5 ms·

The Great Decoupling

35 points by thecolorblue 11y ago

emmelaich 11y ago
Paywalled, and the title gives no hint of what it's about.
- ArekDymalski 11y ago
  I guess this image from the article will answer your question: https://hbr.org/resources/images/article_assets/2015/05/R1506D_MCAFEE_WHENWORKERSFALLBEHIND.png https://hbr.org/resources/images/article_assets/2015/05/R150...
- brianbaquiran 11y ago
  It's an interview with the authors of "The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies" on the impact of technology on productivity, economic growth, and wealth inequality.
eruditely 11y ago
Quoted from below, on whether income is relevant as a measure http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/19/income-as-a-measure-is-a-pseudoscientific-distraction/ http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/19/income-as-a-measur... "The question is better served by how we spend our time, what we consume, and what we worry about, than any measure of income. Income is a poor proxy for measuring inter-temporal changes in consumption, and is only a useful measure of temporal asymmetry. What is for example, the cost of not fearing the soviet union, the change in crime in Boston and new York? Conversely, what is the cost of increase in political friction due to immigration? What is the cost of the conflict over Obamacare? What is the cost of maintaining the post-war empire (probably neutral). What is the cost of outsourcing? What is the cost of failing to reform education? Income is the least important of these measures. And that is precisely why it’s the topic of conversation: because it is the least important but the most emotionally loaded topic. It is an elaborate pseudoscientific distraction for purely political purposes." Interesting. I do not necessarily endorse this but he has influenced me much.
jeffdavis 11y ago
"We’re not saying that social choices have no effect, and for that matter, we’re not saying that globalization has no effect, either. However, there seems to be a common underlying force that’s affecting all these countries. We think that force is technology." It would be nice if they expanded on that. What other trends are at work, aside from technology, that might also coincide with this "decoupling". Globalization and immigration are two things that merit more discussion. Why do they think technology predominates?
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  >Why do they think technology predominates? Short answer: they probably don't. But they want you to think that. Technology is the one driver that you can't blame anybody for. If technology is responsible for a loss of jobs, livelihoods and poverty, who can you blame? Nobody. If globalization (by which we mean "trade policy like the TPP/TTIP/NAFTA/CAFTA"), de-unionization and steady corrupting effect of money on government are actually responsible instead, you have a small group of exposed people to point a pitchfork at. You can say Larry Summers helped cause this. Obama helped cause this. Greg Mankiw helped cause this. Not progress. People. That's not ideal if you are one of those elites. So, blame the robots for everything and if anybody notices, call them a luddite.
  - eru 11y ago
    > If globalization (by which we mean "trade policy like the TPP/TTIP/NAFTA/CAFTA"), de-unionization and steady corrupting effect of money on government are actually responsible instead, you have a small group of exposed people to point a pitchfork at. You can say Larry Summers helped cause this. Obama helped cause this. Greg Mankiw helped cause this. Not progress. People. > Brynjolfsson: No, similar trends are appearing in most developed countries. Does your conspiracy theory encompass the whole globe?
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - crdoconnor 11y ago

35 points by thecolorblue 11y ago

emmelaich 11y ago

Paywalled, and the title gives no hint of what it's about.

ArekDymalski 11y ago
I guess this image from the article will answer your question: https://hbr.org/resources/images/article_assets/2015/05/R1506D_MCAFEE_WHENWORKERSFALLBEHIND.png https://hbr.org/resources/images/article_assets/2015/05/R150...
brianbaquiran 11y ago
It's an interview with the authors of "The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies" on the impact of technology on productivity, economic growth, and wealth inequality.

eruditely 11y ago

Quoted from below, on whether income is relevant as a measure http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/19/income-as-a-measure-is-a-pseudoscientific-distraction/ http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/19/income-as-a-measur... "The question is better served by how we spend our time, what we consume, and what we worry about, than any measure of income. Income is a poor proxy for measuring inter-temporal changes in consumption, and is only a useful measure of temporal asymmetry. What is for example, the cost of not fearing the soviet union, the change in crime in Boston and new York? Conversely, what is the cost of increase in political friction due to immigration? What is the cost of the conflict over Obamacare? What is the cost of maintaining the post-war empire (probably neutral). What is the cost of outsourcing? What is the cost of failing to reform education? Income is the least important of these measures. And that is precisely why it’s the topic of conversation: because it is the least important but the most emotionally loaded topic. It is an elaborate pseudoscientific distraction for purely political purposes." Interesting. I do not necessarily endorse this but he has influenced me much.

jeffdavis 11y ago

"We’re not saying that social choices have no effect, and for that matter, we’re not saying that globalization has no effect, either. However, there seems to be a common underlying force that’s affecting all these countries. We think that force is technology." It would be nice if they expanded on that. What other trends are at work, aside from technology, that might also coincide with this "decoupling". Globalization and immigration are two things that merit more discussion. Why do they think technology predominates?

crdoconnor 11y ago
>Why do they think technology predominates? Short answer: they probably don't. But they want you to think that. Technology is the one driver that you can't blame anybody for. If technology is responsible for a loss of jobs, livelihoods and poverty, who can you blame? Nobody. If globalization (by which we mean "trade policy like the TPP/TTIP/NAFTA/CAFTA"), de-unionization and steady corrupting effect of money on government are actually responsible instead, you have a small group of exposed people to point a pitchfork at. You can say Larry Summers helped cause this. Obama helped cause this. Greg Mankiw helped cause this. Not progress. People. That's not ideal if you are one of those elites. So, blame the robots for everything and if anybody notices, call them a luddite.
- eru 11y ago
  > If globalization (by which we mean "trade policy like the TPP/TTIP/NAFTA/CAFTA"), de-unionization and steady corrupting effect of money on government are actually responsible instead, you have a small group of exposed people to point a pitchfork at. You can say Larry Summers helped cause this. Obama helped cause this. Greg Mankiw helped cause this. Not progress. People. > Brynjolfsson: No, similar trends are appearing in most developed countries. Does your conspiracy theory encompass the whole globe?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - crdoconnor 11y ago