3 ms·

When the steam machine was invented, it seriously disrupted Europe where most of people were working in the fields. Some people rebelled and destroyed these ma

When the steam machine was invented, it seriously disrupted Europe where most of people were working in the fields. Some people rebelled and destroyed these machines who "stole their jobs". Some thinkers thought it would be the end of work. There was a long and difficult transition period, but in the end, they were wrong. People moved to cities and did different jobs. New jobs. It will be the same over and over again.

imglorp 10y ago
Not this time. Automation really will replace people on massive scales because this time it's all of possible, cheap, and better. Pro drivers are first, 10m in the US. Fast food and retail are next. Imagine McD's and Walmart as drive-up vending machines.
- shin_lao 10y ago
  >Not this time How do you know? You don't know the needs of tomorrow. All this free time will create demand for new jobs: coaches, therapist, teachers, etc. Also think about micro factories and bespoke production on demand. This will need people.
- thadjo 10y ago
  I'm sympathetic to the 'not this time' argument but I don't think it has to do with the scale of technical disruption. At the beginning of the 20th century nearly half the labor force was in agriculture; now it's somewhere between 1-2%. In terms of magnitude of displacement, I don't think what we are seeing now, or anticipate seeing in the next decade is of a different kind than what we saw with the mechanization of agriculture. What concerns me is: 1) The rate at which these disruptions are occurring, and 2) The ability for displaced labor to find other opportunities in the economy. The shift from agriculture to manufacturing took place over decades and didn't require significant retraining. The shifts we are seeing now cut across a wide swath of 'unskilled' labor which is appears to be in a general decline. (I recommend checking out EconTalk episodes with David Autor and Erik Hurst: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/econtalk/id135066958?mt=2 https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/econtalk/id135066958?mt=...)
wycx 10y ago
Better technology did not make more better jobs for horses.

imglorp 10y ago

Not this time. Automation really will replace people on massive scales because this time it's all of possible, cheap, and better. Pro drivers are first, 10m in the US. Fast food and retail are next. Imagine McD's and Walmart as drive-up vending machines.

shin_lao 10y ago
>Not this time How do you know? You don't know the needs of tomorrow. All this free time will create demand for new jobs: coaches, therapist, teachers, etc. Also think about micro factories and bespoke production on demand. This will need people.
thadjo 10y ago
I'm sympathetic to the 'not this time' argument but I don't think it has to do with the scale of technical disruption. At the beginning of the 20th century nearly half the labor force was in agriculture; now it's somewhere between 1-2%. In terms of magnitude of displacement, I don't think what we are seeing now, or anticipate seeing in the next decade is of a different kind than what we saw with the mechanization of agriculture. What concerns me is: 1) The rate at which these disruptions are occurring, and 2) The ability for displaced labor to find other opportunities in the economy. The shift from agriculture to manufacturing took place over decades and didn't require significant retraining. The shifts we are seeing now cut across a wide swath of 'unskilled' labor which is appears to be in a general decline. (I recommend checking out EconTalk episodes with David Autor and Erik Hurst: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/econtalk/id135066958?mt=2 https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/econtalk/id135066958?mt=...)

wycx 10y ago

Better technology did not make more better jobs for horses.