

A touch scary but interesting. The end line about getting rid of workers is reality for any major Corporation
-------------------------------------
Analysts at global investment manager Bernstein believe the "age of industrialization is coming to an end," with robots set to destroy manufacturing jobs globally.

That may not sound seismic. After all, the industrial revolution happened hundreds of years ago and manufacturing jobs have been the minority of all jobs in the West for decades. But Bernstein is arguing that the nature of capitalism is undergoing a fundamental change.

Analysts Michael W. Parker and Alberto Moel argue that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the foundational textbooks of economics, is becoming redundant because of two trends: the rise of robotics and China's modernising economy.

Parker and Moel say Smith's book, published in 1776, "remained broadly relevant to capital allocation decisions globally" for the last 240 years but is fast becoming out of date. They say:

"Smartphones and online-to-offline apps give unskilled workers options for making a living that do not involve setting foot in developing market factories. Automation is making manufacturing activity cheaper and less labor intensive. Income inequality in developing markets will rise when work means competing against other unionizing."

Bernstein's central argument is that manufacturing jobs are effectively disappearing globally, replaced by robots. China is leading the way but the trend is global and it means promises made by politicians like Donald Trump to bring overseas industries back to America are unlikely to benefit working people generally.
'China is not getting rid of the work. It is just getting rid of the workers.'

So what's the easiest way for a company to reduce costs? Invest in robotics and eliminate the need to pay wages. Automation is the easiest way to cut costs.

Parker and Moel say:

"It is still possible to force the relocation of production through the introduction of tariffs and quotas. However, if the point of the exercise is to restore well-paying, middle-class jobs in manufacturing in the process, the result is going to disappoint. Any such effort today is likely to result in greater and greater degrees of automation. The activity may come 'home', but there are simply no jobs to steal. Mandating a physical task be carried out in a high-cost labor market in 2017 is simply going to increase the chances the task is automated."

[Tar]

I can tell you that with the onset of automation comes many new highly paid jobs. TMC in Canada which builds corolla for another couple of years had a robot go down with a damaged wire. Five full time people tended to it this Saturday and each made about $1000 doing so. The plant employs over 4000 people who each make between 40k and 250k minus upper management. If you're not automating you can't compete internationally.

By the way, all five people are either skilled trades, techs or engineers.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

We're also going to have to recognize eventually that the free market as we know it does nothing more than increase the income gap, decimate cities, and ruin lives. The fact that we have what we have as a president elect shows that people are realizing this.

Is paying to keep things inefficient so that entire towns/cities and continue to survive such a bad thing? I'm not so sure anymore...

This one company at a time policy is classic cronyism. SO all Corps 'pay' the Don and kiss the ring to get their next good deals by not shitting jobs. Its simply bad policy and goes entirely against the famaliar Republican theme of let the market do the work etc etc. Its crap and his deal is not a good one. The taxpayers in Indianan now have to make up the 7 mil they just got stuck with. Sure its win....fkn hollow at that. Those jobs are going away and sooner rather than later. Thats how the world is going to work and has been for some time. Sucks and your point about trades is spot on.

I suck at articulating my points...but this is what I was trying to get at. This half-assed one-at-a-time approach is in every way. We need a full-on radiacal .gov change that forces companies to be inefficient with the benefit of jerbs, OR some sort of exit strategy plan.

The latter is the right answer, but the problem is, people don't want that. Clearly. They want to make Murica great again, where you could have a nice house in the leafy 'burbs, a boat, a cottage up north, and 2.5 kids all comfortably for screwing on a steering wheel or assembling an AC fan.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

I can tell you that with the onset of automation comes many new highly paid jobs. TMC in Canada which builds corolla for another couple of years had a robot go down with a damaged wire. Five full time people tended to it this Saturday and each made about $1000 doing so. The plant employs over 4000 people who each make between 40k and 250k minus upper management. If you're not automating you can't compete internationally.

By the way, all five people are either skilled trades, techs or engineers.

Yea, but once it's all automated, what happens to the 4k people that work there? They can't all be robot fixers.

[Tar]

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernstei ... ns-2016-12

A touch scary but interesting. The end line about getting rid of workers is reality for any major Corporation
-------------------------------------
Analysts at global investment manager Bernstein believe the "age of industrialization is coming to an end," with robots set to destroy manufacturing jobs globally.

