However, these commutes should get shorter just because the cars will drive better and maybe at higher speeds.
Most people commuting are those with families who live further out for less cost and/or more house because they have families.
His quotes are more like anecdotal illustrations to a bigger point.
I'm skeptical because
1. a large part of the housing pressure in many urban places is artificially created by the past several decades of bad building/zoning policy.
2. the usual type of struggling rural community we think about is often more than an hour from a big city. I doubt even a self-driving car makes a 3-5 hour roundtrip commute appealing. And this doesn't address traffic at all, which is already often the bottleneck of how far out from a city it is feasible to commute from.
I'm generally excited about the prospect of self-driving cars but apprehensive of this idea that it will let us continue/increase our suburban sprawling for free.
Many cities have gone through drastic swings in population due to structural changes in the economy. Some, like Oakland, did not handle it well and paid dearly for it.
Long ~3 Hr RT "Self-driving" commutes already exist to some extant: FB, Google, etc, Oakland->MTV buses. People use them and they are required for talent retention.
I don't think there will be a problem for white collar workers or technical workers at all. Not sure about blue collar workers - I mean you always hear about how there is a shortage of people who are skilled in construction or whatnot. Will that be automated soon? I would be surprised. If not, perhaps some muscle-requiring jobs might even be more in demand.
Even if newer generations will be prepared for different types of labor, that still leaves lots of people with skills that are obsolete and the inability to adjust. And I think this problem is much bigger for lower-schooled work, which is exactly the kind of stuff that'll be automated first.
I'm a well-educated programmer and many of my skills are general and abstract enough to adjust to a changing world with relatively little effort. But I suspect a truck driver without a degree will have significantly more trouble adjusting to a world where his job is automated away.
While white-collar jobs fall somewhere in between, even there I've seen the negative effects of automation and changing requirements, and I think this is only now starting to become a real problem. I've met quite a number of people (even in the < 30 crowd) who are shockingly bad with computers, for example, and the only reasons I can think of that they get away with it is that 1) their 40+ manager/boss is is equally 'illiterate' so the whole company is 'old-fashioned' or 2) they cannot be easily fired (which I approve of, personally).
The way I see it, many of these people are one crafty, ambitious, young tech-savvy employee, consultant, or competitor away from being obsoleted. There's just a lag between what is possible and what companies actually do.
1. A lot of us think we will be needed, or we will be able desirable to someone, or company.
2. I don't know your backround, but unless your education is in a field where there's a big barrier to entry (medicine always comes to mind); I think even the Ivy Leaguers will feel the rath of automation.
3. Willie Brown is actively wondering what San Franciso is going to do when this current tech boom ends. He doesn't want to add to the huge homeless problem that visible everywhere in that city.
4. I read somewhere that workforce participation is at historic lows, or a 30 year low. I don't know? It's the number of people who can work, but just gave up number. I've looked at the unemployment numbers, and they just don't feel right. I almost feel like they are lying? I know so many able bodied people who are barely getting by. They have multiple jobs because they are young, and have energy. Companies like Uber has no problem finding people who will go into debt in order to "get their side hussle on". It's all so easier when your on your 20-30's. You have a network of friends on for support/networking. I know too many forty year olds that are living off their savings. It's so much harder when you get older.
5. I really fear what will happen to the "well educated" white collar worker finds out their skills are just not needed, or they hit 45 on the tech sector? I honestly don't know what "well educated" is anymore. It makes a much sence as a "Professional Manager"? I can't imagine companies in the future will really care what university you went to. After all, they went to college too. They know what it's all about.
6. My point is we should all be a little concerned. I know well educated guys whom hit 45-50, and just arn't needed anymore. Some try to go into blue collar jobs, but they don't seem to last. (Try to stay somewhat fit. Blue collar work is usually physically demanding. Even working at Cost-co, or Wholefoods is standing on your feet all day long, and construction blue collar jobs--are a bitch on the body.) I have noticed White Collar workers usually come from supportive families, so they don't become homeless. But--many do.
7. I really don't want to debate anyone. I just don't see the availability of jobs like I did in the 90's, and that was during a ression. I do see a lot of cushy tech jobs that I doubt will be there in ten years. Why do I feel like we will soon be talking about the free food Google used to offer its employees? "Remember the good ole days?"
Because I do strongly believe that society favors the higher-educated, or at least those who are good at abstract thought, and I think it's very unlikely that this will change in the near future. And if it does, we're probably all pretty fucked.
That said, I'm not disagreeing with you (both). Just wanted to clarify my position.
Why is the solution always to commute into cities?
No, because if you work-day was originally 8hrs of work + 2hrs of commute, it's now just 6hrs of work + 2hrs of work.
I mean, I hope this becomes the case but I think employees will need to ask for it more.
I agree:
I put 200,000+ miles on each of three cars, mostly commuting to work. Soooo, that was a lot of money, all after tax -- buy the car, usually on time so that there was interest, pay for insurance, fuel, maintenance, tolls, parking. All those expenses should have been pre-tax money, "unreimbursed business expenses" like, say, professional text books at least long were.
Should I be compensated for my high rent that comes with living downtown?
The parking is insufficient and costs money, so the drivers would like cheaper more plentiful parking.
The non-drivers catch the bus or pay extra to live in the surrounding suburbs so they can walk in.
Neither side will see the others point of view.
When I was brand new in my career I got about $200 a month for not using a parking spot in Santa Monica. It was a nice little bonus.
I'm not saying it's impossible. I've done it here and there. But it's definitely a challenge and far from a norm.
Right now we can't show you ads in your car, of course, because you're in command of two tons of steel moving at high speed, so your attention needs to be fully concentrated on that task. But if the car could drive itself, think of all the ways we could monetize that newly tappable reservoir of attention! It'd be a gold rush!
He doesn't say that, of course, because the vision of a world where you can spend your commute playing with your kid is a much easier sell than the vision of a world where your car becomes a kind of rolling Skinner box, with you a literally captive audience (what are you going to do, step out of a moving vehicle?) to be bombarded with messages by the highest bidder. But... yeah.
> ...considering this statement was delivered while the US Workforce Participation is at 30+ year lows w...
You cropped out "around the world" which was a prominent prepositional phrase in his sentence.
Also, I believe the theory is (assuming we even still have 8 hour work days), you work an hour in the car, work 6 at work, work an hour driving home.
They aren't. Which is a problem.
Personally, I just want a better voice in what that progress looks like. Rather than listening to venture capitalists whose sole claim to fame is making a lot of money off a social media platform. "Oh, well he got lucky in the financial lotto, so I guess I better listen to him."
SV capitalists are like yesterdays capitalists. "More capitalism" is the only solution that makes sense to them. Not necessarily because it makes sense in the big picture, but because their power and wealth rely on it.
There was the whole Netscape thing, too. I mean, way his arguments on their merits, but he's not just a random VC.
If the good ideas are obvious, why bother listening to him?
He seems to ignore that an obvious good idea still requires exorbitant amounts of capital to enable it. No one can hack together a Netscape and win big anymore, been there done that.
Honestly, this "advice" comes off as a) obvious b) tone deaf.
How do you have progress without private industry actually making things?
It's nearly impossible to have both, ie, progress and no negative consequences. So which would you rather have?
For example, did nobody stop to ask what would happen to all that non-biodegradable plastic meant to service a disposable economy?
Do you feel the impact of the browser has been a net negative?
...considering this statement was delivered while the US Workforce Participation is at 30+ year lows while productivity and technological change has made significant inroads during that time (ex: Macintosh 512k vs. iPhone 7), I think he's missing a large chunk of the, uh, big picture.
Then, contrast one of his well reasoned and very telling thoughts about the future:
>All of a sudden you can have the idea that an hour-long commute is actually a big perk because instead of driving and having to sit and focus and lurch through traffic, what if your car is a rolling living room? What if you get to spend that hour playing with your kid or reading the news or watching TV or actually working because you don’t have to worry about driving?
Because in the United States, we should be working even while we are getting to work, because we don't work enough? SMDH. To me, the Working Class has plenty of reason to be cynical about this vision of the future..."playing with your kids in the car" time or not.