Dow
     -27.02
12938.67
-0.21%
|
     -4.55
1357.66
-0.33%
|
     +0.00
14147.55
+0.00
|
     -15.40
2933.17
-0.52%
|
     -0.16
54.37
-0.30%
|
     +1.68
120.88
+1.41%
|
     +0.07
2.07
+3.54%
November 4, 2011 3:52 PM

Is Silicon Valley fueling unemployment?

By
Erik Sherman
(MoneyWatch)  COMMENTARY High tech is supposed to be a bright spot in the American economy. But new Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) numbers on productivity -- a 3.1 percent annual rate increase last quarter for non-farm business -- should give everyone a pause, particularly as corporate profits remain enormous and unemployment is as stubborn as ever.

For all the protests over Wall Street and the 1 percent of the population that controls vast amounts of the nation's wealth, a long-term shift in the economy and the current jobless recovery are only possible because technology and automation replace humans in established business processes, as my colleague Alain Sherter has noted. But in addition to fueling a stagnant national workplace, there is a secondary effect. Even as they hit record profits and stockpile more cash than ever before, corporations do so by essentially casting off expenses that then land on the nation as a whole. The results may be dandy for corporate earnings, big investors, and CEOs, but they're disastrous for everyone else and the economy at large.

A ruthless efficiency

The latest quarter reports on growth in business productivity -- output per hour of labor -- is nothing new. Here are the BLS numbers for the last few years broken out by economic sector:

(Credit: CBSi/Erik Sherman)

With a few notable drops into negative territory, the clear trend is one quarter of increased productivity after another. In English, that means companies continue to find ways to do more work with fewer people, even as the corporations grow revenues and profits. That's why the unemployment rate, which has dropped some over the last few years, is still over 9 percent, as this BLS chart shows:

(Credit: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics)

It is true that people are working longer hours and taking less time off in general, which reduce the need for hiring additional help. But more time with noses pressed to grindstones doesn't affect productivity, which measures work per hour. Unless people have suddenly become far more industrious, thank technology and outsourcing (which is made possible by technology). Business understandably exhibits a fervent embrace of technology because doing so reduces costs of operations and increases profits. Unfortunately, the main tool this economic miracle employs is eliminating the need for as many employees and, thus, putting an increasing number of people out of work, whether through losing a job or losing the opportunity for one that might have existed before.

How the hidden digital 'economy' threatens jobs
Bad corporate management is killing the economy

Private profits, public pain

Corporate management is doing what it thinks is right and following a fiduciary duty to shareholders and owners. They don't see or feel a duty to keep people employed if those employees aren't necessary to the efficient operation of the company.

But conflict arises because companies that continue to leverage technology and restrict employment effectively push their losses onto society as a whole. Fewer jobs mean more people out of work. More people out of work means a weaker economy and more demand on government to help. The results also hit those at the bottom of the economic ladder hardest, if you look at the September unemployment numbers:

CBSi/Erik Sherman

Those with college degrees are getting off lightly while the other 65 percent of the workforce bears a progressively larger portion of the unemployment burden -- 81 percent of all those unemployed. The 11.7 million without high school degrees have almost as many out of work in hard numbers as the 46.9 million college graduates.

Calling for more education and increased numbers of jobs in science and technology might sound like the solution until you realize that there aren't enough spots in colleges and enough money to help those less well-off to pay for education to make that happen. That's even assuming everyone has the necessary aptitude and ability and that there would somehow be enough high tech jobs available.

In short, companies continue to gain efficiency and productivity by restricting the number of jobs, which pushes people into the arms of the government. At the same time, according to non-profit and self-described non-partisan Citizens for Tax Justice, many large corporations have effective federal income tax rates of zero, and a good number of profitable companies manage to pay less than zero percent of their incomes as income tax, so they're minimizing the burden they might ordinarily pay for government policies that attempt to stimulate the creation of jobs. It's an indirect but significant form of subsidy, in which the public takes on the burdens of not having enough jobs so companies can make more money and often reduce their income tax burden, which makes the subsidy even more expensive.

