Summary: The FM website strives to show readers visions of the future. Sometimes we succeed, like with the robot revolution. Two years ago we alerted readers of its arrival, reviewing fifty years of warnings. Now its splash has attracted the attention of economists and journalists. Today we look at some analysis about this, probably one of the major economic and political challenges of the 21st century.
Contents
Experts slowly seeing slivers of this vast restructuring forced on our world: two hor d’oeuvres, a main course, and pointers to more information. Red emphasis added.
- The monsters Scylla and Charybdis of the 21st century economy
- Going to the heart of the problem
- Optimism from faith-based innumeracy
- Detailed analysis: Paul Krugman discovers the problem
- For More Information
(1) The monsters Scylla and Charybdis of the 21st century economy
(a) “Dean Baker, Center for Economic and Policy Research, 10 December 2012 — Excerpt:
If you are concerned that a falling ratio of workers to retirees is going to make us poor then you are not concerned that excessive productivity growth will leave tens of millions without jobs. Let’s try that again. If you are concerned that a falling ratio of workers to retirees is going to make us poor then you are not concerned that excessive productivity growth will leave tens of millions without jobs.
It is possible for too much productivity growth to be a problem, if the gains are not broadly shared. It is also possible for too little productivity growth to be a problem as a growing population of retirees imposes increasing demands on the economy. But, it is not possible for both to simultaneously be problems. (For fans of arithmetic, I just did the numbers on this. It is highly unlikely that lack of productivity growth will be a problem since even very weak rates of growth will swamp the impact of demographics.)
.
(b) “Are robots and aging demographics self-cancelling problems?“, Tyler Cowen, Marginal Revolution, 28 December 2012 — Excerpt:
That is missing the point, as there is too much talk of “productivity growth” per se and not enough of either distribution or political economy. If robots concentrate wealth in the hands of IP {intellectual property} owners, wages for many workers might fall or remain stagnant. That is a problem.
Similarly, if robots concentrate wealth in the hands of IP owners, it may be hard to drum up the tax revenue to support a higher dependency ratio. The wealthy may produce a blocking political coalition or capital simply may be harder to tax for mobility, accountancy, and Laffer curve-like reasons. There is then a problem with the dependency ratio.
We then have both problems, no contradiction.
(2) Going to the heart of the problem: it’s a political problem
“Robots are taking your job and mine: deal with it“, Cory Doctorow, Boing Boing, 1 January 2013 — Excerpt:
But here’s the thing that neither of these articles — or even Bruce’s acid observations — touches on: once technology creates abundance, what possibilities exist for distributing the fruits of that abundance such that the benefits are more evenly felt?
… In America, anyone who proposes an increase in overall quality of life through public schools, health programs, libraries, or even Internet access, is immediately branded a socialist and dismissed out of hand.
(3) Optimism from faith-based innumeracy
“Better Than Human“, Kevin Kelly, Wired, 24 December 2012 — “Imagine that 7 out of 10 working Americans got fired tomorrow. What would they all do?” Kelly provides this brilliant graphic:
Kelly assumes the future must be like the past, and makes no effort to size the effect of the various factors. This leads him to this Dr. Pangloss-like forecast, assuming that new jobs will appear to replace the old. The above four boxes probably will not be of equal size.
In the coming years our relationships with robots will become ever more complex. But already a recurring pattern is emerging. No matter what your current job or your salary, you will progress through these Seven Stages of Robot Replacement, again and again:
- A robot/computer cannot possibly do the tasks I do.
- OK, it can do a lot of them, but it can’t do everything I do.
- OK, it can do everything I do, except it needs me when it breaks down, which is often.
- OK, it operates flawlessly on routine stuff, but I need to train it for new tasks.
- OK, it can have my old boring job, because it’s obvious that was not a job that humans were meant to do.
- Wow, now that robots are doing my old job, my new job is much more fun and pays more!
- I am so glad a robot/computer cannot possibly do what I do now.
(4) Detailed analysis: Paul Krugman discovers the problem
- “Rise of the Robots“, 8 December 2012
- “Technology or Monopoly Power?“, 9 December 2012
- “Robots and Robber Barons“, 9 December 2012
- “Human Versus Physical Capital“, 11 December 2012
- “Policy Implications of Capital-Biased Technology: Opening Remarks“, 28 December 2012
(5) For More Information
About the Robot Revolution:
- The coming big increase in structural unemployment,
7 August 2010 - The coming Robotic Nation, 28 August 2010
- The coming of the robots, reshaping our society in ways difficult to foresee, 22 September 2010
- Economists grapple with the first stage of the robot revolution, 23 September 2012
- The Robot Revolution arrives & the world changes, 20 Apr ’12
- The coming big inequality. Was Marx just early?, 27 November 2012
- In Friday’s job report you’ll see early signs of the robot revolution!, 5 December 2012
- Krugman discovers the Robot Revolution!, 9 December 2012
- How do we respond to the Robot Revolution?, 11 December 2012
.
.