Visions of a Permanent Underclass (Important, really)
By WILLIAM A. GALSTON, WSJ 10/3
(snip)
Economist Tyler Cowen in his latest book, "Average Is Over," which analyzes the dynamics behind the rise of what he terms the "hyper-meritocracy.." depicts a polarizing labor market, increasingly hollowed out as middle-skill, middle-wage jobs disappear. The Great Recession, he argues, unmasked the fact that U.S. employers had taken on more middle-wage workers than they needed or could afford. That's why so many displaced workers are being forced to accept new jobs at lower wages—and why so many others have dropped out of the workforce.
The main driver of these disquieting trends is technology—specifically, smart machines that can do (and do better) an ever-rising share of what human beings do to earn their living. As this proceeds, some will win out: people who work with and around smart machines; managers who can organize these people; individuals with high general intelligence who can size up new situations and quickly learn what they need to know; and conscientious subordinates with the key new virtues of reliability and team play. Everyone else will lose out—except the marketers who know how to appeal to the wealthy.
Here is Mr. Cowen's description of our future: "[It] will bring more wealthy people than ever before, but also more poor people, including people who do not always have access to basic public services. Rather than balancing our budget with higher taxes or lower benefits, we will allow the real wages of many workers to fall and thus we will allow the creation of a new underclass. We won't really see how we could stop that. . . . One day soon we will look back and see that we produced two nations, a fantastically successful nation, working in the technologically dynamic sectors, and everyone else."
What would happen to the losers? More and more of them would move to Texas, Mr. Cowen's synecdoche for places with cheap housing and lousy public services. More American cities would become the equivalent of El Paso plus Mexico's Ciudad Juárez—thriving metropolitan areas with "shantytowns" attached. We could even plan for this, says Mr. Cowen: In zones set aside for cheap living, we would build some "makeshift structures . . . similar to the better dwellings you might find in a Rio de Janeiro favela.." Even though they had no prospects for escape, they would enjoy cheap food and cheap fun, and that would be enough to pacify them.. It's a prediction coupled with the injunction that resistance is futile. There's nothing we can do, says Mr. Cowen, to avert a future in which 10% to 15% of Americans enjoy fantastically wealthy and interesting lives while the rest slog along without hope of a better life, tranquilized by free Internet and canned beans.
(snip)
The kindest description of his stance is moral indifference: "It will become increasingly common to invoke 'meritocracy' as a response to income equality," he writes, "and whether you call it an explanation, a justification, or an excuse is up to you.." Whether by accident or design, Mr. Cowen's book represents a fundamental challenge. To government-hating, market-worshiping conservatives, it poses a question: If this is the consequence of your creed, are you prepared to endorse it? To liberals and progressives: What are you going to do about it? And to all of us: Is this a country you would want to live in?
I know I wouldn't.
I've seen the future—and it doesn't work.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303918804579107754099736882.html
(If you cannot open by clicking, copy and paste the title - without the words in parenthesis - into google)
= new reply since forum marked as read