That may not sound seismic. After all, the industrial revolution happened hundreds of years ago and manufacturing jobs have been the minority of all jobs in the West for decades. But Bernstein is arguing that the nature of capitalism is undergoing a fundamental change.

Analysts Michael W. Parker and Alberto Moel argue that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the foundational textbooks of economics, is becoming redundant because of two trends: the rise of robotics and China's modernising economy.

Parker and Moel say Smith's book, published in 1776, "remained broadly relevant to capital allocation decisions globally" for the last 240 years but is fast becoming out of date. They say:

"Smartphones and online-to-offline apps give unskilled workers options for making a living that do not involve setting foot in developing market factories. Automation is making manufacturing activity cheaper and less labor intensive. Income inequality in developing markets will rise when work means competing against other unionizing."

Bernstein's central argument is that manufacturing jobs are effectively disappearing globally, replaced by robots. China is leading the way but the trend is global and it means promises made by politicians like Donald Trump to bring overseas industries back to America are unlikely to benefit working people generally.
'China is not getting rid of the work. It is just getting rid of the workers.'

So what's the easiest way for a company to reduce costs? Invest in robotics and eliminate the need to pay wages. Automation is the easiest way to cut costs.

Parker and Moel say:

"It is still possible to force the relocation of production through the introduction of tariffs and quotas. However, if the point of the exercise is to restore well-paying, middle-class jobs in manufacturing in the process, the result is going to disappoint. Any such effort today is likely to result in greater and greater degrees of automation. The activity may come 'home', but there are simply no jobs to steal. Mandating a physical task be carried out in a high-cost labor market in 2017 is simply going to increase the chances the task is automated."

What about logistics and trickle effect? This is tin hat talk dude. Automation doesn't just build stuff by itself. It's constantly being supported by humans.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

http://www.businessinsider.com/bernstei ... ns-2016-12

A touch scary but interesting. The end line about getting rid of workers is reality for any major Corporation
-------------------------------------
Analysts at global investment manager Bernstein believe the "age of industrialization is coming to an end," with robots set to destroy manufacturing jobs globally.

That may not sound seismic. After all, the industrial revolution happened hundreds of years ago and manufacturing jobs have been the minority of all jobs in the West for decades. But Bernstein is arguing that the nature of capitalism is undergoing a fundamental change.

Analysts Michael W. Parker and Alberto Moel argue that Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations, the foundational textbooks of economics, is becoming redundant because of two trends: the rise of robotics and China's modernising economy.

Parker and Moel say Smith's book, published in 1776, "remained broadly relevant to capital allocation decisions globally" for the last 240 years but is fast becoming out of date. They say:

"Smartphones and online-to-offline apps give unskilled workers options for making a living that do not involve setting foot in developing market factories. Automation is making manufacturing activity cheaper and less labor intensive. Income inequality in developing markets will rise when work means competing against other unionizing."

Bernstein's central argument is that manufacturing jobs are effectively disappearing globally, replaced by robots. China is leading the way but the trend is global and it means promises made by politicians like Donald Trump to bring overseas industries back to America are unlikely to benefit working people generally.
'China is not getting rid of the work. It is just getting rid of the workers.'

So what's the easiest way for a company to reduce costs? Invest in robotics and eliminate the need to pay wages. Automation is the easiest way to cut costs.

Parker and Moel say:

"It is still possible to force the relocation of production through the introduction of tariffs and quotas. However, if the point of the exercise is to restore well-paying, middle-class jobs in manufacturing in the process, the result is going to disappoint. Any such effort today is likely to result in greater and greater degrees of automation. The activity may come 'home', but there are simply no jobs to steal. Mandating a physical task be carried out in a high-cost labor market in 2017 is simply going to increase the chances the task is automated."

Unless we change the entire way we live...companies become private with no focus on profits...or something called socialism, this is going to result in a bunch of

[Davestr]

I can tell you that with the onset of automation comes many new highly paid jobs. TMC in Canada which builds corolla for another couple of years had a robot go down with a damaged wire. Five full time people tended to it this Saturday and each made about $1000 doing so. The plant employs over 4000 people who each make between 40k and 250k minus upper management. If you're not automating you can't compete internationally.

