The effect of automation in Manufacturing in the world - Page 11
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 201 to 216 of 216
  1. #201
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    I mentioned the fact that historically the politicians in the United States did in fact get very involved in the building of Infrastructure. The railroads are a fascinating study in this vein. The men who became super rich were made so by their shrewdness in business while others sought out government subsidies some even based upon miles of track laid.

    The down side of these subsidies were that the taxpayer was bilked (yet the railroads were completed) and even paid more for train traveling on certain lines whereas others were built with better quality, better chosen course, and for less cost. It highlighted the men who did the job right and did it on their own without subsidies and those who took the subsidies and wasted the money. Those who were ideal had costs per mile lowest. Hind sight is 20/20.

    Overall there some some kind of factor which played in, that was known (The benefit of the end result) and that was interconnecting the cities in the U.S. to transportation of people , goods and services.

    Land purchase was involved big time and the railroads prospered mightily. It wasted a lot of money because after it was all said and done looking back it became clear the ones who did more miles at less cost and with greater short term profits and long term excelled without subsidies. The men who accepted no money were mad as he++ about their competitors being subsidized because it effected true competition. It is a valid point today.

    The whole robber baron era is down right fascinating to me and I can not get enough of it. These were men who delivered energy to the world despite their competitors were subsidized by their governments and also the fact that their oil was superior in quality!

    One man had fast ships and connected to Japan and also to China. He increased exports to China which has always been a huge market and still is. The way it went for this man is that government interfered in his success and so that trade did not last.

    I understand that finally our trade is said to be highly desired as far as making lots of money. It is about time we were valued more. In my life it has been a decline and it is hard not to remember what happened. I am glad to see the young guys entering the trade who can actually turn a wrench and make something. For their sake I am glad . There is enough business for all countries to continue to prosper and for less developed countries to get involved.

    There is still a lot of growth which needs to happen.

  2. #202
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    Fair taxation has always been a big issue. The fact that the internet was free of the that burden to support growth was a good move.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    Today I watched the morning news and again the topic of automation in transportation driver-free transport is a huge focus. It would supposedly save trillions and make transport much safer.

    On a lighter note I would not only want tax breaks but also heavy subsidies to compete with Mcguiver.

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Edison Washington USA
    Posts
    10,321
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    964
    Likes (Received)
    5322

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcgyver View Post
    I don't know that I at all want a government pulling the strings what business is considered good and what is bad (
    This reminds me of my very first girlfriend when I was a young teenager.
    She told me- "Wanting isnt Getting".

    What you want, unfortunately, contradicts what every single government in the history of humanity has done- that is, pick winners and losers.
    Kings gave concessions to friends, European governments invented the first major companies- like, say, the Dutch East India Company, Hudsons Bay Company, or the Honorable East India Company, and gave those companies exclusive rights, government and military assistance, free real estate, government funds, and in most cases, freedom from competition.

    Thats how large capitalist companies began, historically.

    Since then, in every single country, there have been special laws, special tax breaks, company and industry specific regulations, government no bid contracts, loans, government banks to support specific companies and industries, subsidies, giveaways, and more.

    EVERYWHERE.
    ALWAYS.

    There is not now, and has never been, a capitalist libertarian paradise where this does not happen.

    So, while I sympathize with you wanting and not getting (I did not, in fact, get what I wanted for quite some time in that relationship), I think you have set your expectations a bit high.

    Governments, both US and Canadian, as well as States and Provinces and Cities, have always, and will continue to, pick winners and losers.
    Everything from selecting a single utility provider and giving them state purchased infrastructure, to setting specific tax rates that vary from company to company, to allowing lobbyists to write laws that benefit ONE single company.

    This will change in the USA about the time that AOC gets elected Queen.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Flushing/Flint, Michigan
    Posts
    7,596
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    378
    Likes (Received)
    6344

    Default

    Companies compete.
    Is it wrong for local governments to do do so?
    How did we end up on taxes in the question about automation and "the realities of automation in our trade? "
    Any hope to steer this ship back on it's course?
    Bob

  6. #206
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    Bob I agree. Taxes and incentives are trailing off. I suppose the things that fill clear immediate needs could be obvious to discuss. These robot parts loaders are interesting things. I have seen a couple of outfits who make them showing how they program the arms to pick up a piece of material and move it to another place.

    As far as automation speeding up a shop Programming and QC are areas that always seem to be overwhelmed.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3154
    Likes (Received)
    3579

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CarbideBob View Post
    Companies compete.
    Is it wrong for local governments to do do so?
    where do you see anyone advocating they shouldn't? I think and have said they should - with transparency, equality and without prejudice. They also have a different mandate than companies, which should be obvious.

