[ad_1]
When people compete with machines, wages fall and jobs go out. But, in the end, new groups of better jobs are created. The mechanization of agriculture in the first half of the 20th century, or advances in computer and communication technology in the 1950s and 1960s, for example, went hand in hand with power, sharing much of US economic growth with other developed economies.
But after several years, something went wrong. Since the 1980s, we have seen the evolution of robotics in manufacturing; software development in everything; consumer internet and material internet; and the growth of artificial intelligence. But in the meantime GDP growth in the US has slowed, inequality has risen and more workers – especially men without college degrees – have seen their real wages fall sharply.
Globalization and the collapse of alliances have contributed to this. But so too has professionalism failed. The issue is gaining momentum in Washington. In particular, politicians and policymakers are looking at the work of MIT professor, Daron Acemoglu, whose research shows that mechanical engineering is no longer a success for all investors and employees. He testified At a meeting of the select committee at the US House of Representatives in November that machines – replacing machines with algorithms instead of the jobs that workers had already done – were the cause of 50-70 percent of the economic disparities that occurred between 1980 and 2016.
Why is this happening? Instead, when self-employment in the early 20th century and after 1945 “increased the productivity of workers in various industries and gave them more opportunities”, as Acemoglu put it in his testimony, “we have been experiencing from the middle. “In the 1980s, the pace of innovation and the slowdown in the creation of new jobs.”
In addition, some of the products we produce today are not very economically viable. Think of an awkward computer store located in a drugstore that forces you to try it out for yourself. It can save a few sellers a price on labor, but it does not increase productivity, say, self-propelled machines. Cecilia Rouse, chair of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers, spoke at length he said a Council on Foreign Relations event that they would like to “stand in line [at the pharmacy] so that someone has a job – maybe not a good job, but a job – and where I feel like I am well supported. “
However, there is no going back. The question is how to ensure that more employees are able to reap the benefits. In her remarks on “Virtual Davos” a few weeks ago, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen showed that the recent benefits of technology can increase rather than diminish inconsistencies. He added that, although the “epidemic-induced telephone boom” will increase U.S. yields by 2.7 percent, profits will increase especially for high-skilled, clean-working workers, as online learning has become more effective. with the help of rich, white students.
Training is where the ball meets the road by correcting technically driven inequalities. As Harvard researchers Claudia Goldin and Laurence Katz has shown, when the link between education and technology is deteriorating, technological advances are no longer widely distributed. This is why Biden officials have been pushing for money in community college, vocational training and vocational training.
The idea is to prevent the spread of labor markets in the regions and territories they visited, say, Clinton’s time to embrace free trade without adequate security for workers. If they do not have the training to deal with technical changes, the anger of the workers in the Midwest swing states may be less than that of the low-income and middle-income workers whose jobs are spontaneous.
Some topics require an answer. Companies receive many tax benefits from investing professionally, which can be reduced, as opposed to human activity. Reducing costs to reduce the cost of equipment such as software and robots can reduce these differences.
Competition policies and corporate governance also have functions to perform. As Acemoglu told the House last year, “Big Tech has a business acumen, based on the use of algorithms instead of people. It is no coincidence that companies like Google employ less than one-tenth of the workforce in big business like General. Motors used to do that.
Big Tech’s business is about removing people’s jobs and turning human systems into useless things. It is one that will be under increasing pressure in the coming year, as regulators try to push through legislation to curb the power of the platform before midterms. The big question of how to reconnect more resources with the working people in the coming era of more automation has not been answered.
[ad_2]
Source link
