What do you think?
Rate this book
نهاية العمل: تضاؤل القوى العاملة العالمية وبزوغ فجر حقبة ما وراء السوق
"أحدث كتاب لريفكن " نهاية العمل" ، كتاب رائع ، يرتكز على الأبحاث ، ويتسم بالاعتدال والجد وضبط النفس" " كتاب فريد من نوعه ، يخبرنا ما نعرفه بأسلوب أخاذ، ويضيء لنا ما غمض وأشكل علينا ، فيدفعنا إلى مواجهة ما نحاذر منه: من مثل الاستغناء عن الأيدي العاملة في إنتاج ما تريده وتحتاج أليه. ويطرح تساؤلات واقعية يرى أننا لم نبذل الوقت الكافي في التفكير فيها." ويذهب خبير الاقتصاد جيرمي ريفكن إلى أن الاقتصاد سيمر بتحولات أساسية جوهرية تطال طبيعة العمل سينتج عنها إعادة تشكيل الحضارة في القرن الحادي والعشرين. وعلى الرغم مما في هذا الكتاب من مظاهر الإقلاق والتشويش إلاّ أنه ينطوي على قدر من الأمل والتفاؤل بأننا نقف على أعتاب حقبة تاريخية جديدة . وتتسم هذه الحقبة بضمور ثابت محتوم للوظائف قد يصل إلى درجة إلغائها، فمن المؤكد أن أجهزة الكمبيوتر والإنسان الآلي ونظم الاتصالات وتقنيات عصر المعلومات ستحل محل الأيدي العاملة بسرعة كل القطاعات والصناعات. ورغم أن "قطاع المعرفة" والأسواق الخارجية الجديدة ستؤدي إلى استحداث وظائف جديدة، إلاّ أنها غير كافية قياساً إلى الوظائف التي تم إلغاؤها بحلول الآلة والتقنيات الجديدة. يتعين على كل امة أن تتشبث بإيجاد الحلول الناجعة لاستيعاب وتشغيل ملايين العاطلين عن العمل والذين تم الاستغناء عن خدماتهم جزئياً أو كلياً بحلول الآلة والتقنيات الجديدة. إن إعادة التفكير بطبيعة العمل نفسه سيشكل الشغل الشاغل الذي يواجه المجتمع في العقود القادمة. ويحذر جيرمي ريفكن من أن نهاية العمل قد يعني اختفاء الحضارة التي عرفنها، أو ينبئ ببداية تحول اجتماعي كبير وإعادة ولادة روح إنسانية جديدة. كتب جيرمي ريفكن ما يربو على 12 كتاباً في الاتجاهات الاقتصادية والمواضيع ذات الصلة بالعلوم والتقنية والثقافة. ويشغل منصب رئيس مؤسسة الاتجاهات الاقتصادية في واشنطن دي.
454 pages, Paperback
First published December 28, 1994
About the author
Jeremy Rifkin
67 books532 followersAmerican economic and social theorist, writer, public speaker, political advisor, and activist.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 65 reviews
February 10, 2024
(review originally posted in June 2017)
UPDATE:
> New Headline: February 10, 2024
Cancer Patient Died From Intestinal Tear Caused By Surgical Robot: Lawsuit
According to the lawsuit, Sandra Sultzer had abdominal pain and fever before dying of injuries caused by the da Vinci surgical device.
UPDATE:
New Headline: November 30, 2022
San Francisco Will Allow Police To Deploy Robots That Kill
The Democratic San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to allow police to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations.
UPDATE:
New Headline: September 28, 2022
My Therapist, the Robot
Can an algorithm help with existential angst?
UPDATE:
New Headline: August 29, 2022
The remote revolution could lead to offshoring Armageddon
As telework and contracting soar, white-collar workers fear jobs that can be done from home could be outsourced to cheaper labor forces outside the U.S.
UPDATE:
New Headline: February 4, 2022
The 10 richest people in the world have more than doubled their wealth since the pandemic began in 2020.
UPDATE:
New Headline
Richest 1% Of Americans Underpay Taxes By $163 Billion, Says Treasury
UPDATE:
New Headline
9 billionaires made more than $360 billion during the pandemic. Will that shatter the myth of the benevolent billionaire?
