Rich Lowry: Don’t Fear Artificial Intelligence

Concerns about AI causing job losses are prevalent, with predictions of significant white-collar job reductions. Historical trends suggest that technology creates opportunities rather than destroys them. Despite disruptions, AI could boost productivity and economic growth in the future.

ChatGPT is causing quite the stir, and not for trivial reasons. The alarm bells are ringing as talk of an impending “white-collar bloodbath” fills headlines. Axios recently cited the CEO of Anthropic, suggesting AI might decimate half of all entry-level white-collar roles in the next few years, possibly sending unemployment rates soaring to 10-20%—levels reminiscent of the Great Depression.

Though it sounds bleak, we’ve danced this dance before. Back in the 1930s, economist John Maynard Keynes warned that machines might be advancing faster than we could adapt our workforce. Fast forward to the 1960s, and John F. Kennedy echoed similar concerns about automation’s threat. Yet here we are today, facing the same old fears.

A history of inconsistent predictions doesn’t mean they’ll always be wrong, of course. However, when technology is often blamed for job losses, one has to wonder: shouldn’t we have seen a steady job decline since the wheel was invented? In fact, the unemployment rate now sits at a manageable 4.2%, and as Rob Atkinson from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation points out, the average U.S. unemployment rate hasn’t fluctuated much over the past century despite a tenfold increase in productivity.

The beauty of technological advancement is its knack for creating opportunities. As new efficiencies are embraced, companies can invest in novel ideas and ventures, paving the way for new jobs to replace outdated ones. Just think about the wave of personal computers. They almost wiped out roles like typists and word processors, predominantly occupied by women. Yet, those women transitioned into better opportunities, not worse.

Moreover, while spreadsheets ushered a decline in demand for bookkeepers, the accounting profession didn’t fade away; it evolved. Studies, including one by MIT economist David Autor, reveal that a majority of today’s jobs emerged after 1940, suggesting the job market is fluid and adaptable.

Yes, AI is expected to make a significant impact on white-collar jobs like programming and law, more so than past technological revolutions. But let’s not forget—these roles aren’t out of the automator’s reach any more than factory jobs were. In many cases, AI will enhance careers, making workers more efficient. However, it’s a leap to imagine something like Meta handing over legal representation entirely to AI, even if AI does make junior lawyers less needed.

This is going to shake up the legal field, but on the bright side, it may render legal services more affordable and accessible for everyone needing them. Yes, change can be jarring, and there’s a valid concern that AI will eventually outpace our ability to adapt and find new jobs. But the potential benefits are enormous.

With productivity growth thinning out since the mid-2000s after a solid run in the 1990s, a technological leap from AI could pull us back into an era of robust productivity. If AI boosts productivity again, it could help ease budget deficits and the financial burdens posed by a retiring baby boomer generation.

So, while AI brings with it certain challenges, it’s far from a death knell for employment—much like computers and the internet have proven to be. Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review, raises some crucial points as we navigate through this brave new world.

Rich Lowry argues against the fear surrounding artificial intelligence and its potential impact on jobs. He points out the historical patterns of alarmism, showing that while AI may disrupt certain fields, it’s likely to create new opportunities in its wake. Despite the potential challenges posed by AI, a significant productivity boost could help address larger economic concerns, making it more beneficial than threatening in the long run.

Original Source: coastalcourier.com