Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
1–10 of 140 posts
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#2I remember reading Average is Over and A Fairwell to Alms just when I first started working. They convinced me that labour power was going to decline precipitously. I stared saving 60+% of everything I made and putting it into index funds. Anyone making a good salary should attempt the same. Much of white collar work is extremely amenable to automation, much more than even truck driving:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox
Maybe comparative advantage will save the day, but I think it is a really good idea to start accumulating capital, even at today’s valuations.
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#3> Q: Several studies show technology will disrupt jobs, but they also argue that almost as many jobs will be created.
> A: There’s a mismatch of job displacement and job creation. Job displacement is being driven at the speed of digital technology, which is explosive at this moment. And displacement is the business model for the AI geniuses and all those companies. All of them are hoping to get rich by displacing workers, not by creating jobs. Creating jobs is much slower. So, at least in the next few years, the displacement will outstrip the creation. But it’s not the direction of travel which is wrong. It’s just a mismatch of speed.
Citation needed. There's zero evidence that "creating jobs is slower." People have been saying this every year for well over a century, and yet unemployment is quite low right now in the US.
It's one of those things that seems logical -- but all evidence is to the contrary. And it's probably because it's a lot easier for the human brain to spot a huge loss of jobs in one industry, than a small increase across many industries that adds up to the same size.
Also, the jobs can already exist but just not be filled. We don't necessarily need to wait for them to be "created".
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#4> Q: Several studies show technology will disrupt jobs, but they also argue that almost as many jobs will be created. > A: There’s a mismatch of job displacement and job creation. Job displacement is being driven at the speed of digital technology, which is explosive at this moment. And displacement is the business model for the AI geniuses and all those companies. All of them are hoping to get rich by displacing wor…
Okay... so now also include in your statement the quality of those new jobs. Not how many electronic gadgets people can buy compared to 50 years ago, but how stressed they are and how they fit into greater society. Also include how useful many jobs feel to those working in them - reference to "Dilbert jobs" (or Wally jobs, if you like and how common the feeling seems to be that ones job is useless (I myself certainly had quite a few high-paying (IT) freelancer jobs - the ones where you would expect more rigour before the position is created - where I had clear evidence that the job was completely useless, but it's hard to decline 6-figure income for half a year when society punishes you if you do that).
I don't see the point in making an argument when it's only based on "there is a(ny) job". Here where I live now the bureaucrats can trim the number of jobless by putting them into temporary and mostly useless training programs. Useless according not to me but to any analysis ever published in (the major) news media in my country. Also, the number of people working for worker-lease companies instead of being "direct employees" has increased may times over the last two decades. Part of making the workforce "more flexible". Now they have less pay, are sent around the country much more often and can't establish themselves in one place (or have a family life where they are away all week and have stressful weekend travel to and from the places of work) - but sure, "flexibility" is up. It does not matter if the families those people create will have much less happy kids - as long as the total numbers still look alright. Right?If you "migrate" a job from a stable decades-long factory job to being an Uber driver, 1 == 1 so it's all the same on the bottom line?
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#5> Q: Several studies show technology will disrupt jobs, but they also argue that almost as many jobs will be created. > A: There’s a mismatch of job displacement and job creation. Job displacement is being driven at the speed of digital technology, which is explosive at this moment. And displacement is the business model for the AI geniuses and all those companies. All of them are hoping to get rich by displacing wor…
It seems like the people studying this stuff disagree with your opinion:
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/02/25/automat...
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#6> Q: Several studies show technology will disrupt jobs, but they also argue that almost as many jobs will be created. > A: There’s a mismatch of job displacement and job creation. Job displacement is being driven at the speed of digital technology, which is explosive at this moment. And displacement is the business model for the AI geniuses and all those companies. All of them are hoping to get rich by displacing wor…
Okay... so now also include in your statement the quality of those new jobs. Not how many electronic gadgets people can buy compared to 50 years ago, but how stressed they are and how they fit into greater society. Also include how useful many jobs feel to those working in them - reference to "Dilbert jobs" (or Wally jobs, if you like and how common the feeling seems to be that ones job is useless (I myself certainly…
A while ago I created a poll about BS jobs which unfortunately didn't attract much attention. With N=8, most HNers have bullshit jobs.
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#7I remember reading Average is Over and A Fairwell to Alms just when I first started working. They convinced me that labour power was going to decline precipitously. I stared saving 60+% of everything I made and putting it into index funds. Anyone making a good salary should attempt the same. Much of white collar work is extremely amenable to automation, much more than even truck driving: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wi…
If a large amount of white collar workers are jobless, your SPY calls would also become worthless.
It's a good idea to invest in index funds, but investing in index funds expecting a economic apocalypse is not good reasoning.
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#8The next phase of globalization is the devaluation of fossil fuels and agriculture commodities making whole countries economies untenable leading towards mass migration far more extreme than the recent past...
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#9I remember reading Average is Over and A Fairwell to Alms just when I first started working. They convinced me that labour power was going to decline precipitously. I stared saving 60+% of everything I made and putting it into index funds. Anyone making a good salary should attempt the same. Much of white collar work is extremely amenable to automation, much more than even truck driving: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wi…
If a large amount of white collar workers are jobless, your SPY calls would also become worthless. It's a good idea to invest in index funds, but investing in index funds expecting a economic apocalypse is not good reasoning.
Do you have any suggestion as to what would be a good investment?
Thanks!
Re: Richard Baldwin on the “inhumanely fast” next phase of globalization
#10Not buying it, sorry. Maybe some jobs, but all this nonsense about automation taking over everything is purely to sow FUD and for no other reason.
Oh, automatic trucks, yeah, probably not. That's going to be really hard to pull off because the first time one of those trucks crushes and kills a toddler, the liability is going to rise tremendously. Same with drones--the first one that crashes into a house and causes a fire that kills a whole family is going to force them to reconsider their idiotic plans. It doesn't matter how you design the things because the tech isn't what is important.
As far as replacing the software engineering work I do with "freelancers" is a sure way to put my whole company out of business. If there were any freelancers out there who could assist us we would have already hired them. We don't want "freelancers" we want people who will be around to build up institutional knowledge and perform because they know our company and our data. As it is, our office in India is about 30% as efficient as the one on the US, and that whole experiment has already been running for almost two decades. It's not just the timezones, it's just the whole nature of the job. We have people with 15-20 years of experience working with us. It's just too naive a picture to say "globotics" which is just a made up word--even says so in the article. If you want good outcomes in a corporation, it would be wise to hire good people and not just stock up on human cattle.