We (1) move things with large muscles; (2) manipulate things with small muscles; (3) use our hands, mouths, brains, eyes, and ears to make sure that ongoing processes and procedures stay on track; (4) via social reciprocity and negotiation try to keep us all pulling in the same direction; and (5) think up new things for us to do. The coming of the Industrial Revolution –the steam engine to power and the metalworking to build machinery — greatly reduced the need for human muscles and fingers for (1) and (2). But it enormously increased (3), for all those machines needed to be minded and all of that paper needed to be shuffled. Each improvement in machines made each human cybernetic control element more valuable as well.
Think of (1) as working without tools. (2) is working with tools, but without machinery. (3a) is working with machinery in large organizations. (3b) is working in middle management in large organizations. (4) is managing large organizations, but without creativity and innovation (I think of accountants, m. (5) is creativity and innovation.
Brad’s point is that over historical time, you can watch machines move up the food chain. Today, the computer revolution is in the process of taking away jobs at level (3). The question is whether it is possible to find matches at level (4) and level (5) for most workers, or whether they are instead doomed to a lower-level existence.
Along similar lines, see Kevin Maney’s column, which I arrived at via Irving Wladawsky-Berger (who writes that “larger numbers of people will have to invent their own jobs”) by following a pointer from James Pethokoukis.
A small village in India has no fresh water. They could install a well to provide this, but they don’t have the money or expertise.
It would be trivial for a first world manufacturer to provide the well system. It would cost $1500. Is there any way this can happen without an act of charity?
yes, through an act of democratic coersion. this answers the “redeployment at level 4” question. you don’t need to have anything to contribute to actively engage in the political process.
A loan?
Why would someone give them a loan? That’s just another first world product they can’t afford and aren’t prepared to deal with. Again, assuming charity isn’t the motive.
This process has been going on for five plus centuries already, and yet the people displaced from rungs 1 and 2 weren’t doomed to a lower-level existence, nor were their progeny who were far more numerous.
I guess I question the limitation to five categories and, of course, leisure can grow to the limit of 24hours/day.
Until recently, people were displaced from a job or profession, but not a rung. There was some other opportunity at the same level. In many cases, a shift from rung one to two might be necessary, but this was feasible. Now, the lower rungs are shrinking, and too quickly. Many people can’t go up a level or two.
Leisure requires an exchange of value. It cannot grow to 24 hours per day, without becoming the pet of someone who can generate resources.
You say pet, I say welfare.
I am reminded of a commenter on another blog who once proposed a hypothetical 2-person economy on an island where Person A invented a machine that produced any good or item Person A wanted. This commenter tried to argue that this would worthless to Person A because he would never be able to sell it to Person B because Person B had nothing Person A wanted.
Seriously.
It gets awful lonely on a desert island.
In any case, Thomas, people moved from the farms to factories starting in the 18th century- a change of rungs.
The key point is whether there was another opportunity available at roughly the same level of complexity. A low skill factory job may be different than farming, but if most of the farmers can learn to be productive factory workers in a few days, who cares?
As work gets more and more abstract, less and less people can do the work, and less and less people are needed.
The change is in the capacity of the individual. In the next 100 years, the amount of work one person will be able to do without needing lots of other people will become nearly unlimited. That’s never been true before. We won’t be able to use the past as a guide for what will happen any more.