Robotic Nation Evidence: The effect of robots on employment

6.29.2004

The effect of robots on employment

Why 1.4 million new jobs haven't ended the jobless recovery

The article opens with this:

Since last fall, when the economy finally began adding payroll jobs consistently, the Bush administration has embraced the monthly Bureau of Labor Statistics release of the employment situation report as evidence that its economic policies are working. "Nationwide, the economy has posted steady job gains for each of the last nine months—creating more than 1.4 million new jobs since August," the White House crowed in early June, when news came that 248,000 payroll jobs were added in May. That figure, 1.4 million new jobs, has become the default answer given by administration officials when confronted with unpleasant economic questions. 1.4 million new jobs does sound good, doesn't it? But think about this:

Consider the employment–to-population ratio, a broad gauge that measures the percentage of Americans over the age of 16 who have a job. (Data is available going back to 1948. To see the history, go here and click on the box that reads "Civilian-Employment Population Ratio" and then "retrieve data.") The ratio rose steadily in the 1990s, from 61.4 percent in January 1993 to 64.7 in the spring of 2000. In January 2001, it stood at 64.4 percent, very close to an all-time high. Since then, it has deteriorated steadily, even after the recession ended in November 2001. In May 2004, it stood at 62.2 percent, more than 2 percentage points below the rate of January 2001. Two percent may not sound like much. But we're working with very large numbers. The population is greater than 293 million, as the Census Bureau estimates today. If 64.4 percent of Americans had jobs today, as they did in January 2001, there would be nearly 4.8 million more Americans employed.Why is this happening? The article's conclusion is this:

Something has plainly broken down in the American job creation machine. The supply of new jobs has been nowhere near sufficient to keep up with the supply of new workers—not for the past three years and not for the past 10 months. I don't claim to have a good explanation. Productivity growth, globalization, outsourcing, and widespread excess capacity probably have something to do with it.And this:

The economic numbers show a persistent underutilization of America's greatest asset—its workforce. The addition of 1.4 million jobs in 10 months is paltry by historical standards, and given the size of today's potential workforce, it's anemic. All the happy talk in the world can't hide that.What we are seeing today is the tip of the iceberg. We are at the very leading edge of the robotic revolution, with kiosks and self-checkout lines being the first harbingers of things to come in the American workforce. See Robotic Nation for details.

// permalink - -

Comments:

After reading 'Robotic Nation' I've come to the conclusion that this would only destroy our economy if we cling to capitalism.

(Capitalism is a great system, very much like training wheels are good for kids learning to ride a bike. We will soon be able to grow past it into a system which I think is a touch ahead of it's time, but still works fairly well now, Socialism [the western-european sort])

If there are enough laborers, then labor becomes post-scarce, it comes at no significant cost to anyone, so labor soon becomes free. If we embrace renewable energy sources on a grand enough scale, then energy will also become post-scarce.

With labor and energy being all but free to produce, we can just live as a race of social and intellectual beings.

# posted by

Unknown : 9:03 PM, June 17, 2008

Robotic Nation Evidence

6.29.2004

The effect of robots on employment

About

Send Links

archives