3 ms·

I'm not sure productivity is measured correctly. In general it's measured something like increase in $/employee. But let's say you're a commercial printer. Th

by petra 6y ago

I'm not sure productivity is measured correctly. In general it's measured something like increase in $/employee. But let's say you're a commercial printer. The industry is moving to new printers that print double the amount, per employee hour. If prices stayed the same, you'd see double productivity. But because every company has the new, fastest machine , prices greatly reduce, and stop reflecting the fact that a single employee can now do 2x the work.

Barrin92 6y ago
>If prices stayed the same, you'd see double productivity. But because every company has the new, fastest machine , prices greatly reduce, and stop reflecting the fact that a single employee can now do 2x the work. this phenomenon (price deflation) can exist but we can actually measure deflation/inflation, so there's no need for a hypothetical, and there is no widespread deflation, or put differently increase in consumer purchasing power due to increased production. There's actually very limited sectors where this dynamic exists (think the costs of a GB of data), but healthcare, construction, education, infrastructure all have not been automated, and hence aren't any cheaper. In fact there's actually a decline in producitivity in US construction, as decades of erosion and retiring of experienced workers leave the industry in a bad shape, the US has started to lose manufacturing knowledge. Whatsapp messages and tweets may have gotten a lot cheaper, but it's worth remembering that 'tech' is only 10% of the US economy, employing 3-6 million people depending on how you count. The overwhelming majority of the physical economy and service sector is still practically untouched by it, despite many claims to the contrary. Just physically you can walk into a retail store, which is the most common place of employment around the world. It's got a Square Stand on the desk maybe, but otherwise, not exactly a lot of things have changed. Same thing in the classroom or a hospital ward.
- petra 6y ago
  // There's actually very limited sectors where this dynamic exists (think the costs of a GB of data), but healthcare, construction, education, infrastructure all have not been automated, and hence aren't any cheaper. That's true. But it's a bit more complicated. In construction for example, there's the new prefab sector, which uses a lot of robots, growing nicely. It's a bit challenging to open such expensive factories with boom/bust cycles in construction, but they might figure it out. As for infrastructure, we're starting to see companies working on robotic heavy equipment. As for healthcare, that's an industry I don't understand. It's a very innovative industry. And some of the treatments and the medtech should have created efficiency gains, while not looking like robots. For example: curing hepatitis or cnc for dental crowns. But we don't seem to measure that efficiency. Weird. As for retail, with e-commerce, some of our transactions have surely became more automated. And we chose to convert some if the efficiency gains, into comfort, to receive things at our door. But delivery robots might automate that part too.

by petra 6y ago

Barrin92 6y ago

>If prices stayed the same, you'd see double productivity. But because every company has the new, fastest machine , prices greatly reduce, and stop reflecting the fact that a single employee can now do 2x the work. this phenomenon (price deflation) can exist but we can actually measure deflation/inflation, so there's no need for a hypothetical, and there is no widespread deflation, or put differently increase in consumer purchasing power due to increased production. There's actually very limited sectors where this dynamic exists (think the costs of a GB of data), but healthcare, construction, education, infrastructure all have not been automated, and hence aren't any cheaper. In fact there's actually a decline in producitivity in US construction, as decades of erosion and retiring of experienced workers leave the industry in a bad shape, the US has started to lose manufacturing knowledge. Whatsapp messages and tweets may have gotten a lot cheaper, but it's worth remembering that 'tech' is only 10% of the US economy, employing 3-6 million people depending on how you count. The overwhelming majority of the physical economy and service sector is still practically untouched by it, despite many claims to the contrary. Just physically you can walk into a retail store, which is the most common place of employment around the world. It's got a Square Stand on the desk maybe, but otherwise, not exactly a lot of things have changed. Same thing in the classroom or a hospital ward.

petra 6y ago
// There's actually very limited sectors where this dynamic exists (think the costs of a GB of data), but healthcare, construction, education, infrastructure all have not been automated, and hence aren't any cheaper. That's true. But it's a bit more complicated. In construction for example, there's the new prefab sector, which uses a lot of robots, growing nicely. It's a bit challenging to open such expensive factories with boom/bust cycles in construction, but they might figure it out. As for infrastructure, we're starting to see companies working on robotic heavy equipment. As for healthcare, that's an industry I don't understand. It's a very innovative industry. And some of the treatments and the medtech should have created efficiency gains, while not looking like robots. For example: curing hepatitis or cnc for dental crowns. But we don't seem to measure that efficiency. Weird. As for retail, with e-commerce, some of our transactions have surely became more automated. And we chose to convert some if the efficiency gains, into comfort, to receive things at our door. But delivery robots might automate that part too.