3 ms·

> Historically, technological revolutions have increased productivity and labor force participation, despite many pundits at the time worried about loss of jobs

> Historically, technological revolutions have increased productivity and labor force participation, despite many pundits at the time worried about loss of jobs. That was basically true from about 1830, when railroads came out of beta, to 1979.[1][2] During that period, wages roughly tracked productivity. There are solid US stats on this from at least 1950. This has happened in other countries, too, but generally later than in the US. Here's a study from Japan.[3] In the UK, productivity and wages parted company around 2008.[4] There are stats for China, but they only go back to 1995 and aren't taken that seriously even in China. Plus, China now has 200 million gig workers (!)[5] and data collection on them is weak. Official workforce size in China peaked in 2015, which may indicate that many gig workers are not being counted. This needs to be looked at more closely. Productivity is going great, but the gains don't go to workers much. [1] https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ https://www.epi.org/productivity-pay-gap/ [2] https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/when-comparing-wages-and-worker-productivity-the-price-measure-matters/ https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/when-comparing-wages... [3] https://www.rieti.go.jp/en/publications/summary/25090019.html https://www.rieti.go.jp/en/publications/summary/25090019.htm... [4] https://fraserofallander.org/link-labour-productivity-wage-growth-uk/ https://fraserofallander.org/link-labour-productivity-wage-g... [5] https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/09/18/chinas-200m-gig-workers-are-a-warning-for-the-world https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/09/18/chinas-200m-gig...

anovikov 1y ago
That's not about wages, but labor force participation. What changed around 1979 was that workers who were freed up due to automation, were employed in lower paid service roles that's why wages stopped following productivity. But they weren't left unemployed - through 1970s unemployment was quite high by today's standards, we are living in times of longest ever sustained low unemployment.
- Animats 1y ago
  We're in sustained under-employment. About half of people in the US who have college degrees are working in jobs that don't need a degree. 70% of Uber drivers started driving after they lost a job. Unemployment of new college graduates has increased recently. This hit graduates of the computer boot camps a year or two ago, and this year it hit Berkeley CS graduates. Most people eventually find some kind of job. The alternative is being homeless.
  - anovikov 1y ago
    That's only because everyone and their dog now get a useless degree... People should be discouraged from education that's above their ability, no one needs so many graduates. 25-55 employment vs population is now highest on record barring a few years in ~1997-2000 during the dotcom boom and even that by only a tiny bit. Also, remember that employment is now suppressed by many people going FIRE, which was a rare exception 25 years ago. Many of my friends left the world of work for good years ago, all their late 30s or early 40s.
  - euroderf 1y ago
    I'm always reading that pensioners, college students, teenagers, and others would like to work part-time but do not find the work, so that counts as underemployment too eh. I think a combination of a higher minimum wage and a shorter standard work week - introduced simultaneously in discrete steps over three or four years, say - would transform lives on a massive scale. But unfortunately everything in America seems to be at best ossified, and at worst headed into the dumper.
pjc50 1y ago
Lost in this discussion is that there is an economic target for a minimum level of unemployment. It's how inflation control targeting works. People want inflation when it's their own wages, and they want labour supply to be constrained to achieve that. But as soon as the wage inflation feeds through to price inflation, they get very upset. Transient but significant inflation was one of the successful attacks on Biden's economic record, for example. Wages are flat because it's policy for wages to be flat so that prices can be flat.
- bluefirebrand 1y ago
  > Wages are flat because it's policy for wages to be flat so that prices can be flat This is ridiculous because prices haven't been flat but wages largely have

anovikov 1y ago

That's not about wages, but labor force participation. What changed around 1979 was that workers who were freed up due to automation, were employed in lower paid service roles that's why wages stopped following productivity. But they weren't left unemployed - through 1970s unemployment was quite high by today's standards, we are living in times of longest ever sustained low unemployment.

Animats 1y ago
We're in sustained under-employment. About half of people in the US who have college degrees are working in jobs that don't need a degree. 70% of Uber drivers started driving after they lost a job. Unemployment of new college graduates has increased recently. This hit graduates of the computer boot camps a year or two ago, and this year it hit Berkeley CS graduates. Most people eventually find some kind of job. The alternative is being homeless.
- anovikov 1y ago
  That's only because everyone and their dog now get a useless degree... People should be discouraged from education that's above their ability, no one needs so many graduates. 25-55 employment vs population is now highest on record barring a few years in ~1997-2000 during the dotcom boom and even that by only a tiny bit. Also, remember that employment is now suppressed by many people going FIRE, which was a rare exception 25 years ago. Many of my friends left the world of work for good years ago, all their late 30s or early 40s.
- euroderf 1y ago
  I'm always reading that pensioners, college students, teenagers, and others would like to work part-time but do not find the work, so that counts as underemployment too eh. I think a combination of a higher minimum wage and a shorter standard work week - introduced simultaneously in discrete steps over three or four years, say - would transform lives on a massive scale. But unfortunately everything in America seems to be at best ossified, and at worst headed into the dumper.

pjc50 1y ago

Lost in this discussion is that there is an economic target for a minimum level of unemployment. It's how inflation control targeting works. People want inflation when it's their own wages, and they want labour supply to be constrained to achieve that. But as soon as the wage inflation feeds through to price inflation, they get very upset. Transient but significant inflation was one of the successful attacks on Biden's economic record, for example. Wages are flat because it's policy for wages to be flat so that prices can be flat.

bluefirebrand 1y ago
> Wages are flat because it's policy for wages to be flat so that prices can be flat This is ridiculous because prices haven't been flat but wages largely have