Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

Economy. Is technology partially to blame?

Seriously is technology to blame? To an extent? Thousands used to be employed to work assembly lines, printing presses and filing. Everything has gone to computer or robotics to get the job done. Hell even theaters are going digital, no more need for a projectionist to splice films and set the reels.


Asked by Anonymous at 4:38 PM on Dec. 23, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

This question is closed.
Answers (6)
  • I think to a small degree, yes. But I think the larger problem is that as technology has improved and streamlined the manufacturing process thus changing the way things had "always been done," too many workers didn't keep up with changes within the industry--whether by choice or aptitude.

    I remember back in the late 70's several family members lose their jobs when the businesses started changing over to computers, copiers, fax machines, etc., and the employees either refused to use them or learn how to use the modern equipment. Because they couldn't/wouldn't keep up with the changing workplace environment, they were eventually fired.

    I've met excellent older teachers with over 30 years experience panic at the thought of entering grades into a computer database! In the private sector, they would have been replaced by now. As times change, people have to be willing to "go with the flow."

    Answer by LoriKeet at 5:25 PM on Dec. 23, 2010

  • While I understand what you are saying, there is a lot more to it than just technology. If you look at the stock market crash of 1929, it does give us some same answers as to what is happening now. I did an in depth paper on the Great Depression when I was in college and I began to see the signs that it was happening again. The idea that people and banks were playing in the stock market heavily as well as people making money off of real estate were big in the 1920's. It became big again in recent years. Just as in 1929, the people didn't see what could happen this time around either.
    Techonolgy has forced people out of the jobs that people once did, but it has opened up other jobs as well. The United States has shifted more from a manufacturing country to a country based in the service industry. OUr education has shifted toward this new industry instead of manufacturing.

    Answer by layh41407 at 4:49 PM on Dec. 23, 2010

  • okay but even with a shift form manufacturing to service think about it. from one factory 300 workers are laid off but for new technology in servicing 100 are hired. You don't *need* as many people to sustain a digital or technical business. It was all the rage to get a degree in web design. How many actually GOT jobs. Not many.

    Comment by Anonymous (original poster) at 4:52 PM on Dec. 23, 2010

  • Industries were closing down for decade prior to this last economic downfall. The steel industry was effected in the 1970's and 80's. The car industry was closing down factories for years. The economy, while it did have it's blips, went upward and onward for the most part.
    In 1929, the stock market crashed causing much more of a hardship than now. The reason was how people played the stock market. Throughout the 1920s a long boom took stock prices to peaks never before seen. From 1920 to 1929 stocks more than quadrupled in value. Many investors became convinced that stocks were a sure thing and borrowed heavily to invest more money in the market. But in 1929, the bubble burst and stocks crashed. At the same time, the real estate boom was beginning to crash as well, leaving entire developments unfinished. The problem was that the real estate boom was based, not on the value of the land, but on what a customer (cont)

    Answer by layh41407 at 5:32 PM on Dec. 23, 2010

  • was willing to pay. When the real estate industry began to be investigated, people who were intent on making money in flipping properties were unable to find buyers. At the same time, the people who were playing the stock market had mostly purchased stock based on margin. They only paid a fraction of what the stock was worth and would pay back the entire ‘loan’ when they cashed in that stock. When the market crashed, the lenders were demanding that the entire ‘loan’ be paid in full, but the people were unable to afford it as they didn’t have the money to invest in the first place. Which is a lot of what happened in the real estate industry this time around--people were given loans they really couldn’t afford to pay back.

    See how this all sounds vaguely familiar??

    Answer by layh41407 at 5:32 PM on Dec. 23, 2010

  • I think that is such a VERY small part of it. Sending jobs over sees, high taxes and a president who needs Economic 101 also contribute as well as other things.

    Answer by Anonymous at 7:59 PM on Dec. 23, 2010