These include the prospect of large-scale unemployment due to automation, with attendant political and social dislocation,
This is about AI. It’s comin’ for all our jobs, woe is us.
Which is idiot tosspottery.
The aim and idea of our having an economy, of capitalism, of economic advance, is to destroy jobs. We would, because we’re human and lazy, like to have lots of stuff without having to work for it. So, every time a machine takes over from human labour we become that better off. We get more stuff at the expenditure of less human labour.
The rate at which this happens can be a problem, yes. If it all happened at 11 am tomorrow by midday there’d be an awful lot of folks wandering around looking for something to pay the rent with. On the other hand, if the machines so absolutely everything then true communism has arrived, as Karl said it would. All desires and needs are sated by the technological progress of capitalism – no, really, this is what Marx said – and we can go farm in the morning, hunt in the arvo and philosophise at night.
So, given that we don;t think – and don;t fear – the machines taking all jobs it’s the speed of adaptation that matters. Some jobs get killed – good – and those displaced need to find anohter.
So, what’s the average displacement a year? Atchurly, about 10% of all jobs each year. That’s the normal turnover rate in the economy. 10% of jobs get killed off, 10% of jobs are new that never existed before. Technological shift is that the new jobs are just shaded a little along the machine using spectrum than the older ones. A new version of Sage being used, or the computerisation of the accounts perhaps. A CNC rather than a lathe.
It’s not that “All jobs here die!” it’s that jobs ie all the time and the new ones created are just that little bit further along the spectrum. It’s not, in fact, a technological revolution, it’s s technological creep, a technological ooze.
The speed still matters. Estimates like 40% of jobs are at risk over the next 20 years.
Hmm, over 20 years we’ll have oozed our way through 200% of all jobs anyway.
Technological unemployment is not in fact a problem. Worrying about it is infantile tosspottery.