Electric Vehicle Jobs

[juliusa]

I live in Connecticut, where Tesla is not allowed to sell cars. The law is only independent dealerships can sell cars.

For 6 years I have heard the dealerships argue against allowing Tesla to sell cars because it would mean the loss of jobs. I never understood their logic. Yes, THEY would lost jobs, but CT would not. I figured the number of auto jobs in CT was based on the number of cars - it takes about the same number of people to sell, deliver, and service a Tesla as it does for their brand. It is actually less jobs in CT now because all sales and delivery take place out of state - so those jobs are exported.

Now I am hearing the opposite. I heard Joe Biden talking in Michigan, saying the transition to electric vehicles would mean 1,000,000 new jobs, including in Michigan. Again, I do not understand the logic. Isn't the number of automobile jobs based on the number of cars (and light trucks) sold in the US? Sure there are imports and exports, but those seem to balance out over time for the high-production vehicles. For example, Tesla will build cars for Europe in Germany, for Asia in China, and in the US for the Americas.

If it truly takes 1,000,000 more people to make, sell, deliver, and service EVs than ICE vehicles, does that mean an additional $75Billion in annual labor costs as we shift to electric vehicles (assuming a total cost of $75k per employee)?

I get that there are some minor differences between EV and ICE labor - I'm pretty sure Tesla builds cars with less labor than other manufacturers, and service is probably a little less (no oil changes, spark plugs, or exhaust - and with regen brakes last longer).

So besides the small differences on the margins, where does the large number of new jobs come from?

 

[nwdiver]

So besides the small differences on the margins, where does the large number of new jobs come from?

The number of jobs is going to keep declining no matter what. But you're not going to get elected by telling hard truths. Hillary was honest with coal miners... I think the Democrats learned their lesson.

 

[juliusa]

The number of jobs is going to keep declining no matter what. But you're not going to get elected by telling hard truths. Hillary was honest with coal miners... I think the Democrats learned their lesson.

So the 1,000,000 jobs number is just politics?

I do think auto industry jobs will go down over time. I think EVs require less service and manufacturing automation is increasing.

The real job killer will be Elon's vision of fewer cars in the future because they will chauffeur you around.

 

[nwdiver]

So the 1,000,000 jobs number is just politics?

The warmer weather will bring more jobs. It will be like a miracle... you'll see.

 

[juliusa]

I think I get your point. Being honest about killing fracking was a loser, so lie about electric vehicles creating 1,000,000 jobs?

 

[S'toon]

I remember the claim that the Keystone XL pipeline would create 1,000,000 jobs. When looking at the prediction it said it got ridiculous. It would create economic activity, so x number of artists would have artistic grants and therefore jobscreated.

 

[juliusa]

Yep, I get that. But a more similar comparison would be claiming building the pipeline out of steel would create 1,000,000 more jobs than building it out of plastic. Electric vehicles are a replacement for ICE cars - not incremental activity.

 

[nwdiver]

Yep, I get that. But a more similar comparison would be claiming building the pipeline out of steel would create 1,000,000 more jobs than building it out of plastic. Electric vehicles are a replacement for ICE cars - not incremental activity.

Myopic focus on inefficiency (aka jobs)

 

[Tres_Azul]

I think the part of the dubious 1 million jobs claim that is plausible is during the transition phase. Making all the machines that make the machines, yada-yada. That phase will need "X" more 'hands on deck' or whatever...but once all the industries are transitioned... Well, y'all already said it. BEV needs less service than comparably made/equipped ICE, all else being equal.

Precious little in life is simple enough for black/white, right/wrong, and distilling down to twitter-length sound bites... and even with those things... it takes some assuming that one has correctly interpreted the context under which the info was conveyed.

TL;DR- While we're all here discussing the possible real meaning(s) of a politicians dubious claims, and the subtleties / nuances thereof, the world around us is like:

 

[juliusa]

Myopic focus on inefficiency (aka jobs)

Yes, seems that is what polling says the voters are interested in so that is what they talk about.

 

[nwdiver]

Yes, seems that is what polling says the voters are interested in so that is what they talk about.

We need a solution to income that's not jobs because math. But people will keep focusing on jobs because......

“Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

- George Carlin

#UBINOW #MATH #COMMONSENSE

 

[juliusa]

We need a solution to income that's not jobs because math.

Focusing on income is a small view of the value of jobs and work.

 

[nwdiver]

Focusing on income is a small view of the value of jobs and work.

.... that's why most people have a job... it's pretty easy to find a 'job' that doesn't pay anything. If you know someone that's willing to work for free and is having trouble finding work... PM me.

 

[juliusa]

You are missing the point. Having a job is much more than just about the money for most people. It is part of their identity, feeling of self worth, and so much more.

That is why jobs are important, and the challenge with the transition to where machines do everything.

We are a long way from running out of meaningful work for people to do - a year ago the US economy was being held back due to a lack of workers.

There is a reason politicians talk about jobs.

 

[nwdiver]

You are missing the point. Having a job is much more than just about the money for most people. It is part of their identity, feeling of self worth, and so much more.

That's fine; Coal miners can dig a hole on Tuesday then fill it back in on Wednesday. Wash, Rinse and repeat but the market isn't going to pay them for it because there's no value in digging a hole and filling it in....

This idea that we should preserve obsolete jobs is just Welfare with extra steps.

The reality is that machines are increasingly doing work that humans once did. That's not going to change. We need to accept reality or suffer the consequences. As Ivanka Trump has said 'Find something new'. The harsh reality is that 'new' thing you find to provide self worth may not come with an income. We need to decouple jobs and income.

 

[Tres_Azul]

We need to decouple jobs and income.

This x 1,000,000.

 

[juliusa]

This idea that we should preserve obsolete jobs is just Welfare with extra steps.

Of course we should not do that. Never have. No more buggy whip manufacturers, are there? So far, there have always been new jobs as old ones became obsolete. As recently as a year ago there were more jobs than workers to fill them. We are not running out of jobs for people to do.

100 years ago there were a lot of farmers and no computer programmers.

We do provide basic income for those that need it. Dozens of welfare programs.

Well, at least we agreed on something - the 1,000,000 jobs that will be created by transition to electric vehicles is politics, not reality.

 

[nwdiver]

Of course we should not do that. Never have.

Really? Oh you sweet summer child. Here's one of many examples...

Rules to keep coal-fired power plants burning in Wyoming are expected soon

Another recent example is all the nuclear bailouts flying around. It's easy to couch language as preserving 'baseload' and there are always going to be other rationales but the end result is the same. Spend more $$$ to accomplish less per $ so more people are employed.

The most glaring example of 'Welfare Employment' IMHO I read about in Jared Diamonds 'Collapse'; Sheep farming is disastrous for the ecosystem in Australia. It's unprofitable and unsustainable but it's part of their cultural identity. So Australia ignores the damage and subsidizes the farmers to keep farming sheep. It's like the Aussie version of corn ethanol but ~10x dumber.

Of course there are some new jobs created but not nearly as many as the ones destroyed. Sure... there's ~100,000 people working in amazon fulfillment centers... but ~250,000 fewer working retail. In a few years I have no doubt there will be exciting new opportunities at amazon for AI and Robotics engineers. But every one of those positions will probably eliminate 100 fulfillment jobs. The need could not be more clear. We MUST decouple employment from income.

 

[juliusa]

The population of the US has more than tripled in 100 years, and productivity has gone way up - yet most people are employed.

Petroleum replaced whale oil - somehow we made that transition.

Amazon is not new - we have survived. People are employed.

Perhaps we could start by decoupling healthcare from employment. Let's wait until we run out of jobs for people to do before we consider decoupling income from jobs. What will politicians run on if they can't promise jobs?

 

[nwdiver]

The population of the US has more than tripled in 100 years, and productivity has gone way up - yet most people are employed.

Petroleum replaced whale oil - somehow we made that transition.

Amazon is not new - we have survived. People are employed.

Perhaps we could start by decoupling healthcare from employment. Let's wait until we run out of jobs for people to do before we consider decoupling income from jobs. What will politicians run on if they can't promise jobs?

The 4th industrial revolution is unlike anything that has come before. There's almost nothing humans can do that machines won't soon be able to do better.

If the primary purpose of employment is 'identity, feeling of self worth, and so much more' as you say then why not decouple it from income? People can just find what they want to do and do it...