- Reaction score
- 1,678
Many experts studying the topic of automation believe that the current rate of advancement is leading us into a future with fewer and fewer available jobs.
Maybe that’s a good thing.
In his 2013 essay, “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs,” David Graeber argued that in the wake of automation, we created employment for employment’s sake, not necessarily to fulfill any significant task or purpose. In 1930, John Maynard Keynes predicted that automation would create a 15-hour work week for everyone in Britain and the United States. Graeber argues that we failed to live up to this prediction, not because of a failure of automation, but because of the fear of the social effects that would occur when large numbers of people had large amounts of unstructured time.
In our current system, higher unemployment rates mean an unstable economy. We are constantly looking for ways to “put people back to work.” Oftentimes, however, the employment those people find is unsatisfying.
In 2014, the Conference Board Job Satisfaction Survey reported, for the eighth time in a row, that less than half of Americans are satisfied with their jobs.
As technology progresses, indications are that “putting people back to work” will become less feasible. EconomistsErik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee have charted what they refer to as “the great decoupling.” They have found that productivity, or output per hour of work, has quadrupled since 1947 in the United States while employment has not risen at nearly the same rate.
What this means is that many companies are producing more goods and services without having to employ more people.
Other research suggests in the next 15 to 20 years, 47 percent of all existing employment is at risk of automation. Even more startling, there’s little to suggest new jobs will be created at the pace necessary to compensate for this loss.
Read more here. (Singularity Hub)
Originally published in April 1, 2015, this article was republished again. Now, I can post here.
Maybe that’s a good thing.
In his 2013 essay, “On the Phenomenon of Bullshit Jobs,” David Graeber argued that in the wake of automation, we created employment for employment’s sake, not necessarily to fulfill any significant task or purpose. In 1930, John Maynard Keynes predicted that automation would create a 15-hour work week for everyone in Britain and the United States. Graeber argues that we failed to live up to this prediction, not because of a failure of automation, but because of the fear of the social effects that would occur when large numbers of people had large amounts of unstructured time.
In our current system, higher unemployment rates mean an unstable economy. We are constantly looking for ways to “put people back to work.” Oftentimes, however, the employment those people find is unsatisfying.
In 2014, the Conference Board Job Satisfaction Survey reported, for the eighth time in a row, that less than half of Americans are satisfied with their jobs.
As technology progresses, indications are that “putting people back to work” will become less feasible. EconomistsErik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee have charted what they refer to as “the great decoupling.” They have found that productivity, or output per hour of work, has quadrupled since 1947 in the United States while employment has not risen at nearly the same rate.
What this means is that many companies are producing more goods and services without having to employ more people.
Other research suggests in the next 15 to 20 years, 47 percent of all existing employment is at risk of automation. Even more startling, there’s little to suggest new jobs will be created at the pace necessary to compensate for this loss.
Read more here. (Singularity Hub)
Originally published in April 1, 2015, this article was republished again. Now, I can post here.
