Everything Old is New Again
The idea that rising productivity due to automation will make human laborers superfluous is hardly a new one: It motivated the original Luddites almost 200 years ago to smash mechanical looms. But while this notion is grounded in a pretty simple economic fallacy, it's proved harder to kill than a horror movie slasher.
The most recent attempt to revive the theory comes from techie Marshall Brain, in the form of the warning that robots will render us all perfectly redundant in the coming decades. The problem here is much like that exhibited in William Greider's much ballyhooed antiglobo screed One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. Greider did extensive journalistic legwork, collecting data and anecdotes from around the world, and Brain certainly knows his tech. In both cases, alas, this leads to a false sense of security: confident in their knowledge of the particulars of their subject matter, both authors neglect to guard themselves against basic errors in economic theory. In the Salon piece linked above, Robert Reich provides the counterpoint to Brain's doomsaying. The same fallacy is viciously exposed by Paul Krugman in his review of Grieder's book.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I've probably mentioned it before when this subject has come up, but Nancy Kress has written some rather dystopian SF novels on the subject. Basicly her future is one where robots manufacture everything, and everything is done by machines pretty much. The wealthy are the people who own the machines and they have pretty much everything they want. Everyone else is pretty ignorant and backward, and act like white trash in trailer parks. There's no welfare in in future, but the rich basicly provide everything the poor need in exchange for votes.
Yeah, I recall Asimov writing a few stories set in a world with a similar premise. And one of my favorite scifi novels is Iain M. Banks's "The Player of Games" from his "Culture" universe, in which AI minds are the real movers and shakers, with status in the human world associated chiefly with things like skill at game playing.
On the other hand, "buggy-whip" industries - those whose products have been superceded by technology or have become such commodities that it is uneconomical to do anything but mass-produce them - often open up niches for specialty or "up-scale" products of the same type that are sold for a premium.
Production agriculture and big-agribusiness, for example, while providing cheap abundant food, has run most small family farmers out of business. However, without it, the so-called "organic" or "natural foods" markets could not charge the premiums they do for more primitively-produced foodstuffs. Specialty meats and vegetables, vinyards with their own wineries, etc., are flourishing because small entrepreneurs know what to do when they get priced out of the commodity market. The innovate.
I love How Stuff Works. Too bad Marshall Brian turns out to be a wacko after all.
Yes, automation replaces labourers and puts people out of work.
But when was it ever people's objective to work? A job is not something that one has, it is something that one does (and usually with reluctance). It is the means and not the end.
Automation reduces the amount of work that is required to maintain the same standard of living. It allows those labour hours (a finite resource) to be allocated to better, more productive uses, which improve the overall standard of living. While the transition is slow and painful for some, the overwhelming result is that we get more, by doing less.
The ideal world would have 100% unemployment, and enjoy it.
"viciously" is an understatement.
it is real sad when brute labor is outlawed by technology, forcing people to essentially become artists.
a world without mindless backbreaking work and filled with more artists...terrible! Or is it that people will just become lazy?
I don't feel well. I agreed with ... Krugman?
I'm with Russ. Work is an unfortunate evil that should be elliminated as soon as possible. Then we could devote our time and effor to things we really value and enjoy, whether that be making unique hand carved furniture or playing computer games all day.
I like what the Church of the Subgenius call "Slack". http://www.subgenius.com/
ubergeek, I don't think people will become lazy. I think they already are. And loving it, if they can afford it.
Machines allow more people to afford it.
Machines good!
I weep to think of all the cuneiform tablet manufacturers put out of business by the papyrus industry.
And those horse and oxen breeders put a lot of plow pushers out of business. Farmers could plow far more land with fewer people once horses did the pulling.
And let's not forget the hunters put out of business when farmers learned how to raise livestock. Or the gatherers put out of business by farmers.
I'm telling you, human history has been one huge economic downturn. There was no unemployment and poverty before people started innovating! Right?
Um, right?
Doh!
Illiminating work requires that nothing be left to trade, that individuals get anything and everything they want for free. Otherwise you have trade, which is work.
Nothing to say we can't illiminate work that no one likes or no one would simply ever do without monetary incentive, of course. Instead we could be a world where you just chose between all good and desirable options to get your money.
Oh, I'm going to say that people have always been lazy - that is to say, they want to do as little onerous unpleasant things as possible.
We've just gotten to the point where some can do it without ending up begging on the streets.
Hey Jason: F--- you. Feel better now, you jerk?
Paul,
If you could give me a few good lines about social justice and equalizing incomes, I'd feel it more ...
Dear Jason,
That last outburst was totally uncalled for. I was really just frustrated and upset about the lack of social justice in this country, and in particular the inequality of income for workers in the manufacturing sector. Please accept my apologies.
Your pal,
Paul
Paul Krugman was a national treasure. Almost everything he wrote before he began his NYT column is worth reading. But now he's a very bright partisan hack. Sad.
I wish someone could define for me just what "social justice/injustice" is. If it's simply that some folks got more some got less, t'was ever thus.
Nice. Still, Krugman's comparative advantage
is papers not columns. A social planner who
wanted to maximize the value of total output
would cut the column and put him back to work
on journal articles.
That said, it is nice that he takes a break
from political commentary, in which he is not
trained and which is not his comparative
advantage, to write about economics.
Jeff
I, for one, eagerly welcome our new robot masters.
From my experience, automation has only created less efficiency of workers. Give people a word processor, and they'll spend 4 hours debating over which font to use. IN the supersized grocery stores, one scanned item not in the database will be a minimum five minute delay while someone takes a quarter-mile walk to try to find the item in question on the shelves.
i dunno - for example - in desktop publishing/design, office-based RIP servers, largeform printers and all that nifty postscript stuff is a hell of a lot easier and faster than the new-old way of DTP software printed and glued to mechanicals and shipped to the offset company, which is much faster than typed copy arranged and cut on pasteboards, etc...so productivity in certain areas is certainly boosted by such advances.
i see a lot of bitching about lazy workers on H&R (and bitching about lazy people in general) - there's only a few people in every organization who go out of their way to do a "good job" - a mix of overachievers, perfectionists and pussies - and the rest are fuckups of varying degrees. i don't think automation does much to change any of this.
Automation in logistics/distribution kicks major ass. You haven't lived until you see some robot custom build a pallet in 2 minutes that humans trained for weeks take half an hour to get right, or picking kegs 2 at a time, dainty as you please, where before it took a strong man to muscle a single one around. 24/7/365. No unions, no breaks, no sick/maternity/funeral PTO. Gimme a budget and some Japanese robotics engineers and I'll replace all you monkeys!
During my time researching for various history papers in college, I'd often come across some job that no longer exists because it had been replaced by a machine. You don't rooms full of people making copies of letters by hand or with typewritters any more, just people waiting by the photocopier, or printing multiple copies.
One of the best examples of automation replacing workers I came across was in the cigar industry of Tampa, FL. From about 1890-1930 there was a huge cigar making industry there, with a great deal of labor problems, stikes, lockouts, racial tensions, etc. Then in the early 30s, every cigar factory was out of business. Why? Someone had created machines that could roll cigars and cigarettes, and one factory had the output of 10, with a staff of only a few machine operators.
Of course, for every job machines take away, new ones are created. We wouldn't have web designers, security guards that change the money in ATMs, etc. if not for automation.
Thanks, Russ. See R.I.C.H. for more on this. Read it all before you file it under 'tax and spend'. Wilson is currently running for Governor of California (of course) on the Guns and Dope Party ticket, and promising to end taxation.