I'm really sick of seeing articles about this guy's book. He identifies a trend and claims that the trend will continue. Yet the existence of the trend itself h

I'm really sick of seeing articles about this guy's book. He identifies a trend and claims that the trend will continue. Yet the existence of the trend itself has no inherent predictive value. Current income inequality does not tell us anything about tomorrow's policy environment and its effects on future income inequality. Demography considered in isolation does not predict economic growth. Decreased labor force participation from boomer retirements may in fact reduce inequality by restricting the supply of labor and raising its price. Not to mention that he blithely refuses to consider what technological advances are actually in the R&D pipeline and how they may affect economic growth. Any one of the long list of potential tech revolutions over the next 20 years could reverse the trend. Fusion and miniaturized fusion (e.g. what they're developing at Skunkworks) could completely eliminate emissions and completely crash energy prices. Self-driving cars and trucks will drastically reduce transportation costs. Imagine the effect of fusion-powered 99% automated ships on the cost of global supply chains. Biotech is increasing quality of life and the length of time workers are able to participate in the workforce while cutting down on time spent out of the workforce due to disability or illness. And that's just scratching the surface. Gordon fails to realize that innovation tends to happen in bursts. Information technology did not have as much of a direct impact on productivity as previous technological revolutions, but it has impacted innovation itself and will increase the frequency of those bursts.