[karaterobot]

Not by my reading of the original comment. Seems like they're saying that layoffs result in higher skilled jobs.

And here's my basis for that conclusion:

> The issue that I see addressed less often is that the new jobs require by definition, a higher skill set.

And what I'm saying is that there may not be new jobs, and if they are they may be lower skill jobs if history is any indication.

[starttoaster]

The robots replaced the frontline laborers, yes. But someone now needs to maintain, build, and engineer new robots. Hence they said the laborer's job was replaced with one that requires fewer people at a higher skill (and probably pay) level. Or at least that's what I picked out from their comment.

[pixl97]

Please note that while the robot is replacing local jobs, the people engineering, building, and maintaining robots could be ln the other side of the plant also. In a world that's seen a huge amount of consolidation we are likely to see further consolidation.

[starttoaster]

It is not uncommon to move across the United States for work. Across the planet might be a different story.

[ranger_danger]

My understanding was that they're saying it's the act of replacing the worker with a robot that requires more skilled workers to maintain/design/manufacture/etc., not that it merely resulted in a layoff.

[downrightmike]

USA stem grads are too expensive, so companies are just opening body shops in asia/south america.

So stem education was largely just a grift to get everyone they could into college.

[throwaway4220]

Your first statement doesn’t really match your second statement

[downrightmike]

Get a stem(tm) education! It'll get you a job! Wait.. you cost too much now, so we're not going to hire you, instead we'll outsource.