

The future of work in America - robdoherty2
http://www.kurzweilai.net/the-future-of-work-in-america

======
rayiner
I think it's interesting to look at the limit case: a Star Trek-like future in
which everything is automated and individual labor is mostly unnecessary.

What happens in such a world? Under a pure free-market system, there is a real
possibility that such a future would end up quite horrific. A few people would
own the capital that implemented the automation, while the majority of the
population would have nothing. It would be, in a way, very similar to feudal
times, when a few owned the important capital of the time (land).

~~~
taskstrike
Actually, in a automatic production economy, design becomes king and whoever
can design the best product becomes the most important person.

This already happened in the case of the internet. Cost of labor is almost
zero upon scaling, and the people who make the most valuable and well thought
out websites gains the most market shares. It is not the people who owns the
capital that profited the most on the internet, but great individual and team
of designers and makers.

It is also not assumed that the automation would be owned by the few instead
of owned by everyone. Personal 3d printers are on the rise, and I foresee a
future where we print our products and 3d printers spreads like the personal
computer.

~~~
chokolad
And how many of those displaced workers will be able to design?

------
dbecker
People told the inventor of the steam shovel that he would cause massive
unemployment because "one steam shovel replaces dozens of men with
conventional shovels."

He replied "Or thousands of men with teaspoons."

I'm surprised how many people still think productivity will be the source of
collapse... or how many people think low productivity is the answer to all
economic woes.

That view point has always been wrong in the past, and I'm skeptical anything
will change to make it right in the future.

~~~
rayiner
The difference is that at that time people weren't hitting up against natural
resource limits. Productivity decreases the need for labor, and society reacts
by producing more overall which keeps people busy. But that only works when
there are no other constraints on growing overall production.

~~~
dbecker
From an economic theory point of view, productivity increases generally
increase the demand for labor.

The suggestion that there is some level of "need" for labor suggests that
there is a certain "need" for produced goods, and we happen to be at it right
now.

But we used to be below this level of output (which suggests our current level
isn't a "need"), and consumption is still increasing... rather than leveling
off.

------
ghshephard
Beware graphs not starting at 0. I'm not saying there isn't merit in the
argument, but the attempt to mislead the reader by placing 57 at the bottom of
the graph isn't a good start.

~~~
muzz
You can see the whole data here (and change the scales):

<http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PRS85006173>

It only goes back to 1940, but it would be interesting to know what the labor
share was before that. I'm guessing it was smaller, especially in the late
1800s.

------
bmcleod
This is the point where it's worth pointing out that the portion of the
population involved in food production has collapsed massively over the last
couple of centuries. People generally seem to find new things to value when
their time frees up.

------
greenyoda
"Technology and the Web are destroying far more jobs than they create."

Sorry to be skeptical, but neither this article nor the original that it links
cites a single reference to support this claim. How could you even quantify
how many jobs the web destroys? A business can go under for many reasons other
than direct competition from web-based businesses.

"The Internet is destroying vast income streams that once supported tens of
thousands of jobs in industries from finance to music."

Yeah, we've heard over and over again that the music industry is being
destroyed by the internet and that draconian copyright enforcement regimes are
required to prevent the industry's demise. But it doesn't seem like less new
music is being produced today than in the 1980s. And for every record store
owner that went out of business there's now an RIAA lawyer or lobbyist taking
his place. As for the financial industry, yes, some stockbrokers have been put
out of business by online trading, but that seems to be a really good thing,
since I now get to pay $10 for a trade instead of $400, and I can spend that
extra money to support the employment of sushi chefs.

------
jk4930
SPOILER: This being on kurzweilai.net means--some pages around--that the
solution is the (gradual) merger of humans with machines and thus an
enhancement of human physical and cognitive abilities. See the trailer on
<http://transcendentman.com/>

The loss of jobs is part of the adaption phase, a dead time until the system
reacts. People often assume that the world changes but humans stay the same, a
case of improper ceteris paribus.

For a hypothesis of past human structural (genetic) change in a short time (in
this case as a driver, not a reaction) see
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Clark_%28economist%29#A...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Clark_%28economist%29#A_Farewell_to_Alms)

------
aresant
The Kurzweilai.net blog-spam barely summarizes the article, the original is
here:

[http://www.businessinsider.com/labor-day-2012-the-future-
of-...](http://www.businessinsider.com/labor-day-2012-the-future-of-
work-2012-9)

~~~
paulsutter
Here's the actual original:

<http://www.oftwominds.com/blogsept12/future-of-work8-12.html>

