White House: Robots will kill jobs and make inequality worse

Every American president comes into office with a mandate to create jobs. It’s so often the biggest part of an election that James Carville’s “The economy, stupid” quote has now been utterly lost to pundit cliche.

In the 2016 election, the four-year refrain was back again, but with the international narrative: Mexico and China are stealing jobs. While there’s no doubt that inexpensive labor abroad exports American jobs, a fundamental issue received next to no discussion. Automation and the robots.

As Yahoo Finance chart of the year showed, the amount the US manufactures domestically has risen to record levels. Meanwhile, the number of people that industry employs has fallen dramatically—it’s not in anybody’s imagination. Automation is a challenge far bigger than China, and according to a new report from the Executive Office of the President, artificial intelligence and automation have the potential to spur inequality and hurt the livelihoods of millions.

Increased efficiency due to technology may not be anything new, and in the past the economic changes have been positive. As the White House notes in the report, titled “Artificial Intelligence, Automation, and the Economy,” the 19th century saw changes in tech that made lower-skilled workers more productive and began to build a middle class, reducing inequality. The late 20th century, in contrast, has taken a different path, with higher-skilled workers using computers to boost productivity—at the same time dispatching countless routine-intensive jobs. And as current automation technology advances, with the help of AI, a reckoning is coming.

In the near term, 9% to 47% of jobs may be threatened over the next decade. According to the White House, “research consistently finds that the jobs that are threatened by automation are highly concentrated among lower-paid, lower-skilled, and less-educated workers.”

In the past, optimistic economists have pointed to the economy’s ability to adapt to new opportunities and constraints—pivoting to new jobs and even inventing entirely new types of work in response to macro-scale changes. But cyclical as the economy may often seem to be, past results are no guarantee of future performance, as any fine print disclaimer will tell you.

Much of the White House’s report echoes the findings of economists like Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman, who have showed that the trajectory of the economy has been great for high earners, but horrible for the bottom half, which “has been completely shut off economic growth since the 1970s.”