UPDATE:
New Headline
Robots Are Now 'Creating New Robots,' Tech Reporter Says
UPDATE:
New Headline
This Silicon Valley start-up wants to replace lawyers with robots
UPDATE:
New Headline
How Can Working People Protect Their Incomes as the Robots Increasingly Take Over?
UPDATE:
New Headline:
The Real Threat of Artificial Intelligence
AI "will reshape what work means and how wealth is created, leading to unprecedented economic inequalities and even altering the global balance of power."
UPDATE:
New Headline:
Some are worried Amazon will replace Whole Foods workers with robots
UPDATE:
New Headline:
Now Five Men Own Almost as Much Wealth as Half the World's Population
Recent Headlines:
AUTOMATION AND ANXIETY
HOW TECHNOLOGY IS DESTROYING JOBS
WILL THE RISE OF ROBOTS IMPLODE THE WORLD ECONOMY?
A STRONGER ECONOMY WON’T SAVE OBSOLETE JOBS
JOB LOSS: THE BRIGHT SIDE OF JOB-KILLING AUTOMATION
******
It was in the 1990’s that I first became aware of the fact that we were on the verge of another economic revolution. The United States had experienced a recession at the end of the George H.W. Bush administration, but early in the Clinton administration the economy began to recover. Tens of thousands of new jobs were added each year as the country went on to experience a record number of quarters of uninterrupted economic expansion. The annual budget deficit declined and there was even a surplus for the first time in almost a half century.
Happy days were here again!
True enough, but not for everyone. It was the first time that I recall hearing the term “jobless recovery.” Economists were pointing out that many of the blue collar workers who had been laid off as a result of the recession, workers whose jobs paid well and who had health insurance and retirement benefits, found that, unlike during earlier recoveries, their jobs no longer existed when the recession ended.
Furthermore, many of the new jobs that were created were low-paying or temporary or part-time jobs, primarily in the service sector, and they did not include health insurance or retirement benefits.
Besides “jobless recovery,” there was much discussion in economic circles about the necessity of increased worker “productivity.” That without this improvement the nation would fall behind the world’s other advanced industrial nations. And greater production was achieved during the decade and it was accomplished with fewer workers, which did result in greater productivity. How could that happen?
It happened because more and more manual labor was being performed by robots rather than humans and that explained why the economy did recover -- and why many workers did not.
It was about that time that I first read Jeremy Rivkin’s book, THE END OF WORK: THE DECLINE OF THE GLOBAL LABOR FORCE AND THE DAWN OF THE POST-MARKET ERA, which was published in 1995. It is filled with statistics that highlight the great economic transformation that was and is occurring at the expense of the mass labor market. Reading the book is an enlightening experience but attempting to review it is a daunting one.
In the middle of that uninterrupted period of prosperity mentioned earlier, Rivkin noted the devastating impact that automation was already exerting on workers, especially blue-collar, retail, and wholesale employees, and he predicted that it would get even worse. He believed at the time that we were only viewing the tip of the iceberg. He pointed out that even though the unemployment rate had declined that most of the new jobs left people underemployed, working in part-time jobs in which they did not know from one paycheck to the next what their income would be, nor even if they would be employed.
The result, he wrote, was that corporate managers and knowledge (high tech) workers would reap the benefits while the middle class would continue to shrink and that workplaces would become more stressful. Furthermore, even large numbers of white collar workers were becoming redundant, their jobs being taken over by artificial intelligence (AI). And since that means that corporations can now make do with fewer people even individuals in middle management were becoming expendable.
It isn’t going to get better. The World Bank estimates that about 57 percent of all the jobs on earth could be automated within the next twenty years. It is not a problem for just one nation; it is a problem for all nations.
Recent Headline:
THESE 8 MEN HAVE AS MUCH MONEY AS HALF THE WORLD (3.5 BILLION PEOPLE)
Rivkin does offer some solutions to how the U.S. could cope with the situation, but I’m not going to discuss them because it would be a waste of time to do so since they would require the bipartisan co-operation of both parties in Congress.
