Profit from the rise of the robots

By MoneyWeek Editor John Stepek Sep 05, 2012

John Stepek

Share with
friends:

Comments (24) Print this article

Signs that the global economy is slowing down continue to roll in.

Logistics group FedEx warned that earnings for the three months to August 31 would be lower than expected. As the FT points out, express delivery groups are particularly sensitive to the slowing economy. As companies see inventories of goods pile up, “demand for express services to replenish them can fall sharply”.

It shouldn’t come as a huge surprise. Manufacturing data from around the world has been gloomy in recent months. In most countries, activity in the sector is shrinking.

Business cycles come and go. We had a boom and we’re still in the bust stage. It’s only to be expected.

But behind all this, there’s a far bigger, longer-term change taking place in manufacturing. And smart investors should be looking at how to profit from it now...

What happens to humans when machines take over?

Robots have been used in factories for decades. But now, as John Markoff reports in The New York Times, a new wave of “far more adept” robots are “replacing workers around the world in both manufacturing and distribution”.

In short, robots are getting cheaper, and better at doing things. According to Markoff, Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee of Massachusetts Institute of Technology believe that the coming transition could be comparable to the collapse in US agricultural employment over the last century. That’s a big claim. About 40% of the workforce worked on farms in 1900. Now it’s 2%.

The pace with which robots take over might be exaggerated – these things often are, particularly by breathless ‘experts’. But it’s only taken around 20 years for the internet to demolish the business models of the music, print, and retail industries, from a virtually standing start. So it’d be naive not to start considering the impact of any changes now.

From a social angle, this all raises some interesting and difficult questions. What are the human beings going to do when their jobs are automated? Sure, a lot of these tasks aren’t pleasant: smartphone factories come under attack regularly over their working conditions. But being unemployed in an emerging economy with little by way of a social welfare safety net isn’t much fun either.

No one has the answers, and our job here is to look at the investment angle rather than the social angle. But I’d be interested to hear your opinions on this – give us your tuppence worth in the comments below.


Sign up for a 3-week FREE trial of MoneyWeek
and get the following free as well

"The only financial publication I could not be without."
John Lang, Director, Tower Hill Associates Ltd


Why the rise of the robots is good news for the US dollar

There are plenty of investment implications. But from a ‘big picture’ point of view, it’s another reason to be sceptical of China’s imminent ascendance over the US. Why?

China’s big trump card for the last decade or so has been cheap labour. That’s already changing. For one thing, wages are rising in China, while in many cases they are falling in the US. So when you throw in high transport costs (due to high energy prices), then the advantage of making goods in China to sell to the US becomes far less obvious.

But if you remove cheap labour from the equation altogether – as happens with automation – then energy, rather than wages, becomes the major issue. You need a supply of cheap electricity to run these factories on.

The shale gas bonanza in the US has already driven natural gas prices to near-record lows. This may not last, but the US also has plentiful reserves of coal. So there’s plenty of scope for utilities to switch between the two fuels as necessary, and keep prices low. And if solar power takes off on top of that, you can see that it makes a lot of sense for forward-thinking companies to use the US as their manufacturing base – particularly if that’s where their customers are going to be too.

As James Ferguson pointed out last year in MoneyWeek magazine, this is one major reason why, despite the best efforts of Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke, the US dollar is likely to be a stronger currency in years to come.

The race to devalue paper currencies is likely to continue as the world economy remains fragile. That’s why we’d hold onto gold as portfolio insurance. But we also think that having exposure to a stronger US dollar in your portfolio is a sensible idea. This can come in the form of solid dividend-paying blue-chips with US earnings, or even a short position in a currency that is hugely overvalued against the dollar (such as the Australian dollar).

In the latest issue of MoneyWeek, we look at other ways to profit from the rise of the robots. If you're not already a subscriber, claim your first three issues free here.

• This article is taken from the free investment email Money Morning. Sign up to Money Morning here .

Follow John on Twitter || Google+ John Stepek

Our recommended articles for today

Why I love the space game

Nasa pulling out of the low-earth orbit business has opened up opportunities for daring high tech rocket companies to fill the void, says Paul Hill.

