Technology-driven widespread unemployment ("the robots will take all the jobs") is, like wizards who fly spaceships, a fun premise for science fiction but difficult to find examples for in economic history. (The best example I know is for horses.)
-
-
Alternate take: The US population grew by about 36% between 1980 and 2010. The number of employed tellers grew by about 20% over the same time period. So, the percentage of the population finding work as tellers clearly declined, despite the growing economy being good for banks.
-
And that's before you take into account tellers' salaries, which were about $29,000 in 1980 and went down to $24000 in 2010. (Both numbers in 2010 dollars)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Now do accountants. Cause their salary story is more interesting.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
the marginal impact on distribution of income is more significant than the distribution of jobs. https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/files/el2019-25.pdf … "Automation has been an important driving factor. ... the portion of national income going to workers—has declined from about 63% in 2000 to 56% in 2018."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Seems relevant that tellers can still do things an ATM can't (e.g. understand customer problems and provide advice). Do you think it'll still hold even after AI can do those things better?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
had markets been allowed to work in 2008 & 2009, in the short run there would have been fewer bank branches & then longer term the distribution of power within the banking system would have become more diffused. this outcome was disallowed by political "hope and (non)change"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.