So much for that.
But we do have a President who has said on numerous occasions, once just this past week, that he was elected to represent “the forgotten people.” So, perhaps he and his advisers are thinking about ways to cope with the problem.
In fact, the Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, recently weighed in on the issue. When he was asked about the AI revolution and the impact of automation on the U.S. workforce, he responded that “it is not even on our radar screen.” He predicted that the technology is still fifty to a hundred years from displacing human jobs. “I’m not worried at all,” he said. “In fact, I’m optimistic.”
So much for that.
UPDATE:
> New Headline: February 10, 2024
Cancer Patient Died From Intestinal Tear Caused By Surgical Robot: Lawsuit
According to the lawsuit, Sandra Sultzer had abdominal pain and fever before dying of injuries caused by the da Vinci surgical device.
UPDATE:
New Headline: November 30, 2022
San Francisco Will Allow Police To Deploy Robots That Kill
The Democratic San Francisco Board of Supervisors voted to allow police to use potentially lethal, remote-controlled robots in emergency situations.
UPDATE:
New Headline: September 28, 2022
My Therapist, the Robot
Can an algorithm help with existential angst?
UPDATE:
New Headline: August 29, 2022
The remote revolution could lead to offshoring Armageddon
As telework and contracting soar, white-collar workers fear jobs that can be done from home could be outsourced to cheaper labor forces outside the U.S.
UPDATE:
New Headline: February 4, 2022
The 10 richest people in the world have more than doubled their wealth since the pandemic began in 2020.
UPDATE:
New Headline
Richest 1% Of Americans Underpay Taxes By $163 Billion, Says Treasury
UPDATE:
New Headline
9 billionaires made more than $360 billion during the pandemic. Will that shatter the myth of the benevolent billionaire?
UPDATE:
New Headline
Robots Are Now 'Creating New Robots,' Tech Reporter Says
UPDATE:
New Headline
This Silicon Valley start-up wants to replace lawyers with robots
UPDATE:
New Headline
How Can Working People Protect Their Incomes as the Robots Increasingly Take Over?
UPDATE:
New Headline:
The Real Threat of Artificial Intelligence
AI "will reshape what work means and how wealth is created, leading to unprecedented economic inequalities and even altering the global balance of power."
UPDATE:
New Headline:
Some are worried Amazon will replace Whole Foods workers with robots
UPDATE:
New Headline:
Now Five Men Own Almost as Much Wealth as Half the World's Population
Recent Headlines:
AUTOMATION AND ANXIETY
HOW TECHNOLOGY IS DESTROYING JOBS
WILL THE RISE OF ROBOTS IMPLODE THE WORLD ECONOMY?
A STRONGER ECONOMY WON’T SAVE OBSOLETE JOBS
JOB LOSS: THE BRIGHT SIDE OF JOB-KILLING AUTOMATION
******
It was in the 1990’s that I first became aware of the fact that we were on the verge of another economic revolution. The United States had experienced a recession at the end of the George H.W. Bush administration, but early in the Clinton administration the economy began to recover. Tens of thousands of new jobs were added each year as the country went on to experience a record number of quarters of uninterrupted economic expansion. The annual budget deficit declined and there was even a surplus for the first time in almost a half century.
Happy days were here again!
True enough, but not for everyone. It was the first time that I recall hearing the term “jobless recovery.” Economists were pointing out that many of the blue collar workers who had been laid off as a result of the recession, workers whose jobs paid well and who had health insurance and retirement benefits, found that, unlike during earlier recoveries, their jobs no longer existed when the recession ended.
Furthermore, many of the new jobs that were created were low-paying or temporary or part-time jobs, primarily in the service sector, and they did not include health insurance or retirement benefits.
Besides “jobless recovery,” there was much discussion in economic circles about the necessity of increased worker “productivity.” That without this improvement the nation would fall behind the world’s other advanced industrial nations. And greater production was achieved during the decade and it was accomplished with fewer workers, which did result in greater productivity. How could that happen?
It happened because more and more manual labor was being performed by robots rather than humans and that explained why the economy did recover -- and why many workers did not.
