Here’s the link. Its title is “Technology and people: The great job-creating machine” by Ian Stewart, Debapratim De and Alex Cole. This is a report that quotes and compares a few jobs-by-sector statistics from various (UK) censuses.
We don’t need the census data to notice that we don’t in fact have much higher unemployment (which is something I think will change in the future), and the population has also increased, so clearly new jobs were created. How much of that is attributable to “technology” is debatable and the report doesn’t analyze this.
In fact it doesn’t do any analysis at all; it consists entirely of a list of examples of particular job sectors that have changed in size over the years, with brief descriptions of what the authors think were the reasons. And most of the reasons they give are not technological, but social or economic. (Also, many of the examples they give are comparing today to 1992, not any earlier periods.)
In summary, I don’t think this report provides any evidence that technology has recently created or will continue to create a number of jobs commensurate with the number automated away.
According to a recent study technology produced more jobs than it destroyed: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/17/technology-created-more-jobs-than-destroyed-140-years-data-census
Here’s the link. Its title is “Technology and people: The great job-creating machine” by Ian Stewart, Debapratim De and Alex Cole. This is a report that quotes and compares a few jobs-by-sector statistics from various (UK) censuses.
We don’t need the census data to notice that we don’t in fact have much higher unemployment (which is something I think will change in the future), and the population has also increased, so clearly new jobs were created. How much of that is attributable to “technology” is debatable and the report doesn’t analyze this.
In fact it doesn’t do any analysis at all; it consists entirely of a list of examples of particular job sectors that have changed in size over the years, with brief descriptions of what the authors think were the reasons. And most of the reasons they give are not technological, but social or economic. (Also, many of the examples they give are comparing today to 1992, not any earlier periods.)
In summary, I don’t think this report provides any evidence that technology has recently created or will continue to create a number of jobs commensurate with the number automated away.