Too much of a good thing

In an extract from his forthcoming book, Bill Bonner explains why economists failed to see what was right in front of their noses.

Comments (24)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Robin

    (05 September 2012, 11:43AM)  Complain about this comment

    Well, my view on the macro economic aspects of this are: consumers can only spend what they earn or that they can borrow (and then default on).

    Not paying employees, decreases consumer activity. Theoretically the extra labour capacity leads to the invention of new occupations?

    I'm sceptical.

    I think most new jobs that replace redundant jobs are created in sectors where there is potential for 'arms races'; circumstances where companies compete over a pie in an ever expanding and ultimately pointless way. Think marketing, and law. Beyond a point, advertising degrades the human experience, and law degrades freedoms.

    My solution to this is to have a citizen's allowance. Tax abnormal profits from business. Free education. What if one of the hamsters in the wheel is the next Einstein? Unemployment is not such a bad thing as long as the time and opportunities exist. What is the point of technology anyway?



  • 2. Tel Knight

    (05 September 2012, 12:06PM)  Complain about this comment

    Before the industrial revolution there were as many horses as people in Britain, if not more. Don't assume that surplus wage slaves and their children will be looked after any better when they are no longer needed by those with the power and the wealth.

  • 3. M

    (05 September 2012, 12:34PM)  Complain about this comment

    Real wealth is created through increases in output per unit of labour. People no longer working in factories will be producing and creating new goods and services demanded by a population with greater resources and more free time.

    When everyone worked the fields 7 days a week the tractor must have been a worrisome invention. No one can forecast what industry will replace or indeed create employment for those displaced. Who in 1912 knew a century later people would be spending their free time tweeting from their iPhones!

    A good read on this subject is
    http://www.amazon.com/Eat-People-Unapologetic-Game-Changing-Entrepreneurs/dp/1591843774

  • 4. Brucie

    (05 September 2012, 12:40PM)  Complain about this comment

    If you take robots to their logical conclusion no humans need be employed, which means that they won't get paid, which means that they won't be able to participate in the market, which means that the entrepreneurs won't be paid for the products the robots produce, which means that they'll have to lay off their robots because they won't have any work to do.
    I'm sure lawyers are already considering a class action for robots thrown on the heap before retirement.

  • 5. HL

    (05 September 2012, 12:48PM)  Complain about this comment

    The same human ingenuity that invents robots will doubtless invent new occupations and pastimes to replace lost jobs.

    Some of the pastimes might be nasty of course (drug addiction, war etc.), but many will surely devote their time to sports, opera, care of the elderly, teaching and other good things.

  • 6. robin

    (05 September 2012, 01:39PM)  Complain about this comment

    HL - love the way you think. The existence of work being created out of something... is what I doubt.
    We have two responsibilities in this life, to earn and to spend. If technology is making the first impossible, does it necessarily have to make the second impossible too? And isn't this the point of technology anyway, to provide us with a better world, not force poverty on entire generations?

    People seem to blindly have faith in this notion that new jobs will be created that are genuinely productive... We have subscribed to similar fantasies in the past. The efficient market hypothesis. The ideas that banks and stock markets contribute to society by funnelling money where it is needed.

    What does it mean to be productive anyway, in a world of robots? Orwell's 1984 goes on about a distopia, but what if the distopia isn't quite so awe full, but we are stuck in it just the same?