It was about that time that I first read Jeremy Rivkin’s book, THE END OF WORK: THE DECLINE OF THE GLOBAL LABOR FORCE AND THE DAWN OF THE POST-MARKET ERA, which was published in 1995. It is filled with statistics that highlight the great economic transformation that was and is occurring at the expense of the mass labor market. Reading the book is an enlightening experience but attempting to review it is a daunting one.
In the middle of that uninterrupted period of prosperity mentioned earlier, Rivkin noted the devastating impact that automation was already exerting on workers, especially blue-collar, retail, and wholesale employees, and he predicted that it would get even worse. He believed at the time that we were only viewing the tip of the iceberg. He pointed out that even though the unemployment rate had declined that most of the new jobs left people underemployed, working in part-time jobs in which they did not know from one paycheck to the next what their income would be, nor even if they would be employed.
The result, he wrote, was that corporate managers and knowledge (high tech) workers would reap the benefits while the middle class would continue to shrink and that workplaces would become more stressful. Furthermore, even large numbers of white collar workers were becoming redundant, their jobs being taken over by artificial intelligence (AI). And since that means that corporations can now make do with fewer people even individuals in middle management were becoming expendable.
It isn’t going to get better. The World Bank estimates that about 57 percent of all the jobs on earth could be automated within the next twenty years. It is not a problem for just one nation; it is a problem for all nations.
Recent Headline:
THESE 8 MEN HAVE AS MUCH MONEY AS HALF THE WORLD (3.5 BILLION PEOPLE)
Rivkin does offer some solutions to how the U.S. could cope with the situation, but I’m not going to discuss them because it would be a waste of time to do so since they would require the bipartisan co-operation of both parties in Congress.
So much for that.
But we do have a President who has said on numerous occasions, once just this past week, that he was elected to represent “the forgotten people.” So, perhaps he and his advisers are thinking about ways to cope with the problem.
In fact, the Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, recently weighed in on the issue. When he was asked about the AI revolution and the impact of automation on the U.S. workforce, he responded that “it is not even on our radar screen.” He predicted that the technology is still fifty to a hundred years from displacing human jobs. “I’m not worried at all,” he said. “In fact, I’m optimistic.”
So much for that.
Read
August 10, 2011We should get paid to not work. Very provocative, but necessary. The warning bells should've gone off a long time ago because of the opposing facts that companies don't want employees, but employees want companies. And with technology being more powerful than organized labor, who will win? Companies, of course, unless there's an intervention of government to legislate equality in the face of capitalism, and the intervention needs to start now.
"The End of Work" is an insightful confirmation of my thinking that we must place value on other important aspects of society other than working, since the role of labor has been shrinking and will continue to shrink and disappear because of the neverending advances of technology that allows corporations to re-engineer and downsize their labor. I am halfway through this book, and although the author has briefly suggested ways to structure societies so that we do not turn into a nation or world of welfare cases, I will reserve that information until I finish reading.
The US (and consequently, the industrial world) service and consumer markets have been able to absorb displaced workers from the dwindling labor intensive industries, but soon, this will no longer be the case. Corporations are increasing productivity with less labor, and this trend will continue until there are but a few workers needed, and then a life of leisure will be in store for all of us or a major problem if we continue to only value those who provide labor.
What fact has been clouded by fiscal policy and government cash infusions to prop up consumer spending and keep the economy on a somewhat even keel is that employees are needed less and are being paid less, which reduce the ability of consumers to buy products, which eventually will hurt these producing companies. Because of technology allowing corporations to re-engineer, the company is leaner, flatter, more efficient and paying less wages with less labor and middle management needed. Where are all these low-skilled workers and middle managers going? They are staying on unemployment, taking low-paying jobs, or working part-time, not being able to maintain their standard of living, having to buy food at the community pantry, getting welfare assistance...all because corporations see labor as a burden to their bottom line and refuse to allow workers to share in their increased productivity in the form of shorter work hours or higher pay.
