3 ms·
Tech moves on and usually displaces labour but so far hasn't created mass unemployment. Instead it's made us richer. At any point in time people are concerned
by RobinL 11y ago
Tech moves on and usually displaces labour but so far hasn't created mass unemployment. Instead it's made us richer. At any point in time people are concerned by the job destruction caused by progress, but after it has happened rarely want to rewind and go back to the old ways.
I'm curious - if you think this is a bad thing, are there technological innovations which have already happened which you would want to undo? How many jobs do you think it would create? GPS could provide be a good thought experiment.
- clort 11y ago> Instead it's made us richer. some of us, anyway http://www.cbsnews.com/news/census-data-half-of-us-poor-or-low-income/ I wonder what it means when half of the richest country in the world lives in poverty..
- RobinL 11y agoThere are clearly serious problems with wealth and income distribution. However, the size of the pie and the distribution of it are different problems (although not independent). It doesn't follow that by prohibiting technological progress things would be more equal. I'm not sure what the relationship is between income distribution and progress; I think there are probably arguments both ways. For example, would income inequality be rising even if technological progress was not happening? Probably yes, from my reading of Pikkety. Those with capital would probably continue to accumulate more. But it would affect returns to capital so perhaps it's not so clear cut. Is income inequality increasing as a result of technological progress? Maybe, I guess? I'd be quite interested to see some real evidence either way because I don't think the answer is intuitive either way.