Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Marathon machine Unskilled workers are struggling to keep up with technological change

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 07:47 AM
Original message
Marathon machine Unskilled workers are struggling to keep up with technological change
http://www.economist.com/node/21538699

THE rich world’s crisis of unemployment would be painful enough on its own, but it comes on the heels of a generation of labour-market stagnation. Growth in inflation-adjusted incomes in the rich world slowed sharply as early as the 1970s. In America, median household income has actually fallen since 1999. Economic growth continues, but not all see the rewards. By some estimates, the top 1% of American earners captured 58% of the country’s economic growth between 1976 and 2007.

Scapegoats, from crony capitalists to foreign-currency manipulators, are in no short supply, but technology is increasingly fingered as a culprit. Some economists reckon the problem with technology is that there is too little of it. Tyler Cowen, an economist at George Mason University, says in a recent e-book that a “great stagnation” is under way. The gains from the big inventions of previous eras—electricity, jet engines and antibiotics, for example—are now exhausted, and new, comparable innovations are exceedingly rare. Fewer grand inventions mean less productivity growth and a slower improvement in living standards.

It is a troubling diagnosis, but not the only one available. Erik Brynjolfsson, an economist, and Andrew McAfee, a technology expert, argue in their new e-book, “Race Against the Machine”, that too much innovation is the bane of struggling workers. Progress in information and communication technology (ICT) may be occurring too fast for labour markets to keep up. Such a revolution ought to be obvious enough to dissuade others from writing about stagnation. But Messrs Brynjolfsson and McAfee argue that because the growth is exponential, it is deceptive in its pace.

Progress in many areas of ICT follows Moore’s law, they write, which suggests that circuit performance should double every 1-2 years. In the early years of the ICT revolution, during the flat part of the exponential curve, progress seemed interesting but limited in its applications. As doublings accumulate, however, and technology moves into the steep part of the exponential curve, great leaps become possible. Technological feats such as self-driving cars and voice-recognition and translation programmes, not long ago a distant hope, are now realities. Further progress may generate profound economic change, they say. ICT is a “general purpose technology”, like steam-power or electrification, able to affect businesses in all industries.

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
DCBob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Im a techie and I have a hard time keeping up.
No doubt technological progress is happening too fast for labor markets and educational institutions to keep up. I am a software/network engineer and the stuff is changing so fast it makes my head spin. I do keep up generally but Im constantly pressured to update my skills and learn the latest hot thing. Its overwhelming at times. I am sure this is occurring to some degree in all fields that involve computer/network technology.

There is a good and bad side to all this but clearly the worker is under a great deal of strain to stay marketable. I dont know what the answer is but something needs to be done to help those who's skills become obsolete for no fault of their own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
arikara Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-27-11 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. I got into the field in the windows 95 days
when everyone was training to be a net tech and get rich working for microsoft. I never really did work in the field, started off doing help desk then moved on to testing software. I've been out for 5 years and know absolutely nothing anymore. I don't think anything I learned is relevant and I have no urge to get back into it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
2. How to keep up? Is it the responsibility of the individual (I hate the terms worker
Edited on Thu Nov-24-11 09:00 AM by geckosfeet
, work force, labor force etc), or should business offer programs tailored to their needs, or should government step in and provide assistance?

How do unemployed homeowners afford school, look for work, work part time if they are lucky, maintain their home life and study effectively all at the same time?

I truly believe that business needs to develop programs for their own specific needs. These programs would be much better tuned to their specific processes than anything a tech school or university could manage. Although, local educational institutions could co-sponsor programs with local businesses that are tuned to their business needs.

These so called job creators (corporate entities) need to step up and not only actually create jobs, but provide educational and mentoring opportunity for employees. The government has a role in this as well. Instead of letting billions go to ceo's as bonuses and to fund office decoration and lavish office parties, require, yes require and demand accountability that bailout funds go to strengthening the backbone of the corporations - the employees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
exboyfil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
3. This is part of the reason that I get angry when
it is argued that 15% capital gains rate is appropriate to reward the "risk" of the investment. An individual takes far more risk in education/training/learning than an investor. If you spend 4 years in college getting a CS degree for example and get out and all the CS jobs have been offshored, then what do you do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BiggJawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. What do you do?
Why, you back to school and get an MBA. Or a degree in Organizational Leadership.
Or go for your PhD, that'll keep you insulated from the job market for another 4-6 years...

We have Baccalaureates who come back to Grad school after an unsuccessful turn through the job market, and Graduates who go into Post-Grad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sam11111 Donating Member (638 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. "work (or machine productivity) UP, wage down"..."more for the Boss means less 4 you"
Automation in a corporate economy leads to all profit increase going to the Boss.
Newly surplus woRkers are fired. In the end, one billionaire owns a fully automated planet and the rest of us are left to starve. In short, Hell.

In a co op econ, increase in profits is shared... and no one gets laid off. Heaven.

That's the choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BiggJawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. And so many people cheer the Boss.
Because RW Talk tells them the Horatio Alger LIE, that if they just keep their heads down and their mouths shut, they too will someday be a "Boss".

Ever see the "Mr. Block" comix the IWW had a hundred years ago? Still timely today.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
exboyfil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-24-11 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Yes but when you do get a job with salary is it fair
to charge you 40%+ marginal federal rate when both sides of S.S. is included versus the 15% from capital gains. That is my point.

I am a firm believer in lifelong learning. I have gotten a M.S. in Engineering and an MBA while working full-time. I have also taken a bunch of extra M.S. and PhD classes over and beyond the M.S. I am not taking any more classes, but I am learning/relearning subjects as I Homeschool/tutor my daughters in school (Science, Math, and Social Studies mostly with some English as well).

Capital gains and dividends should be taxed as regular income. Retained profits at the corporate level should be taxed with corporate income taxes. These rates should be comparable to labor rates of taxation. No charitable foundations to avoid taxes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 09:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC