> we can't be expecting everyone to become an engineer or a scientist
We don't have to. There are many complicated jobs that aren't white collar but still require a highly skilled individual and are not currently achievable by robotics (millwrights for example).
The OP is referring to removing monotonous, simplistic, repetitive jobs.
True to a point but you're trying to handwave around some very simple math. We are not seeing new industries emerge that require large pools of labor which means the jobs being wiped out by automation are not being replenished.
> We are not seeing new industries emerge that require large pools of labor which means the jobs being wiped out by automation are not being replenished.
Do you have a citation for that? I would be interested in seeing that. According to the Chinese government (which has been accused, in fairness, of fudging the numbers) their unemployment rate is highly stable.
Historically, as countries transition from developing to developed their workforce will shift from primarily non-skilled labour to primarily skilled labour [1]. China appears to be following this line naturally, if you trust their reported unemployment rates.
I do not have a citation. Are you aware of any combination of industries that have emerged in the last 30 years that have produced strong demand for unskilled or semi-skilled labor? Housing & construction hasn't blown up, manufacturing sector jobs have vanished. Mining is in sharp decline. Forestry has automated away most of it's workforce. Infrastructure is also in the toilet. So what am I missing?
We don't have to. There are many complicated jobs that aren't white collar but still require a highly skilled individual and are not currently achievable by robotics (millwrights for example).
The OP is referring to removing monotonous, simplistic, repetitive jobs.