    Any hope to steer this ship back on it's course?
    Get us back on track with a good question or comment on the subject.....otherwise after 200 posts, its kind of been well flogged and the discussion wanders....

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    4,752
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3154
    Likes (Received)
    3579

    Default

    No, mostly what government does is NOT pick winners and losers, but create the environment and framework for commerce and business to exist. Nevertheless, Its unclear what the point of all that your wrote is. Of course its gone on in the past and still does, that make it ok with you? You think corporate welfare or that the tax you pay depends on your relationship with a politician is ok? And some here, maybe you, seemingly want to invite municipal politicians in on the action?

    We should be opposed to things that are unethical and wrong, the fact that you may never eliminate it entirely not notwithstanding.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ries View Post
    This reminds me of my very first girlfriend when I was a young teenager.
    She told me- "Wanting isnt Getting".

    What you want, unfortunately, contradicts what every single government in the history of humanity has done- that is, pick winners and losers.
    Kings gave concessions to friends, European governments invented the first major companies- like, say, the Dutch East India Company, Hudsons Bay Company, or the Honorable East India Company, and gave those companies exclusive rights, government and military assistance, free real estate, government funds, and in most cases, freedom from competition.

    Thats how large capitalist companies began, historically.

    Since then, in every single country, there have been special laws, special tax breaks, company and industry specific regulations, government no bid contracts, loans, government banks to support specific companies and industries, subsidies, giveaways, and more.

    EVERYWHERE.
    ALWAYS.

    There is not now, and has never been, a capitalist libertarian paradise where this does not happen.

    So, while I sympathize with you wanting and not getting (I did not, in fact, get what I wanted for quite some time in that relationship), I think you have set your expectations a bit high.

    Governments, both US and Canadian, as well as States and Provinces and Cities, have always, and will continue to, pick winners and losers.
    Everything from selecting a single utility provider and giving them state purchased infrastructure, to setting specific tax rates that vary from company to company, to allowing lobbyists to write laws that benefit ONE single company.

    This will change in the USA about the time that AOC gets elected Queen.
    Last edited by Mcgyver; 04-13-2019 at 10:35 AM.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,933
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    894

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcgyver View Post
    No, mostly what government does is NOT pick winners and losers, but create the environment and framework for commerce and business to exist.
    Maybe in Canada.

    Not in the US.

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Geneva Illinois USA
    Posts
    6,031
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2517
    Likes (Received)
    2338

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcgyver View Post
    No, mostly what government does is NOT pick winners and losers, but create the environment and framework for commerce and business to exist.
    I would like to know what and where the dividing line is. US has provided all manner of subsidies for alternate fuels. Solar (who can forget Solaria?), wind, alcohol, public transportation... Even if money is not provided, direct or taxes, talking up a project is support.

    Tom

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Denver, CO USA
    Posts
    10,215
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    58
    Likes (Received)
    5695

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcgyver View Post
    No, mostly what government does is NOT pick winners and losers, but create the environment and framework for commerce and business to exist. Nevertheless, Its unclear what the point of all that your wrote is. Of course its gone on in the past and still does, that make it ok with you? You think corporate welfare or that the tax you pay depends on your relationship with a politician is ok? And some here, maybe you, seemingly want to invite municipal politicians in on the action?

    We should be opposed to things that are unethical and wrong, the fact that you may never eliminate it entirely not notwithstanding.
    The us government picks winners all the time.
    Railroads, automotive, aerospace...all have had support.
    Of course it all pales in comparison to the USA building an entire foreign policy stance based on supporting Standard Oil and its successors.

  12. #212
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Edison Washington USA
    Posts
    10,321
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    964
    Likes (Received)
    5322

    Default

    The Canadian government has a history, going back over 100 years, of picking winners and losers. They used to pay steel mills to export, for example.
    This was a pretty interesting part of history- in 1908, they were paying Canadian mills to export, and putting huge tariffs on British imports.
    Iron Age - Google Books

    then, of course, we have the whole Milk price support thing. Which includes government regulating who can produce milk, and how much they can sell it for, as well as the government paying to help market it abroad.

    or, the recent Shopify deal wtih the Ontario provincial government giving them the monopoly on online sales of newly legal pot.

    But there are dozens of examples going back decades.

    The fact is, laws and regulations are enacted, in both the USA and Canada, at least 50% of the time, because somebody pays for them to be enacted. Which is almost always companies and business groups. And for their money, they expect advantage.
    Hence, we have the US price supports for sugar, the import export bank, the pentagon (and Jared Kushner) acting as salesmen for Boeing and other military contractors, no bid contracts, laws that cover ONE company in the entire USA, and more.

