Can we stop robots from eating our lunch?

Right now, there are a lot of people who either can’t find a job or are working but can’t find a job that pays the salary they once earned. In  my September 16, 2011 article,  I noted that in years past manufacturing jobs provided a good income for many people; then I cited several reasons for the current lack of jobs in the manufacturing sector: the global economy and competition from overseas; the loss of factory jobs to automation; the current recession; and the loss of consumer demand resulting from falling home values, foreclosures and falling stock values. Unfortunately, these factors and others do not affect manufacturing jobs only; they also affect retail and service sector jobs.

Why aren’t more employers hiring? More specifically, why aren’t more employers hiring in the United States? Here’s a probably incomplete list of possible reasons: employers are not hiring because their prospective customers aren’t buying; employers aren’t hiring because they’ve found ways to get things done with fewer employees – they’ve discovered ways to automate the work or they’ve found ways to be more efficient or they’ve found that with jobs hard to find they can motivate the employees they have to work harder; employers aren’t hiring in the United States because it is more profitable to expand overseas or to buy components and services from overseas vendors; employers and prospective employers aren’t hiring because banks won’t lend the money they need to expand existing businesses and start new businesses; employers aren’t hiring because the future is uncertain; employers aren’t hiring in the United States because labor laws, government regulations, and union work rules make it too expensive to do so. Which of these are true? There’s probably some truth to all of them.

For the remainder of this discussion, we’ll focus on automation. This is something that will not go away when the current recession does. The global economy won’t go away either, but we’ll save that discussion for another day. Recently, Farhod Manjoo authored a series of articles at slate.com based on the theme, Will Robots Steal Your Job. He looks at the possibilities for automated pharmacists, doctors, writers, lawyers, and scientists. His findings are sobering. This is a trend that will continue. Robots and computers are not only replacing or reducing the need for human workers in factories, they’re doing it many other places. Some of the eliminated jobs paid very well; some did not. In some cases, people are flat out eliminated. In some cases, people with skills or expertise utilize sophisticated tools to accomplish more than would be otherwise possible. In some cases, it’s just the opposite; the machine produces answers and the humans more or less do what they are told. Additionally, details of many business processes are absorbed into computer programs, then forgotten by most of the humans involved. Many bank employees would be hard pressed to calculate interest and fees by hand; some supermarket cashiers are near automatons, unable to identify products, calculate prices or determine change.

Where is this taking us? Consider this: if we ever reach a state where all work is done by computers and robots, none of us will have jobs; if we don’t have jobs, we won’t have money to buy all the goods and services – no one will. This is probably extreme, but the notion does give rise to some interesting thoughts.

In Bloomberg BusinessWeek for September 26, Peter Coy points out that this is one thing Karl Marx may Have been right about. “Marx predicted that companies would need fewer workers as they improved productivity, creating an ‘industrial reserve army’ of the unemployed whose existence would keep downward pressure on wages for the employed.” Coy also points out that Marx was wrong about a lot of things. I’ll add a couple more. The failure of Communism is often cited as a demonstration that massive hierarchical central planning just doesn’t work very well. Marx also overlooked a basic fact about human nature and society: some people always rise to the top of any social structure and, sadly, some of these focus only on their own welfare to the detriment of everyone else – Feudal Lords, Commissars, and Robber Barons have a lot in common. Neither Peter Coy nor yours truly is suggesting the revolution of the proletariat and all that as the solution to our problems. This does suggest, however, that we may need to consider whether or not our current system of jobs and wages is going to meet our needs moving forward. You can stop holding your breath; I’m not about to reveal some great new social order. In the past, there have been a variety of proposals for Utopian societies; there have also been many examples of Utopian fiction, illustrating the expected benefits of these methods for organizing society. There as many or more examples of anti-utopian or dystopian fiction, suggesting dark sides to all these fine ideas; Huxley and Orwell may be among the best known authors of this genre and, sadly, history has generally proven them more correct.

What then, short of revolution, might we, as individuals and as a society, do to improve our lot in the future?

One song goes like this. The last half century or so has been a time of constant change: new technologies, radical changes to the nature of existing jobs, jobs we’d never have imagined not too long ago. As one homely example, I can note that in one of my earlier lives, I was a draftsman, creating drawings on paper in pen or pencil; we then made blueprints by running special paper through a big machine that smelled of ammonia. Individuals should be prepared for change and expect a life of constant learning. Society should educate for flexibility and the ability to learn. Here’s another idea. Individuals, businesses, and governments need to foster innovation; we need a stream of new businesses and new occupations.

The last thought I have is the most problematic. We seem to have entered an era marked by shrinkage of the financial middle. A very few people have most of the income and most of the money. A big part of the rest of the  income and money is divided in small allotments among many. The middle class may never be eliminated, but it is becoming smaller. Where is this going to take us? Lords and peasants? Some sort of welfare state? It is very likely we will need a different approach to dividing the pie in the long term unless we settle for Lords and peasants. A shorter work week for full pay?  Most likely, something we’d never anticipate will evolve. I hope we’ll like it.

Think about it.

© Charlie Wertz, October 2011

Advertisement