Lant makes a wonky but strong argument for “people over robots”

His argument in Foreign Affairs (link below) centres on productivity and he argues that resisting immigration by building out expensive technology rather than ease immigration controls is fundamentally an inefficient solution.

I admit ti falling into the technology evangelist category however his economic arguments are a refreshing take on current economics that we have taken for granted, and possibly too easily.

It is easier to build massively expense and difficult technology than deal with the political difficulties associated with “immigrants stealing my job”. In fact he argues that immigration not only provides income for immigrants it raises the country’s income for everyone through higher production. This paradox comes about because immigrants will fill gaps in core work, ie repeatable, process oriented work which most of us define as low value work. in other word why build fancy technology solutions for work that is automatable, such as grocery store checkout when immigrants will fill those gaps at no cost beyond wages. Similarly health care for the aged, security guards represent core work that is repeatable and process heavy.

The arguments are very much based on economic theory, and not something I profess knowledge. i admit the reference to technology being viewed by us as a force of nature that we must adapt to and learn how to adapt and cope, rings true for many. Technology is a choice with its own costs, benefits and risks.

I recommend the article and for convenience I have included some snippets below.

I also recommend listening to the podcast with Lant.

—

Foreign Affairs

People Over Robots

The Global Economy Needs Immigration Before Automation

By Lant Pritchett

March/April 2023

This statement caught my attention because it rings true.

These conversations almost always treat technological change as something to be adapted to, as if it were a force of nature, barreling inexorably into the staid conventions and assumptions of modern life. The pace of change seems irrepressible; new technologies will remake societies. All people can do is figure out how best to cope.

Realities definitely interfere with the theory of unlimited social mobility. And international GDP suffers as a consequence.

From the perspective of individual firms and industries, it is easier to figure out how to get artificial intelligence to drive a truck than it is to lower the bureaucratic barriers of immigration restrictions.

But choosing devices over people is a mistake. It leads the world to miss out on the real economic and humanitarian gains that would come from letting people move to where they are needed instead of trying to invent machines that can supplant humans.

In fact, the growth of economic productivity in industrial countries by the standard measure of growth of “total factor productivity” (which assesses productivity by dividing total production, or output, by its costs, or inputs) has been considerably slower in recent decades than it was between the early twentieth century and 1970. Nearly every developed country has experienced a substantial deceleration in productivity growth since 1980.

The medium-term demographic future of the native born in the rich industrial world is already clear: by the 2040s, there will be millions too few native-born people in developed countries available to perform all the essential, nonroutine, manual tasks in the economy.

Ultimately, U.S. firms opt for automation because it is far easier to solve even very hard technical problems,

False necessity is the mother of dumb inventions.

The phenomenon of global poverty today is not one of “poor people” but of people trapped in “poor places,” unable to leave because of barriers limiting their movement.

… but the reality is that the massive expansion of education in the developing world since the 1950s means that the average adult in Haiti today has had more schooling than the average adult in France had in 1970.

Summary Paragraph

It may seem paradoxical, but the pitfalls of labor mobility in the present are reasons to facilitate even more movement, only through legal and well-devised channels. The benefits of allowing people to move where their labor is needed are huge for all concerned. Rich and democratic societies need to stop blindly pursuing technological advances that economize on precisely what is abundant around the world. Wealthy countries have created strong incentives for their firms and innovators to choose machines over people. It is time to make the bet on a future built by and for people

Tags #productivity #social-mobility #migration