Great article, but it's confusing to criticize off-shoring in one paragraph and protectionism the next, then suggest by the end of that paragraph that pills from overseas are placebos. I would like all drugs and baby food to be made back here in the US, and if automation leads to greater efficiency, fewer workers, and a smaller environmental footprint, that's fine - a high-functioning economic engine in a community where there didn't used to be one can create growth and wealth even if everyone doesn't work for the same plant. Thanks again for the great research and argument!
A nice rendition of a common process we're all familiar with. We continue to produce record output with ever fewer workers. Yet, I couldn't help wonder how Oren's tariffs fit the story. Does government really have the smarts, integrity, and discipline to materially impact this inexorable process? Can we trust establishment politicians to wield the tool for the national interest, or is it inevitably used to further the political and personal financial interests of the leader. DonOrenomics is giving us the answer.
Blue collar workers adjust, there are always more jobs. The only difference is that the new jobs often pay much less. Also things aren't always as they appear. Making houses with a massive printer spewing out concrete eliminates few jobs. Erecting the actual frame of the house is a small part of construction. It takes many months after framing before there is a certificate of occupancy.
Paid less? A minimum wage worker can purchase more computing power with a days wages than Howard Hughes could with all his wealth. Wages are numbers, they are not real (at least not since you could no longer trade them in for gold coins.)
In his fascinating book The Origins of Efficiency, Brian Potter criticizes the tendency of economists to attribute increases in total factor productivity to technology. Technology is both too narrow and too broad an explanation.
My suggested substitute is *continuous process improvement*. It's also all inclusive (and probably too narrow and too broad at the same time) but it takes the focus away from invention and towards a mindset of problem solving.
I've only read the intro and chapter 1 though. Looking forward to Chapter 2! :-) @brianpotter
Great article, but it's confusing to criticize off-shoring in one paragraph and protectionism the next, then suggest by the end of that paragraph that pills from overseas are placebos. I would like all drugs and baby food to be made back here in the US, and if automation leads to greater efficiency, fewer workers, and a smaller environmental footprint, that's fine - a high-functioning economic engine in a community where there didn't used to be one can create growth and wealth even if everyone doesn't work for the same plant. Thanks again for the great research and argument!
A nice rendition of a common process we're all familiar with. We continue to produce record output with ever fewer workers. Yet, I couldn't help wonder how Oren's tariffs fit the story. Does government really have the smarts, integrity, and discipline to materially impact this inexorable process? Can we trust establishment politicians to wield the tool for the national interest, or is it inevitably used to further the political and personal financial interests of the leader. DonOrenomics is giving us the answer.
Blue collar workers adjust, there are always more jobs. The only difference is that the new jobs often pay much less. Also things aren't always as they appear. Making houses with a massive printer spewing out concrete eliminates few jobs. Erecting the actual frame of the house is a small part of construction. It takes many months after framing before there is a certificate of occupancy.
Paid less? A minimum wage worker can purchase more computing power with a days wages than Howard Hughes could with all his wealth. Wages are numbers, they are not real (at least not since you could no longer trade them in for gold coins.)
In his fascinating book The Origins of Efficiency, Brian Potter criticizes the tendency of economists to attribute increases in total factor productivity to technology. Technology is both too narrow and too broad an explanation.
My suggested substitute is *continuous process improvement*. It's also all inclusive (and probably too narrow and too broad at the same time) but it takes the focus away from invention and towards a mindset of problem solving.
I've only read the intro and chapter 1 though. Looking forward to Chapter 2! :-) @brianpotter
GLP-1 should be as cheap as aspirin by now, due to sheer demand ... what is going on there?