MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE by Michael Wolraich Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop |
A new practice of production has emerged in all the major economies of the world. The simplest and most telling of its many names is the knowledge economy. It holds the promise of changing, to our benefit, some of the most deep-seated and universal regularities of economic life and of dramatically enhancing productivity and growth.
Its effects, however, have so far proved modest. Instead of spreading widely, it has remained restricted to vanguards of production, employing few workers. Entrepreneurial and technological elites control it. A handful of large global firms have reaped the lion’s share of the profits that it has yielded. It appears in every part of the production system; the habit of equating it with high-technology industry is unwarranted. In every sector of the economy, however, it remains a narrow fringe, excluding the vast majority of the labor force. Even though its products are used ever more widely, its revolutionary practices continue to be quarantined.
The true character and potential of the new practice of production remain disguised: by virtue of being insular, the knowledge economy is also undeveloped. The technologies with which it is most recently associated, such as robots and artificial intelligence, have riveted worldwide attention. Nevertheless, we have barely begun to grasp its significance for economic and social life or gained insight into its possible futures.
The established body of economic ideas is useful and even indispensable but also insufficient to an understanding of these problems. Received economic theory leaves us short of the insights that we need to guide the institutional and policy changes required to take us from the insular knowledge economy that we have to the inclusive one that we need. The effort to think through the agenda of an inclusive vanguardism prompts us to reassess the alternative futures of economics as well as the alternative futures of the economy.
Comments
A bit conspiracy laden. Between 1989-1992 we added Soviet Union/East Europe to the relatively global free trade economy, China's paeticipation steadily grew from 1980, SE Asia sprung wings, and even Africa performed much better while the EU solidified its free trade zone.
We had an eruption of goods and new tilt towards services. Not every community could participate equally, competence wise, biz model wise, access to capital wise. But the *knowledge* was and is there largely for everyone, often for free - Linux used for servers, mobile phones, embedded camras; free cloud computing systems, big data, databases - even now Python et al libraries for IoT, machine learning, artificial intelligence, data analytics... with online courses for free or $15, good enough translations via Google of tech and general interest articles from Wikipedia et al. Desktop computers for $200-400, mobile smartphones even lalthough over Africa for payments (with much improved mobile and wireless infrastructure). Specialized med help online, travel, logistics, procurement, language learning, cheap tools to run a business - video collaboration, free Office tools, shared calendars, Project Management, HR, tax... It's not completely easy for non-native English speakers, but it's certainly not hidden nor tough to access.
What likely is the toughest is that the disruptive technologies like Uber or Amazon need far fewer resources, esp human, than what they replace. So while productivity goes up for the few, the rest have to shift work - as the new winners are largely winner-take-all, rather than say auto manufacturing with coopetition and a large supply & delivery ecosystem. And these changes have to be absorbed much faster - continual improvement.
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 07/05/2019 - 2:30pm
The world eventually has to get off the productivity hamster wheel introduced with the industrial revolution and move on to something else like, perhaps: quality of life. I have found that if you grok with trying to understand what's going on with medicine, the big picture that way becomes ever so clear. I'm sure that people who try to grok the environment issues see it the same way. It's probably a long ways away, hopefully the planet will last in the meantime. That said, there has been a lot of progress in my lifetime in getting the world population problem down, to the point of many countries with the "problem" of not enough "replacement" of cog bodies in the machine.
by artappraiser on Fri, 07/05/2019 - 3:12pm
Yeah, it's a transition - we're still not there, need more automation, process improvement, micro-robots and other specialties. Much of what we do is still people-intensive, serious no-stop work for 8+ hours, other jobs can be shaved down. The machine learning/AI stuff is a bit "low hanging fruit" yet again, unsurprisingly. Investor-driven. The shit jobs involving repetitive mind-numbing or even happy customer-focused still can't be toned down, even if fries machines or espresso bars have it down to an assembly line. And then look at something like education where you need an individualized human approach yet me often get mechanical changes but more teacher burden...
by PeraclesPlease on Fri, 07/05/2019 - 3:20pm