

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Economist Joseph Stiglitz speaks during an event on November 7, 2019 in Turin, Italy.
"I'm hopeful that if we did the right thing, AI would be great. But the question is: Will we be doing the right thing in our policy space? And I think that's much more problematic."
Economist Joseph Stiglitz said this week that he is highly concerned about the potential of unregulated artificial intelligence to supercharge global inequality, which exploded during the coronavirus pandemic as billionaires saw their wealth surge while tens of millions were pushed into poverty.
"I'm very worried," Stiglitz, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001, told Scientific American. "In a way, robots have replaced routine physical work. And AI now is replacing routine white-collar work—or not replacing [it] but reducing the demand. So jobs that were routine white-collar, I think, will be at risk."
"And there are enough of those that it would have a macroeconomic effect on the level of inequality," Stiglitz added. "It could amplify the sense of disillusionment: [in places where deindustrialization occurred, there was a] rise to the deaths of despair. They were located in particular places, but this routine work occurs everywhere."
A recent report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that AI is "likely to significantly impact jobs" as companies continue to adopt the rapidly developing technology.
"When considering all automation technologies including AI, 27% of jobs are in occupations at high risk of automation," the OECD estimated.
Stiglitz acknowledged that "with the right policies," AI could lead to "higher productivity and less inequality, and everybody would be better off."
"But you might say the political economy, the way our politics have been working, has not been going in that direction," said Stiglitz. "So at one end, I'm hopeful that if we did the right thing, AI would be great. But the question is: Will we be doing the right thing in our policy space? And I think that's much more problematic."
Stiglitz is hardly the only economist concerned about the disruptive and potentially damaging effects AI could have on workers across the globe, particularly if governments don't heed growing calls to aggressively regulate the technology.
Yingying Lu, a research associate at the Crawford School of Public Policy's Center for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, wrote earlier this year that "although economists have different opinions on the impact of AI, there is general agreement among economic studies that AI will increase inequality."
"One possible example of this could be a further shift in the advantage from labor to capital, weakening labor institutions along the way," she added.
Stiglitz similarly warned that AI is being developed in the context of a system in which "workers don't have much bargaining power."
"So in that kind of world, AI may be an ally of the employer and weaken workers' bargaining power even more, and that could increase inequality even more," said Stiglitz. "There is a role for government to try to steer innovation in ways that are more productivity-increasing and job-creating, not job-destroying."
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Economist Joseph Stiglitz said this week that he is highly concerned about the potential of unregulated artificial intelligence to supercharge global inequality, which exploded during the coronavirus pandemic as billionaires saw their wealth surge while tens of millions were pushed into poverty.
"I'm very worried," Stiglitz, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001, told Scientific American. "In a way, robots have replaced routine physical work. And AI now is replacing routine white-collar work—or not replacing [it] but reducing the demand. So jobs that were routine white-collar, I think, will be at risk."
"And there are enough of those that it would have a macroeconomic effect on the level of inequality," Stiglitz added. "It could amplify the sense of disillusionment: [in places where deindustrialization occurred, there was a] rise to the deaths of despair. They were located in particular places, but this routine work occurs everywhere."
A recent report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that AI is "likely to significantly impact jobs" as companies continue to adopt the rapidly developing technology.
"When considering all automation technologies including AI, 27% of jobs are in occupations at high risk of automation," the OECD estimated.
Stiglitz acknowledged that "with the right policies," AI could lead to "higher productivity and less inequality, and everybody would be better off."
"But you might say the political economy, the way our politics have been working, has not been going in that direction," said Stiglitz. "So at one end, I'm hopeful that if we did the right thing, AI would be great. But the question is: Will we be doing the right thing in our policy space? And I think that's much more problematic."
Stiglitz is hardly the only economist concerned about the disruptive and potentially damaging effects AI could have on workers across the globe, particularly if governments don't heed growing calls to aggressively regulate the technology.
Yingying Lu, a research associate at the Crawford School of Public Policy's Center for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, wrote earlier this year that "although economists have different opinions on the impact of AI, there is general agreement among economic studies that AI will increase inequality."
"One possible example of this could be a further shift in the advantage from labor to capital, weakening labor institutions along the way," she added.
Stiglitz similarly warned that AI is being developed in the context of a system in which "workers don't have much bargaining power."
"So in that kind of world, AI may be an ally of the employer and weaken workers' bargaining power even more, and that could increase inequality even more," said Stiglitz. "There is a role for government to try to steer innovation in ways that are more productivity-increasing and job-creating, not job-destroying."
Economist Joseph Stiglitz said this week that he is highly concerned about the potential of unregulated artificial intelligence to supercharge global inequality, which exploded during the coronavirus pandemic as billionaires saw their wealth surge while tens of millions were pushed into poverty.
"I'm very worried," Stiglitz, who won the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2001, told Scientific American. "In a way, robots have replaced routine physical work. And AI now is replacing routine white-collar work—or not replacing [it] but reducing the demand. So jobs that were routine white-collar, I think, will be at risk."
"And there are enough of those that it would have a macroeconomic effect on the level of inequality," Stiglitz added. "It could amplify the sense of disillusionment: [in places where deindustrialization occurred, there was a] rise to the deaths of despair. They were located in particular places, but this routine work occurs everywhere."
A recent report by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) found that AI is "likely to significantly impact jobs" as companies continue to adopt the rapidly developing technology.
"When considering all automation technologies including AI, 27% of jobs are in occupations at high risk of automation," the OECD estimated.
Stiglitz acknowledged that "with the right policies," AI could lead to "higher productivity and less inequality, and everybody would be better off."
"But you might say the political economy, the way our politics have been working, has not been going in that direction," said Stiglitz. "So at one end, I'm hopeful that if we did the right thing, AI would be great. But the question is: Will we be doing the right thing in our policy space? And I think that's much more problematic."
Stiglitz is hardly the only economist concerned about the disruptive and potentially damaging effects AI could have on workers across the globe, particularly if governments don't heed growing calls to aggressively regulate the technology.
Yingying Lu, a research associate at the Crawford School of Public Policy's Center for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, wrote earlier this year that "although economists have different opinions on the impact of AI, there is general agreement among economic studies that AI will increase inequality."
"One possible example of this could be a further shift in the advantage from labor to capital, weakening labor institutions along the way," she added.
Stiglitz similarly warned that AI is being developed in the context of a system in which "workers don't have much bargaining power."
"So in that kind of world, AI may be an ally of the employer and weaken workers' bargaining power even more, and that could increase inequality even more," said Stiglitz. "There is a role for government to try to steer innovation in ways that are more productivity-increasing and job-creating, not job-destroying."