This is DrDick's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following DrDick's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
DrDick
Recent Activity
Except that Germany and Japan have retained a larger share of workers in manufacturing, despite more automation. Germany has also retained much more of its manufacturing base than the US has. The evidence really does point to the role of outsourcing in the US compared with others. http://www.economist.com/node/21552567 http://www.economist.com/node/2571689
Toggle Commented Apr 6, 2017 on Links for 04-06-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
A couple of nice pieces from Campbell and Bernstein (the CBPP link) in today's links. Campbell nicely drives a stake through the heart of the "robots are stealing your jobs" nonsense using international comparisons. Bernstein clearly delineates the structural inequities in our system and the ways that Republican policies, particularly the AHCA, make those much worse.
Toggle Commented Apr 6, 2017 on Links for 04-06-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Some lovely snark from Dillow here, thoroughly eviscerating conservative hypocrisy on taxation.
1 reply
He also seems to falsely imply that the people associated with capital actually have functioning brains.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2017 on Links for 04-05-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Given that Mark routinely links to his blog, I expect people to know what I am talking about, just as I know where to look when someone refers to pgl, Dorman, or Sandwichman.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2017 on Links for 04-05-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Agree completely.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2017 on Links for 04-05-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
"a "gentleman's farm" in IA worth $11mil would be roughly 1500 acres (somewhat smaller because part of it is equipment)." Given that the average farm size in Iowa is less than 400 acres, this is highly unlikely to even exist in Iowa.
1 reply
That, however, is their fault and not the tax systems's.
1 reply
A nice piece by Dillow, who confirms my point that many, if not most, managers have little or no idea what they are doing. I would say that, for the US at least, he ignores the impact of stagnant wages over the past 40 years as a cause of declining productivity.
Toggle Commented Apr 5, 2017 on Links for 04-05-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
A wonderful piece and aligns with what I have long said, that we need to hold top executives personally responsible for the actions of their companies. Corporations do not act, people do and the CEO and other top executives are personally responsible for knowing what their business is doing.
1 reply
Here you go: http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch15s61.html http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2010/10/estate_tax_and_founding_fathers https://hubpages.com/politics/The-Aristocracy-of-Wealth https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/04/does-income-inequality-really-violate-us-principles/479577/
1 reply
Damn, that is even smaller than I thought. If anything we need to tax estates more aggressively. I really favor the idea put forward by some of the founders, who rightly feared the emergence of a hereditary aristocracy of wealth, of a confiscatory tax on really large estates.
1 reply
His "Globalization and its Discontents" is on my bookshelf.
Toggle Commented Apr 3, 2017 on Links for 04-03-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Krugman's only point here is simply that Trump lied (which should have been obvious at the time).
1 reply
A great piece by Stiglitz.
Toggle Commented Apr 3, 2017 on Links for 04-03-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Have to agree that most of the comments on this are, at best, inane and miss the point.
1 reply
I cannot speak for EMichael, but as a mid-Boomer I actually remember operator assisted calls.
Toggle Commented Mar 31, 2017 on Links for 03-30-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Which is what I said. Yes, the percentage of workers employed in those sectors declined as a result of increased automation, but the numbers of workers employed did not. It is only when offshoring takes off that there are actual reductions in the numbers of jobs.
Toggle Commented Mar 31, 2017 on Links for 03-30-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
In point of fact, we know that a lot of US companies (i.e., automakers and computer makers) have outsourced component manufacture, while retaining final assembly here.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-29-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
What part of "It only reduced job growth" don't you understand. Yes, automation increased productivity in those industries. It did not reduce the *numbers* of jobs. Offshoring reduced the numbers of jobs.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-30-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
Not. Gonna. Happen. Ever!
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-29-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
There is this: http://flashmanletters.typepad.com/my-blog/2013/10/how-mexico-is-upending-the-us-auto-industry.html
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-29-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
I would not disagree, but, as you indicate, this is a completely different argument from the one both Summers and Bahko are making.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-29-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
China had a bigger impact on jobs after 2000 than robots did. I have never denied that automation played a role. Indeed, I have explicitly stated that businesses have automated those operations where this was easily done. However, they exported the far more numerous labor intensive processes to low wage/low regulation countries, going back to the 1970s.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-29-17 at Economist's View
1 reply
But it did not actually reduce the numbers of jobs, which continued to rise. It only reduced job growth, and even that is not unambiguous, since it is not clear that we would have had the increase in productivity without automation.
Toggle Commented Mar 30, 2017 on Links for 03-30-17 at Economist's View
1 reply