    And, yes, a lot of this affects automation.
    The US government has paid for the development of automation, computers, and factory and manufacturing improvements in virtually every field, and has been the sole reason a lot of automation was developed to the point of being commercially viable.
    Computers for artillery aiming and codebreaking, when there was no commercial justification.
    Waterjets to cut titanium.
    The commercial development of carbon fiber.
    Satellite phones, GPS, the internet- The basic building blocks of ALL automation were non-profit government programs.


    CNC machining as we know it had all the heavy lifting, financially, done by companies that were building the first NC machines for cost plus government contracts- nobody else could afford the price of those early machines.

    During WW2, all the airplane fuselages and bulkheads were essentially hand crafted, riveted, and machined on manual mills.
    By the mid 50s, the US government, thru the Heavy Press program, automated large size aerospace forging, building 50,000 ton and 100,000 ton presses with taxpayer dollars that eliminated all those manual machining jobs. Automation taking jobs- 1955- now.

    Virtually every military aircraft to this day has parts made on those presses, along with most Boeing and Airbus planes.
    The US government picked winners in that case- US companies.

    If we had not spent tax dollars on those presses, the Russians, the French, and now, the Chinese, were all willing to, and their companies have benefitted.

    There are no "private industry" presses of that scale except for ones that the respective governments gave to them in sweetheart deals- Can you spell "Alcoa"? There was a winner, picked by somebody...

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Florida
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    0

    Default

    Yes Off course, The Automation in manufacturing in the world is a really good in all factors because it is making things advance and automatic which is very fascinating. So, the new steps in any field on the basis of equipment's, techniques, safety all are Good.

  14. #214
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ries View Post
    The Canadian government has a history, going back over 100 years, of picking winners and losers. They used to pay steel mills to export, for example.
    This was a pretty interesting part of history- in 1908, they were paying Canadian mills to export, and putting huge tariffs on British imports.
    Iron Age - Google Books

    then, of course, we have the whole Milk price support thing. Which includes government regulating who can produce milk, and how much they can sell it for, as well as the government paying to help market it abroad.

    or, the recent Shopify deal wtih the Ontario provincial government giving them the monopoly on online sales of newly legal pot.

    But there are dozens of examples going back decades.

    The fact is, laws and regulations are enacted, in both the USA and Canada, at least 50% of the time, because somebody pays for them to be enacted. Which is almost always companies and business groups. And for their money, they expect advantage.
    Hence, we have the US price supports for sugar, the import export bank, the pentagon (and Jared Kushner) acting as salesmen for Boeing and other military contractors, no bid contracts, laws that cover ONE company in the entire USA, and more.

    And, yes, a lot of this affects automation.
    The US government has paid for the development of automation, computers, and factory and manufacturing improvements in virtually every field, and has been the sole reason a lot of automation was developed to the point of being commercially viable.
    Computers for artillery aiming and codebreaking, when there was no commercial justification.
    Waterjets to cut titanium.
    The commercial development of carbon fiber.
    Satellite phones, GPS, the internet- The basic building blocks of ALL automation were non-profit government programs.


    CNC machining as we know it had all the heavy lifting, financially, done by companies that were building the first NC machines for cost plus government contracts- nobody else could afford the price of those early machines.

    During WW2, all the airplane fuselages and bulkheads were essentially hand crafted, riveted, and machined on manual mills.
    By the mid 50s, the US government, thru the Heavy Press program, automated large size aerospace forging, building 50,000 ton and 100,000 ton presses with taxpayer dollars that eliminated all those manual machining jobs. Automation taking jobs- 1955- now.

    Virtually every military aircraft to this day has parts made on those presses, along with most Boeing and Airbus planes.
    The US government picked winners in that case- US companies.

    If we had not spent tax dollars on those presses, the Russians, the French, and now, the Chinese, were all willing to, and their companies have benefitted.

    There are no "private industry" presses of that scale except for ones that the respective governments gave to them in sweetheart deals- Can you spell "Alcoa"? There was a winner, picked by somebody...
    The industries subsidized were deemed critical to National interests and so government can bring to bear money to support it. As a rule it must be done on a case by case basis and fall to those who have responsibilities where they can do this. It does not always work very well as far as being cost effective.

    Things like special interest and also corruption are always things which make the whole deal bad. It underlines the need for good government with checks and balances in a world where governments are effectively playing this high stakes game. There will always be great businessmen who achieve in spite of these factors and they are the ones who amaze. That is the best way encouraging true competition.

    Granted there are so very many advancements in automation and tech which were not possible without the commitment of the government. For these types of tech the tech itself was very likely a secret one that the private sector would not understand or would feel was not a good investment.

  15. #215
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    barcelona, spain
    Posts
    2,366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    525
    Likes (Received)
    1421

    Default

    The US tax policy stuff and local gov. allowances is definitely relevant.
    I think the system is broken, myself, but ..

