The NY Times has a business story, the opening of which I will paste
below. The argument isn't nearly complicated enough to correctly
analyze this. I certainly support innovation -- and job eliminating
innovation -- but there is more to it than is dreampt of in this
philosophy.
Gene Coyle
January 4, 2009
UNBOXED
Innovation Should Mean More Jobs, Not Less
By JANET RAE-DUPREE
CREATING new jobs is a good way to get America’s economy moving again.
That’s not the controversial part of President-elect Barack Obama’s
economic stimulus plans. As usual, the devil is in the details. And
innovation advocates fear that if the devil runs amok, a short-sighted
emphasis on jobs over long-term productivity may bog down the economic
recovery.
The problem, as they see it, is a centuries-old misconception that
innovation is synonymous with automation, which in turn leads to the
elimination of jobs.
“If you invest in a technology that makes something more efficient,
the fear is that people will be put out of work,” says Kevin Efrusy,
the venture capitalist whose firm Accel Partners is the lead funder of
several important Silicon Valley start-ups, including Facebook. “But
it’s just the opposite. When anything becomes cheaper, we consume a
lot more of it. The overall economic effect is, you create and expand
entire new industries and employment goes up.”
<snip>
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
