Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> Many would argue otherwise. In reality, the result ends up being a massive reduction in the number of longshoremen / dock workers as they are replaced with robots.

I’ll bite. How long does it take to automate all of the ports on the US East Coast? Most likely 10-30 years, in which time all of the current union members will be retired.

Unions care too much about the small possibility of losing some jobs quicker than expected and not enough about the entire country becoming uncompetitive because they are the only people who can unlock high productivity between countries.



>How long does it take to automate all of the ports on the US East Coast?

How long did it take to completely destroy the working class of the United States with NAFTA and globalization?

>Most likely 10-30 years, in which time all of the current union members will be retired.

I'm sure that will come as a surprise to thousands of current union members. Try telling a room full of union workers, many in their late 20s and early 30s, who spent 5+ years as apprentices making low wages and working the least desirable positions in order to earn their union book that their jobs will be eliminated in 10 years by automation and see how that goes down.

>Unions care too much about the small possibility of losing some jobs quicker than expected and not enough about the entire country becoming uncompetitive because they are the only people who can unlock high productivity between countries.

Who says we need high productivity between countries? Globalism is not something that has been beneficial to working people in the United States. It has been the complete opposite. Why should unions care if wealthy business owners can make a few billion more by eliminating their jobs? People just aren't buying the fallacy that the extra billions being accrued by the international business elite will somehow "trickle down" to the rest of us anymore.


The working class had been degrading since Nixon opened China and then Raegan deregulated large swaths of the economy in the 70s. Even if NAFTA may have accelerated things slightly, it didn’t really materially impact the trajectory since China has had a bigger impact on the working class than Mexico. It turns out that capital will always try to find the cheapest workers. And before globalizations, people would complain about low-priced immigrants coming and taking jobs.

As for globalism, if anything you’re complaining that there isn’t enough globalism in terms of a global regulation on what business owners and countries can and can’t do. Because otherwise you’re just getting outcompeted and trying to silo off your country leads to a long death.


> Who says we need high productivity between countries?

A long history of countries taking the piss when another more advanced one comes around with wildly superior industrial technology and capacity.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: