3 ms·
"The same kind of argument was used when China was admitted to the World Trade Organization. And indeed, lots of new jobs were created, just not in the Western
by AnodicElegy 18d ago
"The same kind of argument was used when China was admitted to the World Trade Organization. And indeed, lots of new jobs were created, just not in the Western world."
China's entry into the WTO is really not a good evidentiary example for AI causing mass unemployment. Unemployment in the U.S. had already been increasing at the time, peaked soon after, decreased to well below the point it had been at China's entry, and only went up again during the Great Financial Crisis, which had nothing -- or at least very little -- to do with competition from China. That's not to say that jobs weren't lost, even en masse, but they were replaced, and U.S. unemployment has been near record lows in recent years. China's WTO entry is a supporting point, not a counterpoint, to the idea that jobs lost to AI will be replaced by new ones.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/UNRATE
- wuisce 18d ago> That's not to say that jobs weren't lost, even en masse, but they were replaced That's what the article was implying with: > Yes, new jobs were created, but often not for those people who lost their jobs. Coal miners didn't just become programmers overnight. The point is that middle-income (industrial) jobs were replaced with less, higher-income (service/knowledge/advanced industrial) jobs, with virtually zero overlap between the two in terms of workers. This is why certain regions across the West (US Rust belt, Northern England etc.) were devastated and have become so immiserated.