Wednesday, September 5, 2012

The Jobs of 2093

What will people be doing for work 81 years from now?

Click to enlarge.

This is great news. 100%! What could possibly go wrong? Perhaps I should zoom in on the chart a bit.

Click to enlarge.

Another exponential trend failure? Seriously? This just isn't our decade. Hey, at least the trend is still going up though. Right?

Click to enlarge.

I really shouldn't be using a 3rd order polynomial as an attempt to predict the future (extremely high correlation notwithstanding). That's just crazy talk! In order for this to make any sense at all we would either need to see robotic teachers and doctors *or* an inability to afford more education and health services in the future. How likely are those outcomes?

May 29, 2012
Mind-reading robot teachers keep students focused

During this story the robot raised its voice or used arm gestures to regain the student's attention if the EEG levels dipped. These included pointing at itself or towards the listener - or using its arms to indicate a high mountain, for example.

May 11, 2004
Robot doctor gets thumbs-up from patients

"Generally, the robot checked up on patients, asked them how they were feeling, inspected their surgical sites to ensure proper healing, and answered questions," said Dr. Louis Kavoussi, a professor of urology at Johns Hopkins and the study's lead author.

August 18, 2012
Obama Attacks Republicans Over Teacher Layoffs

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Saturday bashed Congressional Republicans — and by association, the Romney campaign — for failing to prevent teacher layoffs made by cash-strapped state and local governments.

September 5, 2012
Healthcare costs threaten financial well being of elderly

The researchers investigated total out-of-pocket healthcare expenditures in the last five years of life, and looked at these costs as a percentage of total household assets. In their study it was found that greater than three quarters of households spent at least $10,000, with the spending for all participants averaging $38,688 in the last five years of life. It was even more shocking to find that a quarter of participants made an average contribution of $101,791, and the same number spent more than their total household assets on healthcare.

See Also:
Trend Line Disclaimer
Sarcasm Disclaimer

Source Data:
St. Louis Fed: Custom Chart


Troy said...

Historical and Projected Number of Medicare Beneficiaries and Number of Workers Per Beneficiary

Their 2.3 workers/per beneficiary estimate is contentious.

2.3 x 80 million is 184 million. Going with the current PAYEMS as workers not jobs to be generous, that's still 50 million jobs needed in 18 years, 230,000 per month every month.

Even PAYEMS' historical gain ain't going to get us there.

$23,000 beneficiary cost / 2.3 beneficiaries per worker is $10,000 per worker, 20% of the average wage.

Japan, by comparison, has it made in the shade. Their baby boom is tiny and is already turning 63. is a projection of their population. It shows Japan’s seniors will rise from 30M to ~35M, but counter-balancing this 5M increase is the 4M decline of youngsters, from ~17M to 13M.

We, of course, are going to have MORE seniors and MORE school-age kids in 2030, up ~10% from 73M to ~80M.

Make Room!, Make Room!

Nobody will be as shocked as I if my investment in Japanese actually pays off going forward!

Scott said...

Love the 3rd order polynomial; and the R squared number is amazing. Of course, inability to afford more healthcare and education spending is certain. Rapidly declining return on marginal education dollar; and the simple fact that income growth isn't keeping up with health care increases dictate that these growth trends will hit a wall/drop off a cliff.

Double digit health care cost increases just aren't sustainable long term.

Stagflationary Mark said...


Their 2.3 workers/per beneficiary estimate is contentious.

Pure Imagination

I'm kind of tearing up. ;)

Stagflationary Mark said...


Love the 3rd order polynomial; and the R squared number is amazing.

It was somewhat tongue-in-cheek of course. Polynomials generally don't do well when extrapolated.

That said, the data sure looked like a 3rd order polynomial. You get exactly two turns in the data with a 3rd order polynomial and they were both there.

Note that my Trend Line Disclaimer heckles a polynomial trend line equation though.

As seen within the link...

With an R-squared value that high, you would expect the equation to accurately predict future values (but again, this is Microsoft).

A 6th order polynomial couldn't accurately predict the future? Shocking!! I guess we'll just have to count on the astrologers. ;)

And it was blamed on Micosoft? That's just priceless, lol.