By the way, all five people are either skilled trades, techs or engineers.

There will be winners and losers in this. The talking head analysts quoted in the article seem torn about the outcome of intense automation. As noted in the article - Below
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The key question that has not yet been answered is whether this "Fourth Industrial Revolution" simply changes the jobs market or leads to fewer jobs.

Past industrial revolutions have destroyed jobs but also created better-paid roles: the horse and cart driver moved into the Ford factories to build cars. Bernstein's analysis of the Chinese jobs market is encouraging — more service sector jobs at higher pay.

But not everyone is so optimistic. The Citi and Oxford study found that: "Today’s technology sectors have not provided the same opportunities, particularly for less educated workers, as the industries that preceded them." They predicted that "inequality between the 1 percent and the 99 percent may widen as workforce automation continues."

Lord Turner echoed these findings, telling BI: "There’s a certain sort of equality of citizenship that requires that everybody does OK. I think that may breakdown. I think it may breakdown because of the fundamental nature of technology."

Economist Guy Standing coined the term "precariat" to refer to people in precarious, low-benefit, and low-paid employment, often driven by technology. Think of Uber drivers and Deliveroo couriers.

Whether the tech "precariat" becomes the new normal or simply a transitional phase during these economic ructions remains to be seen.

[Davestr]

BOOM! --http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/05/used-veh ... -high.html

[Tar]

I can tell you that with the onset of automation comes many new highly paid jobs. TMC in Canada which builds corolla for another couple of years had a robot go down with a damaged wire. Five full time people tended to it this Saturday and each made about $1000 doing so. The plant employs over 4000 people who each make between 40k and 250k minus upper management. If you're not automating you can't compete internationally.

By the way, all five people are either skilled trades, techs or engineers.

There will be winners and losers in this. The talking head analysts quoted in the article seem torn about the outcome of intense automation. As noted in the article - Below
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The key question that has not yet been answered is whether this "Fourth Industrial Revolution" simply changes the jobs market or leads to fewer jobs.

Past industrial revolutions have destroyed jobs but also created better-paid roles: the horse and cart driver moved into the Ford factories to build cars. Bernstein's analysis of the Chinese jobs market is encouraging — more service sector jobs at higher pay.

But not everyone is so optimistic. The Citi and Oxford study found that: "Today’s technology sectors have not provided the same opportunities, particularly for less educated workers, as the industries that preceded them." They predicted that "inequality between the 1 percent and the 99 percent may widen as workforce automation continues."

Lord Turner echoed these findings, telling BI: "There’s a certain sort of equality of citizenship that requires that everybody does OK. I think that may breakdown. I think it may breakdown because of the fundamental nature of technology."

Economist Guy Standing coined the term "precariat" to refer to people in precarious, low-benefit, and low-paid employment, often driven by technology. Think of Uber drivers and Deliveroo couriers.

Whether the tech "precariat" becomes the new normal or simply a transitional phase during these economic ructions remains to be seen.

Good effort to research and present your findings of the options of well respected analysts. Is the global sense, there will continue to be less and less low skill level manufacturing jobs but the high level jobs or support work will survive in developed nations because automation levels the playing field cost wise. No automation, no competing with China. Simple as that. Thankfully the supply chain of any manufacturing is deep and supports LOTS of hard to automate jobs, like the lady who waits tables at the coffee joint up the street from the trucking company who's drivers carry finished goods to distribution centers, or the supervisor who makes sure the fork lift driver didn't smoke that ish before he got on his machine at the distribution center.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

There will be winners and losers in this. The talking head analysts quoted in the article seem torn about the outcome of intense automation. As noted in the article - Below
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The key question that has not yet been answered is whether this "Fourth Industrial Revolution" simply changes the jobs market or leads to fewer jobs.

Past industrial revolutions have destroyed jobs but also created better-paid roles: the horse and cart driver moved into the Ford factories to build cars. Bernstein's analysis of the Chinese jobs market is encouraging — more service sector jobs at higher pay.