Hmm, maybe Occupy Wall Street should consider starting Occupy Silicon Valley.

How rising inequality stunts the U.S. economy
How flatlining wages are suppressing the economic recovery

© 2011 CBS Interactive Inc.. All Rights Reserved.
Add a Comment
by BarlL November 15, 2011 2:05 AM EST
Why don't you take a look at this

http://www(dot) optoiq(dot)com/articles/2011/11/robots-will-create-more-than-one-million-jobs-by-2016.html

Replace (dot) with .

Seems it's all the opposite, robots create jobs due to added productivity and demand
Reply to this comment
by BarlL November 15, 2011 2:03 AM EST
Seems like everyone who has done a market study suggests the contrary, but I keep on seeing the political scene pushing for a "man vs machine" narrative when this is clearly not true. Perhaps To get a scapegoat for the fed, the central bankers robbing everybody and the federal government? Yea, quite likely, but does automation hurt jobs? All the contrary. Thats my conclusion from these articles because 1, it seems to be widespread (CNN, msnbc, and all news is actively attacking automation) and 2. All market scientific studies show that automation CREATES jobs.

So my conclusion is that. It's incredibly stupid from my perspective, I mean your going againt innovation, the thing that gives any naion or civilization it's comoetetie edge....mnot too smart.
Reply to this comment
by BarlL November 15, 2011 1:59 AM EST
Why don't you take a look at this

http://www(dot) optoiq(dot)com/articles/2011/11/robots-will-create-more-than-one-million-jobs-by-2016.html

Replace (dot) with .

Seems it's all the opposite, robots create jobs due to added productivity and demand
Reply to this comment
by Robert2897 November 5, 2011 12:23 AM EDT
Computers and robots are getting better and better. More jobs are being done by software, often incorporating artificial intelligence or machine learning. There was a recent piece in the NYT about teams of lawyers being replaced by e-Discovery software.

This is going to ACCELERATE in the future. A company called Heartland Robotics is working on a $5000 robot; that means an employer can buy a robot for the price of a couple of months wages.

As jobs at all levels, from McDonalds to college-educated knowledge-workers, are increasingly automated, there will be more unemployment, more downward pressure on wages, and especially even more income inequality as the owners of capital realize even more gains. Ultimately, this will undercut consumer spending because there simply won't be enough average people with discretionary money to spend on goods and services. In fact, we already see evidence of that.

For a great overview of this, see this book:

"The Lights in the Tunnel: Automation, Accelerating Technology and the Economy of the Future"

http://www.**********/gp/product/1448659817

A free PDF is also available here: http://www.thelightsinthetunnel.com/

Also see the author's blog at http://econfuture.wordpress.com/.

I think the issues raised in this book are among the most important that we will have to confront as a society. I encourage everyone to read it...
Reply to this comment
by eriksherman November 5, 2011 8:06 AM EDT
Right, and I agree that author Martin Ford has an interesting take on the subject. It's a growing problem and one, as you point out, that both feeds on (less spending pushes companies to cut more costs) and eventually undermines itself. I'm waiting for the day that computers make strategic decisions and eliminate CEOs.
by sjc_1 November 11, 2011 11:21 AM EST
We could dig ditches with shovels, but modern equipment does a better job. We need to be designing, making, operating and servicing that equipment to create higher paying jobs.
by SVPHIL November 4, 2011 8:09 PM EDT
This is true. I worked at the online division of a giant retailer here in Silicon Valley over the last 4 yrs I have seen them weed out people and never replace them, at the same time they split the extra work to the remaining team and gave the extra work cute names like "an opportunity" or " a challenge" . They also spent money on "work tracking" software to make sure we had maximized out work time. oh don't forget the hours they asked us to VOLUNTEER for community charities so they could use for their propaganda (Look at our corporation- we give back to the community)
It was a disgusting thing to witness! YES Ocuppy Silicon valley!!!
Reply to this comment
by eriksherman November 5, 2011 10:16 AM EDT
Out of curiosity and a bit of dark humor, does this company often talk about employees as being one of its most important assets?
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook