Technical Unemployment starting to receive more publicity
One of the driving factors behind some of the people involved with the Manna Project is the concept of technological unemployment. The impending loss of jobs due to automation has many worried. Sadly, those in power seem to either ignore the issue or be oblivious to it. We draw this conclusion simply based upon the lack of serious discussions from political leaders around the world.
Luckily, others are starting to discuss the matter outside the tech community.
In an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal, economist Milton Friedman penned the view that the Fed out to have the mandate of maximum employment removed.
The dual mandate started in 1978 when passed by Congress.
The creation of the Fed’s dual mandate reflected concern in Congress that cyclical declines in the demand for goods and services would lead to increased unemployment. Economic theory implies that low interest rates and an easy monetary policy can increase the demand for output and labor. Thus, Congress charged the Fed with pursuing a monetary policy that would achieve maximum employment.
One of the difficulties of our time is that tradition theories about labor are breaking apart. Consider what happened over the past decade in terms of monetary easing coupled with the employment rate, it is hard to substantiate this as truth.
Friedman points out that job losses will not be due to low demand as much as automation. Even if the economic theory does still hold, this monetary policy does not apply to job losses due to technology.
Monetary policy will still be an appropriate tool the Fed can use to respond to traditional cyclical changes in demand. But technological disruption will make the unemployment rate a very noisy signal of the demand level. The Fed’s policy goal should therefore be shifted so that it focuses solely on price stability, in line with what other central banks now do. Achieving the government’s goal of maximum employment will require different policies, like increased job training and the removal of state licensing barriers.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-fed-cant-save-jobs-from-aiand-robots-1528652059
Friedman's did not refer to universal basic income in any way. The goal of his letter was to opine about how the Fed should focus solely on rapid moves in inflation.
Him bringing up the point of job losses due to automation and stating that there is nothing the Fed can do about it is the message we want to pass on. This is something we feel is coming.
Education is the first step. Pretending that robotics and AI are not going to have a significant impact on the job market will only serve to make that eventuality that much worse.
The time to prepare is now.
To get your weekly manna distribution, go to https://www.mannabase.com.
It is a matter of time before people are forced to learn, the people that stick their head in the sand are screwed
It's been years now that people has been facing this unemployment problem and there ain't solution, those politicians won't care as long as its not about them and their families
Nothing can still save us but blockchain and cryptocurrencies
Agreed. Though automation might not be as bad as people are beginning to think. There are things, after all, that computers just can't do. Until we get a ssituation like in David webber's Safehold series, where the AI were made from the consciousness and souls of human beings, complete with all of their thoughts and emotions, the threat will never be as great as people believe.