    Re: automation think of apple iphones.
    (I posted this elsewhere).

    200M++ units per year, ordered in advance by apple.
    65 machining ops per case.
    Video online, yt.
    Milled.
    Lasered tiny holes for light to come out of leds, maybe 200 holes size human hair.

    The 6$ cost foxconn gets for work, 9$ total, means == 6.5/65 == 0.10$ per-op machining [email protected]% profit.

    Looking at the videos, thinking of You (us, anyone) machining an alu case to exacting aerospace tolerance for 0.10$.
    No way.
    A lot of the ops are quite slow, sandblasting, milling, many.

    My opinion / pov is that like PCs in the past, IT in the past, internet operators => users in the past, automation scales up to near-zero marginal costs per unit per operation.
    This is generally good as in goods get much cheaper to make, and can be "better" technically.

    It is much better to have automated trucks delivering goods, vs drivers.
    Robo-taxis at 1/10 the cost for 5$ to the airport vs 50$, etc.
    To the economy, companies, and consumers.

    But what will we do with the truck drivers, taxi drivers, excess machinists ?
    The machinists will mostly be ok, but should they then pay for the truck drivers, taxi drivers, and endless similar manual workers pensions at 45 yo ?

    Should we allow the corps who automate everything to make excess profits, and use them to pay off shareholders, while the remaining machinists and high-skills or high tech workers pay for the pensions the others already paid for but did not get ?

    E.g. GM workers paid for their pensions, 30-40 years.
    The money was not safely handled or stored, GM and big auto looted it.
    The GM worker laid off after 20+ years has a right to the pension, that his salary was garnished for, for decades.

    E.g.
    Truckers / taxi might not have pensions.
    But they (taxi, or big rig trucker) might have a value in the medallion aka permit, of 400k$.
    They paid off a 300k loan over decades.
    Is it right to take this away, after they paid taxes for 30 years ?

    I don´t have an "answer" as such.

    But I think "no-automation" is silly, as is no-benefits for those displaced.
    Where the GDP benefits from the automation, a slice of it should, imo, be allocated to benefit those disadvantaged.
    It is also much cheaper to cure in advance than treat later, by about 20x.

  16. #216
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Texas
    Posts
    2,599
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3052
    Likes (Received)
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hanermo View Post
    The US tax policy stuff and local gov. allowances is definitely relevant.
    I think the system is broken, myself, but ..

    Re: automation think of apple iphones.
    (I posted this elsewhere).

    200M++ units per year, ordered in advance by apple.
    65 machining ops per case.
    Video online, yt.
    Milled.
    Lasered tiny holes for light to come out of leds, maybe 200 holes size human hair.

    The 6$ cost foxconn gets for work, 9$ total, means == 6.5/65 == 0.10$ per-op machining [email protected]% profit.

    Looking at the videos, thinking of You (us, anyone) machining an alu case to exacting aerospace tolerance for 0.10$.
    No way.
    A lot of the ops are quite slow, sandblasting, milling, many.

    My opinion / pov is that like PCs in the past, IT in the past, internet operators => users in the past, automation scales up to near-zero marginal costs per unit per operation.
    This is generally good as in goods get much cheaper to make, and can be "better" technically.

    It is much better to have automated trucks delivering goods, vs drivers.
    Robo-taxis at 1/10 the cost for 5$ to the airport vs 50$, etc.
    To the economy, companies, and consumers.

    But what will we do with the truck drivers, taxi drivers, excess machinists ?
    The machinists will mostly be ok, but should they then pay for the truck drivers, taxi drivers, and endless similar manual workers pensions at 45 yo ?

    Should we allow the corps who automate everything to make excess profits, and use them to pay off shareholders, while the remaining machinists and high-skills or high tech workers pay for the pensions the others already paid for but did not get ?

    E.g. GM workers paid for their pensions, 30-40 years.
    The money was not safely handled or stored, GM and big auto looted it.
    The GM worker laid off after 20+ years has a right to the pension, that his salary was garnished for, for decades.

    E.g.
    Truckers / taxi might not have pensions.
    But they (taxi, or big rig trucker) might have a value in the medallion aka permit, of 400k$.
    They paid off a 300k loan over decades.
    Is it right to take this away, after they paid taxes for 30 years ?

    I don´t have an "answer" as such.

    But I think "no-automation" is silly, as is no-benefits for those displaced.
    Where the GDP benefits from the automation, a slice of it should, imo, be allocated to benefit those disadvantaged.
    It is also much cheaper to cure in advance than treat later, by about 20x.
    Yes pensions are not really protected. Add t that they are now very rare. 401K's could be a lot better as can be Social Security. Automation advances will be amazing.


Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •