Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

thisandthat.chat

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 144 posts

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#121

Post by orcasushi »

briga wrote: post #21

The central premise of this post is basically not true: working conditions and wages have pretty consistently improved over the past 200 years. The cases where it didn't were generally offset by the rest of society benefiting from increased automation and productivity. Where the current revolution will lead remains unclear, but if the past is any indication things will probably continue to improve for most people.

Although that's true, is 200 years ago really the baseline we want to use for judging working conditions?

Two hundred years ago meant widespread child labor, harsh factory conditions, little worker protection, and slavery or serfdom. Add to it the onset of Industrial Revolution.

Modern studies indicate people in the dark ages worked 6 hours a day: Ironically a better baseline!

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#122

Post by fugaziboutit »

orcasushi wrote: post #121
briga wrote: post #21

The central premise of this post is basically not true: working conditions and wages have pretty consistently improved over the past 200 years. The cases where it didn't were generally offset by the rest of society benefiting from increased automation and productivity. Where the current revolution will lead remains unclear, but if the past is any indication things will probably continue to improve for most people.

Although that's true, is 200 years ago really the baseline we want to use for judging working conditions? Two hundred years ago meant widespread child labor, harsh factory conditions, little worker protection, and slavery or serfdom. Add to it the onset of Industrial Revolution. Modern studies indicate people in the dark ages worked 6 hours a day: Ironically a better baseline!

I don't believe that "6 hours a day" is an answer any historian would give when asked how much workers in any period in history worked.

There have been indications that there were approximately 150 days per year which were most active for medieval farmers, but if I had a time machine I wouldn't stay there very long if my desire was to experience good working conditions.

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#123

Post by bossyTeacher »

prewett wrote: post #98
noosphr wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2026 - 200 = 1826 Yeah no. It's only since 1950 that conditions improved for everyone. Before then everything from sewage, to coal smoke, to chronically low wages made life worse for everyone involved. The most miserable people to live in history were the British working class in the mid/late 19th century.

Early in the Industrial Revolution people voluntarily moved from the countryside to the cities despite all that, so apparently a lot of them thought it was an improvement. Some of the cities were proud of the soot, since it showed that they were participating in Progress. You can see some of this repeating in China. Migrant workers move to the cities because, while what they can earn is low, it is a lot higher than s…

> Early in the Industrial Revolution people voluntarily moved from the countryside to the cities despite all that, so apparently a lot of them thought it was an improvement

The industrial revolution took many of the countryside jobs to the city. You cannot stay in a place that no longer has jobs

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#124

Post by anonymars »

WalterBright wrote: post #93
anonymars wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FRED shows Federal outlays as a percent of GDP broadly leveling off and declining. 2008 GFC and COVID being transient exceptions https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S Meanwhile here's employee compensation* over GDP (both seasonally adjusted) https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1XO2h Any chance you can share the sources for your assertions? * includes benefits as per https://www.bea.gov/resources/methodolog…

Just google total compensation vs salary.

As I specifically mentioned, the compensation chart includes benefits (including health insurance)

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#125

Post by anonymars »

s1artibartfast wrote: post #101
anonymars wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FRED shows Federal outlays as a percent of GDP broadly leveling off and declining. 2008 GFC and COVID being transient exceptions https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S Meanwhile here's employee compensation* over GDP (both seasonally adjusted) https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1XO2h Any chance you can share the sources for your assertions? * includes benefits as per https://www.bea.gov/resources/methodolog…

Comp over GDP is slightly down, but is still increasing overall, even when adjusted for inflation. See my sibling post.

Not since the seventies which was the assertion in question

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#126

Post by smallmancontrov »

WalterBright wrote: post #116
smallmancontrov wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Narrow and cheaply built" isn't enough to make houses affordable in an age where crack dens with busted utilities go for over a million dollars. The ability of material to become cheap is capped far below the ability of location to become expensive.

google sez: "The median home sale price in Seattle is approximately $853,000 to $879,000, depending on the specific neighborhood mix and recent monthly data. Listing prices sit slightly lower around $750,000 to $775,000, placing Seattle among the highest-priced major metropolitan housing markets in the United States." I assume a crack den with busted utilities would go for less. I've lived in this area my adult life.…

That's my entire point: the affordability problems stem from ponzi gatekeeping of jobs, not from the youth having expensive material taste.

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#127

Post by smallmancontrov »

scotty79 wrote: post #112
smallmancontrov wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much of the last ~25 years of outsized capital returns in the US came from selling our industrial base to the Communist Party of China?

You mean exploiting labor of Chinese poor for the benefit of American customers and investors?

American Labor: + cheap iPhones, - jobs

American Capital: +++++++++ money

America: ------- industry

Behold the responsible economic management.

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#128

Post by smallmancontrov »

WalterBright wrote: post #115
smallmancontrov wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People had to put up with deflationary shocks and yet robber barons built their empires all the same. Hard money doesn't stop r>g, it doesn't stop expected returns from growing increasingly burdensome, and it doesn't stop assets from appreciating relative to wages. It doesn't actually deliver the things we care about. It delivers plenty of things we don't care for, though. History provides the most lurid examples, bu…

> deficits aren't the root of all evil I didn't say it was. I said it was the root of inflation. > robber barons built their empires all the same Kerosene prices dropped 70% while Standard Oil prospered. Rockefeller was benefiting people, not robbing them.

Louis Brandeis would like a word. In particular: no, the fact that tech advances and economies of scale dropped oil prices at the same time Rockefeller was building his monopoly does not make that monopoly harmless or good or justify it into perpetuity.

More importantly, after Ronald Reagan and Robert Bork brought us back to robber-baron era antitrust policy, we've seen robber-baron level corporate consolidation and corporate profits. We've exceeded them in most regards, in fact. It has been terrible for consumers and excellent for shareholders.

Re: Most tech revolutions made work worse for employees

#130

Post by john-h-k »

regularization wrote: post #64
briga wrote: post #21

The central premise of this post is basically not true: working conditions and wages have pretty consistently improved over the past 200 years. The cases where it didn't were generally offset by the rest of society benefiting from increased automation and productivity. Where the current revolution will lead remains unclear, but if the past is any indication things will probably continue to improve for most people.

The US Department of Labor measures wages, and adjusted for inflation the hourly wage is below what it was in 1973. It is even lower if you are only counting non-management roles then and now. Wages have not gotten better over the past half century they have gotten worse. Workers now work more hours pee year to try to catch up to what they made back then, so working conditions are worse now as well.

> The US Department of Labor measures wages, and adjusted for inflation the hourly wage is below what it was in 1973.

This is just blatantly untrue according to your source.

Hourly wages have been consistently growing since the 90s, after the big retraction in the 70s/80s. They exceeded 1973 in 2019 and are higher now.

Post reply on HN