Is technological progress causing unemployment?
A summary of this Slate Star Codex post 👇slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/19/tec…
A summary of this Slate Star Codex post 👇slatestarcodex.com/2018/02/19/tec…
Progress hasn't led to unemployment in the past.
Every time we get technological progress, either machines augment human workers or they expand industries so that they can employ more workers (e.g. ATMs meant more bank tellers)
AKA lump of labor fallacy:
Every time we get technological progress, either machines augment human workers or they expand industries so that they can employ more workers (e.g. ATMs meant more bank tellers)
AKA lump of labor fallacy:
Argument against: In the long run, perhaps the tech gets so good that instead of augmenting people it will replace them.
Here's that argument and counters to it:
Here's that argument and counters to it:
More germane to now, sometimes there is a lag btw the time it takes to automate jobs away and create the ones that replacement, & people suffer in the interim.
Automation & globalization contribute to short-term unemployment but there's no reason to believe that it is permanent.
Automation & globalization contribute to short-term unemployment but there's no reason to believe that it is permanent.
Well before COVID, unemployment was at historic lows.
That's partly a measurement issue, as we had more and more people outside of the workforce altogether, for a whole host of reasons (e.g. baby boomers retiring, more disabled people)
That's partly a measurement issue, as we had more and more people outside of the workforce altogether, for a whole host of reasons (e.g. baby boomers retiring, more disabled people)
"In the 1950s, ~97% (!) of prime-age men had a job. Today that number is more like 88%. This is the decline people are worrying about when they talk about technological unemployment or any other threat to work, and it seems to be happening across the Western world"
What happened to the million working-age men who are not in the workforce? Lots of unsatisfactory explanations.
Maybe it's the more miserable your work is, and the more decent options you have available to you (in terms of gov't support), the more likely you are to leave work.
Maybe it's the more miserable your work is, and the more decent options you have available to you (in terms of gov't support), the more likely you are to leave work.
Manufacturing has seen a big decline
"The people getting kicked out of manufacturing jobs may have other jobs available to them, but those jobs may not be as good or pay as well. This isn’t 'technological unemployment'. But it might be technological underemployment."
"The people getting kicked out of manufacturing jobs may have other jobs available to them, but those jobs may not be as good or pay as well. This isn’t 'technological unemployment'. But it might be technological underemployment."
Automation hits the middle class jobs first.
The highest-paying jobs are doing fine. The lowest-paying jobs are also doing fine.
It's the middle class jobs that are in trouble (e.g manufacturing, administrative positions)
So when they get automated, they get lower paying jobs.
The highest-paying jobs are doing fine. The lowest-paying jobs are also doing fine.
It's the middle class jobs that are in trouble (e.g manufacturing, administrative positions)
So when they get automated, they get lower paying jobs.
This makes sense intuitively.
Machines can't be CEOS. They also can't deliver pizza or do personal care.
But they can proofread, translate, drive trucks, etc.
Machines can't be CEOS. They also can't deliver pizza or do personal care.
But they can proofread, translate, drive trucks, etc.
But why is this worse now when progress has happened forever?
A combination of factors:
"Today's robots are better than yesterday's Rolexes"
Our education system has been worse at adapting & retraining ppl
We haven't had enough technological progress.
A combination of factors:
"Today's robots are better than yesterday's Rolexes"
Our education system has been worse at adapting & retraining ppl
We haven't had enough technological progress.
Conclusion:
No evidence of tech unemployment, but there might be potential underemployment (robots taking middle-skill jobs & pushing people into lower-skill jobs, or out of labor force entirely)
Usually there is an adjustment, but it takes time (& better gov't and ed policy).
No evidence of tech unemployment, but there might be potential underemployment (robots taking middle-skill jobs & pushing people into lower-skill jobs, or out of labor force entirely)
Usually there is an adjustment, but it takes time (& better gov't and ed policy).
