Comments 8

经济进步的未来

Apr 15, 2014 Kemal Derviş

华盛顿—关于经济增长的性质的争论进入了新阶段，这一变化虽然缓慢，但无可置疑。信服显得问题与近几十年来的争论问题大相径庭，我们可以从中感受到决定未来经济进步（以及经济政策）讨论的概念框架的变化。

第一个问题是关于未来经济增长潜在速度的，这一问题造成了经济学家之间的严重分歧。比如，西北大学的罗伯特·戈登（Robert Gordon）认为，从中期看，美国经济年人均增长达到0.5%就要谢天谢地了。另一些人——其中最认真的大概是丹尼·罗德里克（Dani Rodrik），对新兴经济体深感悲观。许多大牌分析家的共同假设是技术进步将会减速，包括与新兴和发展中国家关系最密切的赶超收益。

另一边是“新科技派”，他们认为我们正站在第四次工业革命的门口，这次工业革命的特征是真正的“智能机器”，它们将成为中低技能劳动力的近乎完美的替代品。这些“机器人”（其中一些以软件的面目出现）也可称为“物联网”（Internet of things），拜3D打印所赐，它们将在能源效率、交通（如自动驾驶汽车）、医疗和个性化大生产等领域极大地提高生产率。

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To read this article from our archive, please log in or register now. After entering your email, you'll have access to two free articles from our archive every month. For unlimited access to Project Syndicate, subscribe now.

Featured

The West’s Race Problem

Sep 13, 2018 Ian Buruma
Universal Basic Income or Universal Living Wage?

Sep 17, 2018 Laura Tyson & Lenny Mendonca
The Global Trade System Could Break Down

Sep 17, 2018 Anne O. Krueger
Has Putin’s Popularity Bubble Burst?

Sep 14, 2018 Nina L. Khrushcheva
The Immorality of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump

Sep 18, 2018 Chris Patten

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 7 in all 7 Comments on this article

Austin Folkestad Sep 1, 2015

It would seem that alternative energy sources are our best bet when things like coal and oil run out, but one must remember that there's a lot of infrastructure that goes into mining for the necessary resources (or otherwise procuring them), assembling them into finished products (solar panels, turbines, etc), and transporting them to their installation points. The question is this: can we successfully modify this infrastructure to be self-sustaining before we all run out of oil? That's not a rhetorical question. If any of you technologists out there have any ideas on this matter, I'd love to hear them.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Miguel de Arriba May 28, 2014

When machines have replaced humans, who consume? Machines ...?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dirk Ouellette Apr 20, 2014

EROEI (energy returned on energy invested) calls all the shots as it has since the primordial ooze. Little else matters for humans or any other living thing.
Humanity, particularly in the "first" world countries, have been on a hayride of fun and thrills since the discovery of coal and then petroleum. We can throw in nuclear as a bit of extra juice, but we all know the dangers, and EROEI of the nuclear industry. That is to say, without massive government protection, nuclear is D E A D as an energy source. So, with the EROEI of petoleum, coal , sunshine, hydro, wind, becoming, or already on the downhill slide, $$$$$$$$$ will be the factor in gathering and using our energy resources.
We have a huge world population directly related to the cheap energy we've been extracting for 300 years. As that energy becomes too expensive to use for the vast majority, the "vast majority" will become much less vast.
The economists with their charts, graphs, PhD's, computer models, corporate backers, are swiftly becoming the necromancers sitting to the side of the various rulers, whether corporate or governmental. As a whole, useless time and money wasters.
Education is always an answer, but what kind of education? I think education cognizant of the future realities of terribly expensive energy, other than water, animal (human and otherwise), and mechanical.
Believe in the technologists if you will, but kepp at least one eye to their real successes, as opposed to their virtual, self agrandizing stories. I think you will see, that for that "vast majority" of humanity, it is back to the future of preindustrial civilization.
Keep dreaming though. It is often a good release mechanism
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Pingfan Hong Apr 20, 2014

All the quetions mentioned in the article are rooted in the human nature of competition, which is coded in our gene. Otherwise, why do we just suggest obolishing the grading system in schools, and all pupils will get the same pass regardless of their efforts?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Val Samonis Apr 18, 2014

EDUCATION is the key globally. However, it seems to be undergoing revolution (high tech & systemic/institutional) and we do not know yet what transpires for the 21st C.So this is an unknown unknown. Some known unknowns include: roles of governments in economic growth, the nature of entrepreneurship the global digital era, etc.

Val Samonis
Toronto
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Procyon Mukherjee Apr 16, 2014

The challenge of economic progress is that the capital stock is rising at a greater rate than the rate of increase of income; for those at the lower half of the income hierarchy, the rate has actually gone down. This dysfunctional arrangement cannot be cast away as mere consequential evidence that technological progress leaves demented earnings for those at the bottom of the chain.

Martin Wolfe has today rightly pointed out that managerial marginal product, although it has reached its peak, can hardly be measured and Picketty is so right to point that out that it is a significant area of concern how the rise of managerial remuneration has created such a distortion and skewedness in the last two decades alone, when the value of contribution is so much murky.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Zsolt Hermann Apr 15, 2014

I think the questions regarding the future of global economy can be approached better and more precisely if we accept the principle that economy, trade is nothing else but the external, practical representation of the interrelationships in between people.
If we also accept the other principle that humanity has evolved into a globally interconnected and interdependent network, which is not man-made but an evolutionary necessity, than we can easily deduce that we are existing in a given system, with given, unchangeable conditions we have to adapt to.
From there it is not difficult to deduce that in this given global, integral system constant quantitative growth is not possible, as such thing does not exist in a sensitively balanced, closed and finite natural ecosystem we are also part of, and that when each and everyone depends on each and every other, and are also fully responsible for each other, the present ruthless, exploitative and wasteful competition has to be replaced by a globally mutual, complementing cooperation.
Social interconnections and economy based on natural necessities and available resources and means, mutually cooperating with each other.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

http://prosyn.org/BcJluJh/zh;

经济进步的未来

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Featured

The West’s Race Problem

Universal Basic Income or Universal Living Wage?

The Global Trade System Could Break Down

Has Putin’s Popularity Bubble Burst?

The Immorality of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Europe’s Refugee Scandal

PS [In Depth]: Women’s Economic Empowerment

The Emerging World’s High Achievers

The Immorality of Boris Johnson and Donald Trump

Education for Fragile States

Looking Beyond Lehman

The Global Trade System Could Break Down

A Better Bailout Was Possible

Cookies and Privacy

Log in/Register