But not everyone is so optimistic. The Citi and Oxford study found that: "Today’s technology sectors have not provided the same opportunities, particularly for less educated workers, as the industries that preceded them." They predicted that "inequality between the 1 percent and the 99 percent may widen as workforce automation continues."

Lord Turner echoed these findings, telling BI: "There’s a certain sort of equality of citizenship that requires that everybody does OK. I think that may breakdown. I think it may breakdown because of the fundamental nature of technology."

Economist Guy Standing coined the term "precariat" to refer to people in precarious, low-benefit, and low-paid employment, often driven by technology. Think of Uber drivers and Deliveroo couriers.

Whether the tech "precariat" becomes the new normal or simply a transitional phase during these economic ructions remains to be seen.

Good effort to research and present your findings of the options of well respected analysts. Is the global sense, there will continue to be less and less low skill level manufacturing jobs but the high level jobs or support work will survive in developed nations because automation levels the playing field cost wise. No automation, no competing with China. Simple as that. Thankfully the supply chain of any manufacturing is deep and supports LOTS of hard to automate jobs, like the lady who waits tables at the coffee joint up the street from the trucking company who's drivers carry finished goods to distribution centers, or the supervisor who makes sure the fork lift driver didn't smoke that ish before he got on his machine at the distribution center.

Yea, but what happens when the trucks and forklifts are automated as well? (We're not far from that).

[goIftdibrad]

A lot of talk about the fake unemployment rate... the government paid 76 billion last year to snap. In 09 that number was half that... also ... 95 million not in labor force is

that is the stat that should be making every investor quit and sell everything.

how do you have 1 out of every three americans NOT WORKING and expect a robust economy?

[Johnny_P]

Good effort to research and present your findings of the options of well respected analysts. Is the global sense, there will continue to be less and less low skill level manufacturing jobs but the high level jobs or support work will survive in developed nations because automation levels the playing field cost wise. No automation, no competing with China. Simple as that. Thankfully the supply chain of any manufacturing is deep and supports LOTS of hard to automate jobs, like the lady who waits tables at the coffee joint up the street from the trucking company who's drivers carry finished goods to distribution centers, or the supervisor who makes sure the fork lift driver didn't smoke that ish before he got on his machine at the distribution center.

Yea, but what happens when the trucks and forklifts are automated as well? (We're not far from that).

Trucks will take a long time to automate fully. I could see automated cruise systems get implemented, but for backing a truck into a loading dock, or at a port facility where it's utter chaos, or for oversize loads you're still going to have a driver. Not to mention, most trucks on the road are old as shit with a ton of miles. They don't get replaced often so adoption of an automated technology would be very slow.

[Tar]

Good effort to research and present your findings of the options of well respected analysts. Is the global sense, there will continue to be less and less low skill level manufacturing jobs but the high level jobs or support work will survive in developed nations because automation levels the playing field cost wise. No automation, no competing with China. Simple as that. Thankfully the supply chain of any manufacturing is deep and supports LOTS of hard to automate jobs, like the lady who waits tables at the coffee joint up the street from the trucking company who's drivers carry finished goods to distribution centers, or the supervisor who makes sure the fork lift driver didn't smoke that ish before he got on his machine at the distribution center.

Yea, but what happens when the trucks and forklifts are automated as well? (We're not far from that).

Toyota has automated fork lifts. There are still 4k jobs inside the plant. Both of those jobs are at risk in the high end places. You go to a tier two plant and none of that exists. Overhead is too high.

What happens when a plant and it's supply chain go to China/Mexico?

[Johnny_P]

A lot of talk about the fake unemployment rate... the government paid 76 billion last year to snap. In 09 that number was half that... also ... 95 million not in labor force is

that is the stat that should be making every investor quit and sell everything.

how do you have 1 out of every three americans NOT WORKING and expect a robust economy?

Unemployment is still very high.

[ChrisoftheNorth]

that is the stat that should be making every investor quit and sell everything.

how do you have 1 out of every three americans NOT WORKING and expect a robust economy?

Unemployment is still very high.

Not according to the #s.

Dat labor force participation, doe. Such low denominator.

[goIftdibrad]

Unemployment is still very high.

Not according to the #s.

Dat labor force participation, doe. Such low denominator.

they way that the participation rate is calculated is bs