  • 7. Tel Knight

    (05 September 2012, 01:46PM)  Complain about this comment

    Zardoz

  • 8. Rãvï

    (05 September 2012, 01:57PM)  Complain about this comment

    Historically the way forward was to wage war and distribute some of the booty, treasure/taxes, to the Citizens by way of free bread, and circuses to relieve their boredom. Menial tasks like harvesting and road-building were done by importing man-power from conquered nations.
    Translated to the modern arena the way forward appears to be: Arms dealing in state-of-the art technology
    Acquisition of large land masses for agriculture/mining
    Welfare state to be vastly expanded
    Concentration of effort in extra-terrestrial colonisation.
    to name but a few. Note that if the historical mould is not broken then we are observing a non-sustainable system the decline and fall being a lot speedier than in Roman times.
    A concerted effort

  • 9. NVP

    (05 September 2012, 02:07PM)  Complain about this comment

    hey all

    Everything is in a constant state of change and evolution...Products , Markets , Consumers , Technology , Economies, Countries , Nature , the Human race......

    thats why we make the mistake of taking a straight line to any trend or bias we think we see ......A Classic Human frailty

    The future is never a straight line extrapolation

    NVP

  • 10. JYW

    (05 September 2012, 02:22PM)  Complain about this comment

    The world is vastly awash with energy humans can use, so no problem there.
    Robots will simply create vast amounts more work for humans, same as computers have done.
    However, the "life patterns" which humans carry between generations will replace the human body as host with the microchip, so tediously and sadly it's bye bye to us.

  • 11. NeutronWarp9

    (05 September 2012, 03:12PM)  Complain about this comment

    I re-call Tomorrow's World had much the same story in 1978. I think the human race will be OK. Robots are perhaps desirable for repetitive tasks and automated shipping, etc but does the ever-growing population of the world need such souless automatons?

    Increased productivity and higher profits are fine for employers and shareholders but there are social consequences.

    Many large factories I have visited have proudly replaced 20 or so shift-workers with a bright yellow robot made in Japan, South Korea, Germany or Italy. Meanwhile, the nearest town to each factory declines ever further into an economic wasteland.

    We used to export machines abroad and let Johnny Foreigner 'take our jobs'. Now we go one better and let JF build the robots that take our jobs.

  • 12. susanmba

    (05 September 2012, 03:53PM)  Complain about this comment

    Robots create jobs - for those who invested need to generate more cash to invest in the next technological idea; to show how wealthy and generous or cultural the financial beneficiaries of each well-marketed technological invention are, by their spending and donating the proceeds to suppliers, service providers, artists, and charitable causes: and for others to work in the realm of robot disruption, or re-focusing their capabilities for more humans to degenerate, requiring more and more technology to re-invent their bodies - finally leaving their remaining assets to the younger generation to spend, consume and donate ad infinitum!! As the scientific proverb goes:- No new matter is created or destroyed - only atoms going in circles, transforming continuously to create different patterns of solids and gasses.

  • 13. MC

    (05 September 2012, 04:56PM)  Complain about this comment

    Adapt or die. No one's planning a return to the plow or a spinning wheel so the robots are on their way regardless of what anyone says. Technology and people's love for it points only one way. In 50 years, if you've got enough cash you'll probably be able to replace most of your worn out body parts with a synthetic version, which could mean in 100 years the human is likely to be half 'robot' itself. Anyone saying they wouldn't want to buy themselves a new lease of health is lying. There's going to be an enormous market in everything surrounding this.

  • 14. Benny (M/s Diane).

    (05 September 2012, 05:18PM)  Complain about this comment


    I keep hearing that the US $ is fine in the short term from US sources.

    In the long term however many countries are already circumventng the dollar in favour of trade in their own currencies or that of neighbours.

    Many think the days of the petrodollar are over.

    The dollar will not be the reserve currency one day as we all suspect and then the USA will have serious problems.

  • 15. Ddandco

    (05 September 2012, 05:47PM)  Complain about this comment

    You may be interested in a recent book by Martin Ford which specifically addresses the economic and political effects of increasing automation in western society. It's "Lights in the Tunnel" and makes a good case for preparing for major effects on our society.

  • 16. Andy

    (05 September 2012, 07:25PM)  Complain about this comment

    Given that robots don't eat, commute to work, take breaks, etc. their running costs should be lower to justify their feasibility, thereby providing productivity gains.

    A logical argument is that robots themselves don't actually need the benefit of their gains, so whatever gains they provide will go back to humans. That is, whatever net gains arise, will pass back entirely to humans. So the cost and benefit analysis will always be positive.

    The problem is who gets to gain from the benefits if there is excessive use of robots, and the resulting rise in unemployment. There will probably need to be some kind of tax to take the gains and spread amongst the rest of society.

    Note that this already exists in societies, which offer tax breaks to create employment and jobs, which makes robots less attractive. Its probably a simple argument. But means there will be a lot more human activities for people, like sport, learning, entertainment and social events.

  • 17. aidan

    (06 September 2012, 12:03AM)  Complain about this comment

    Already technology is making people dumber, the phones are getting smarter but the people using them are getting dumber. The theory was that technology would free people from manual arduous tasks and freed from this humans would gravitate to higher things, do you really think this has happened?. Another huge problem is obesity if humans dont need to do physical tasks they wont, most people wont do enough physical exercise just for exercise sake, because people are naturally lazy. Now we have lifestyle coaches telling people that they must build exercise into their lives, but technology is doing the opposite creating jobs where all people do is sit down all day. Surely we have reached the stage where technology has moved to far for society to cope with it.

  • 18. Roger

    (06 September 2012, 10:22AM)  Complain about this comment

    When robots take over from humans for jobs, what humans do? From the current welfare society, we can imply drugs, sex, alcohol, purposeless destruction of public properties, killing each other, sports, education, parties (go back to drugs etc). We will be VERY busy indeed.

  • 19. Critic Al Rick

    (06 September 2012, 12:35PM)  Complain about this comment

    Man is pioneering his own extinction.

    How profitable is that?

  • 20. Karim

    (06 September 2012, 06:36PM)  Complain about this comment

    So the few that own the robots get even richer, stupidly rich, no doubt helped further by tax breaks from the Republicans, and everybody else ends up on welfare, and the country goes broke. Wait a minute... we're already there and the robots haven't even arrived yet!

    I fear that economic and social disaster looms large on the horizon.

  • 21. Ian S

    (07 September 2012, 01:41PM)  Complain about this comment

    Responding to the social aspect:

    The is a lot that is wrong with the capitalist system and with governments with "demoncratic" party governments. To the latter, as long as there are political parties good people can form a government (That is everyone should have to run as an indepent). As long as politicians are sponsored by corporations, their campaign fund raising, they are owned -bought and paid for - by corporations. They do what they corporate owners tell them to. (Example preferred nation status to totalitarian China in 1990 sold out the western nations to a country without labour protection or environmental protection and out-sourced the jobs and correspondingly economies of the west.)

  • 22. Ian 2

    (07 September 2012, 01:43PM)  Complain about this comment

    Robots are machines (capital) replacing workers. The excessive destructive forces of unbridled profit maximization would continue to concentrate remaining wealth in the top fraction of 1%. Without a healty well-paid middle-class and lawas to protect their rights and benefits goods cannot be manufactured for them as they cannot afford to buy them. This was the inherent problem of letting the corporations sell us out to China under the evil of free trade to countries, notably China, without the protection of workers or the planet.

  • 23. Ian 3

    (07 September 2012, 01:43PM)  Complain about this comment

    We need a new political model and a new financial model. As the corporations control the government (and not the voters who maintain a placebo charade of elections) it is difficult to see how the change to the destructive structure we have now will come. Further the corporations control the mass media and therefore the minds of the masses so a conscious change - such as party politics is corrupt and undemocratic - is hard to envision.

    As the planet is sinking under a massive population explosion and no-one daring to speak of one child per family goal on a worldwide basis, dithering about robots is trivial. The planet is on life-support and we are puling the plug.

  • 24. Mark

    (08 September 2012, 10:59AM)  Complain about this comment

    The major issue is the distribution of wealth. History suggests that when the skew between the top 1% and the rest gets too big:
    a)there isn't enough wealth (not "demand", everyone would demand a mansion if they could afford it!) for the masses to pay for stuff (eg now!) and
    b) the 99% get upset about it and conflict starts (Unions, politics or war).
    The robot- owning 1% could of course be charitable, employ people to do stuff for them at good wages and spread the wealth around more willingly.....ha ha ha ha ha !

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


>