Labor Productivity: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
(→14%) |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
#[[Flex Fab]] - distributed fabrication of the [[Second Industrial Divide]] | #[[Flex Fab]] - distributed fabrication of the [[Second Industrial Divide]] | ||
#[[Open Source IP]] - end of patents and trade secrets | #[[Open Source IP]] - end of patents and trade secrets | ||
#[[Open Sector Enterprise]] | |||
=Links= | =Links= | ||
*[[Automation and the Future of Work]], Aaron Benanev | *[[Automation and the Future of Work]], Aaron Benanev | ||
Revision as of 05:21, 17 March 2025
With robotics and automation, labor productivity is decreasing - [1]
Jeremy Rifkin on Labor Productivity
- Robert Solow got nobel prize for breaking the floor out of economics - concluding that with the current crappy 14% labor productivity, we don't know where the 86% of productivity is wasted.
14%
Labor + capital account for 14% of the efficiency. Aggregate efficiency in the managing, powering, and moving of economic activity. [2]
NB: concepts are mixing here. Do we have 14% efficiency, or do we have that 86% is waste? Yes, if we claim labor + capital are all of the productivity. From the OSE perspective, proprietary tech and various Competitive Waste are the 86% efficiency loss which can be corrected with:
- Flex Fab - distributed fabrication of the Second Industrial Divide
- Open Source IP - end of patents and trade secrets
- Open Sector Enterprise
Links
- Automation and the Future of Work, Aaron Benanev