Self-driving trucks will be job-killers.
http://gizmodo.com/self-driving-trucks-are-going-to-kill-jobs-and-not-jus-1705921308"Those 3.5 million truck drivers driving all over the country stop regularly to eat, drink, rest, and sleep. Entire businesses have been built around serving their wants and needs. Think restaurants and motels as just two examples. So now we’re talking about millions more whose employment depends on the employment of truck drivers. But we still can’t even stop there.
Those working in these restaurants and motels along truck-driving routes are also consumers within their own local economies. Think about what a server spends her paycheck and tips on in her own community, and what a motel maid spends from her earnings into the same community. That spending creates other paychecks in turn. So now we’re not only talking about millions more who depend on those who depend on truck drivers, but we’re also talking about entire small town communities full of people who depend on all of the above in more rural areas. With any amount of reduced consumer spending, these local economies will shrink."
--------------------
Beware: Most unskilled workers will be replaced with robots whenever its cheaper. The only save jobs for unskilled workers will be those where the human component is part of the service/product, e.g. customer-service like waiting tables or crafting artisanal products.
And for those who go by the old "there-will-always-be-new-kinds-of-jobs" route: Please list examples of new jobs for 3.5 million unskilled workers, created by self-driving trucks.
= new reply since forum marked as read
As a pilot car driver, I think it's a great idea. 
Nothing pisses me off more than a 18 wheeler so close to my back bumper I feel like the truck is going to run over me. 
My mother in law, growing up in an outlaying neighborhood in a small Alabama city the 1940's, still lived in a house that needed to have all the indoor plumbing completed (no hot water heater), and they had a pony cart to get to "downtown" and go shopping until she was in high school (otherwise, they biked and walked), even as most of their neighbors had cars.
Now-a-days, adaptation to technology is increasing at logarithmic pace, as the implementation of new technology quickly leads to the development of it's replacement. I've seen the impact that a home computer has done to "office", not to mention drafting and modeling/simulation, research, and other supplemental support tasking; even 10 years ago, a service center might have three to five people just to handle paperwork for techs and/or sales people; now, sales people do their own paperwork and tech support is automated to the degree that menus replace the local techs, and shift the support to one or two dedicated technicians at a central office.
Working from anywhere affects transit and office maintenance jobs. Administration can be automated; my company just got rid of their travel group, the "mail room", and half of the supply support group because of their new software - the employee spends an hour or so on company time to do his/her own online search at the company supplies request or travel page, makes the "e-request", the manager confers with a departmental financial controller who checks the automated contracts accounting and budgeting tracker, and they both then click to approve or not - and the tickets, or supplies, or whatever is delivered directly to the employee.
That was a whole division of 50 employees, along with 28 other jobs (and associated overhead) that just disappeared three years ago. I know four people who are still looking for permanent work; they can get "Kelly Jobs" or contract out on small jobs, but no one is hiring staff anymore - and when you're trying to pay off a student loan or put kids through school, you need the security of a full-time job.
Half of the pharmacy we go to get my husband's medications is automated. A good amount of nursing staffs are automated.
And as more and more of the better-paying larger companies automate, these people have fewer and fewer options to become re-employed at.
Those jobs can't be transitioned into supporting new technology, because the technology supports itself, unlike the advent of the automobile or more advanced factory machinery. A blacksmith could easily transition to an auto line mechanic, a buggy-whip maker or carriage maker could transition to auto upholstery, body-work, or floor operator.
There is very little "line mechanic" or "body work", or even "floor operator" job to transition to. The floor operator is now one or two people at a monitor screen looking at indicators, and the machinery on the floor pretty much operates itself.
We are looking at the end of mass work due to automation, not a transition from one technology to another that could still employ a lot of people with a little bit of re-training.
In the late 1990's, Thomas Friedman, of the "Flat World" fame, dictated that the loss of US manufacturing and customer/technical support jobs will be made up by an increase of "service jobs" - that the factory worker will be able to transition to supporting a global economy by becoming a warehouse employee or driver, and the service/support technician can just as easily transition to retail or personal service support for investors and shareholders whose profit increases will spur consumer purchases, that will then drive the economy - because, of course, every 5%'er and above will hire personal shoppers, shippers, and other staff with the increases they'd see in their profits. In the world of Trickle-down economics, anyone and everyone in the US can be an investor and end up make tens to hundreds of thousands a year with all that spare money they made while being overpaid for their minimal production...
Problem is, there are very few new transitional/replacement technology jobs for people who can't get into MIT or an advanced STEM school that aren't being automated. There are very few new transitional/replacement service jobs that aren't already being automated.
There are is still a fairly large amount of openings for jobs that are entrepreneurial in nature, but 1) you have to know someone to get into them and 2) if you're going to start your own business, you need money to keep you going for at least three years to get it off the ground - if you're lucky and it will get off the ground.
And the problem with entrepreneurial work is that once the fashion or situation that drove the customer to look to your business to meet his/her needs, you're pretty much done, unless you can catch the next fashion or situation.
I just got my degree in Business/with a minor in managing Emerging Technologies at a fairly liberal University. It looks pretty grim for the average unskilled or semi-skilled worker.
Haele
much more than a few years to implement self-driving trucks (per the OP of this whole thread.) See my post directly above yours on why 
We're also talking about a field that's spread out over the whole continent. It's not like there's going to be 3.5 million out of work truckers in one region/state/city. When you consider the amount of time it's going to take to replace all rigs to self-driving types, then you've got plenty of time for folks to find other areas of work, whether through retraining, re-educating, or whatever.
People will find work. I think y'all are selling the adaptability of folks short.
It reminds me of some of these stationary grid-based systems of mass-transit, where the automated vehicles are overhead and make using mass-transit easier than even taking the subway or light-rail. People will then get rid of their personal vehicles for the most part, and lose the high-cost of maintaining one (maintenance, fuel, cleaning, insurance, storage/parking.) I'd give up my car if a self-driving fleet was available 
and I could consider myself one to a point. I'd love to see more tracks available as well as some of these exotic supercars available to try out for those of us that can only gawk at them on Top Gear. I could get my tight-cornering and fast-curves fix without missing it from the self-driving car I sleep in on the way to and from work
It sucks for the people? That's not callous?
Well I suppose the very wealthy will always need someone to scrub their toilets.
It's true I'm no expert on the industrial age, or the modern era at large, being a medievalist. I do understand, however, that new technologies replace older ones, and generally there are new jobs created from this change. I also understand that there are losers when this happens, even though society at large benefits. I just can't be callous about it or shrug in indifference when people, for whatever reason, are unable to fit in with this new dynamic because there are no new jobs for them.