CEOs are paid enormous salaries, shareholders are being taken care of, but who is taking care of the workers who have been downsized, or if they still are working, are being stressed to the maximum by companies who have designed ways to produce more with less people. The government is trying just a little bit, but since I've heard it been said many times by friends, neighbors, family, pundits and politicians that only working people deserve a roof over their head, food in their bellies, and proper health care, we all need to think differently on the value of work and realize that we all won't be so lucky to work and toil.
"The End of Work" is an insightful confirmation of my thinking that we must place value on other important aspects of society other than working, since the role of labor has been shrinking and will continue to shrink and disappear because of the neverending advances of technology that allows corporations to re-engineer and downsize their labor. I am halfway through this book, and although the author has briefly suggested ways to structure societies so that we do not turn into a nation or world of welfare cases, I will reserve that information until I finish reading.
The US (and consequently, the industrial world) service and consumer markets have been able to absorb displaced workers from the dwindling labor intensive industries, but soon, this will no longer be the case. Corporations are increasing productivity with less labor, and this trend will continue until there are but a few workers needed, and then a life of leisure will be in store for all of us or a major problem if we continue to only value those who provide labor.
What fact has been clouded by fiscal policy and government cash infusions to prop up consumer spending and keep the economy on a somewhat even keel is that employees are needed less and are being paid less, which reduce the ability of consumers to buy products, which eventually will hurt these producing companies. Because of technology allowing corporations to re-engineer, the company is leaner, flatter, more efficient and paying less wages with less labor and middle management needed. Where are all these low-skilled workers and middle managers going? They are staying on unemployment, taking low-paying jobs, or working part-time, not being able to maintain their standard of living, having to buy food at the community pantry, getting welfare assistance...all because corporations see labor as a burden to their bottom line and refuse to allow workers to share in their increased productivity in the form of shorter work hours or higher pay.
CEOs are paid enormous salaries, shareholders are being taken care of, but who is taking care of the workers who have been downsized, or if they still are working, are being stressed to the maximum by companies who have designed ways to produce more with less people. The government is trying just a little bit, but since I've heard it been said many times by friends, neighbors, family, pundits and politicians that only working people deserve a roof over their head, food in their bellies, and proper health care, we all need to think differently on the value of work and realize that we all won't be so lucky to work and toil.
October 30, 2012
A few weeks ago, I serendipitously found this title staring out of the shelf at me in Value Village while I was looking for a Halloween costume accessory. Besides Martin Ford's "The Lights in the Tunnel" which I'd read a year or two earlier, I honestly had no idea that there were other books on the subject. The End of Work is a much more solid, well-researched and carefully argued book than Ford's. And it's from 1995. Incidentally, it helped me discovered that there was a Wikipedia page on Technological Unemployment, for the first time.
Ok, so the review: It's evident that Rifkin did his homework. The book is grounded in a nice historical context, peppered with great quotations, oodles of footnotes, etc. The density of statistics listed in the books midsection was admittedly rather eye-glazing. And I can only imagine that the author cringes every time he comes back to this book and sees his phrase "information superhighway," "symbolic analysts," or considers his failure to foresee the effect of widespread piracy on digital media, but then again, who else was forecasting that shit in '95? Regardless, some sections will feel dated. His grasp of the history of computers and of AI also lacks and marks him as an outsider to the field. An understanding of the human mind grounded in evolutionary biology (Edelman) and an understanding of computers grounded in the math of formal systems (Hofstadter) seem like the sort of background necessary for a comparison, so the reader is best off assigning themselves that complementary reading.
But for the most part, the book feels very relevant. One big difference from Ford's work, is that Rifkin's proposed solutions to the challenges of technological unemployment feel much more convincing, are significantly more fleshed out, and there is nuance, with e.g. the welfare-alternative proposals of others like Milton Friedman elaborated alongside the author's. It's really helpful.
Will this book factor into my perspective on society, the future, and my own career trajectory? Yes. More so, I imagine, for anyone who has not yet been exposed to serious arguments about automation, technology-driven unemployment and consumer purchasing power declines.
Depending on how well we can address the challenges ahead of us, society will either end up in a safe, gleaming techno-utopia of free-time as technologically-enabled leisure, or a dirty, inequitable and politically volatile hell-hole of free-time as poverty and depressive loss of meaning/self-worth. Okay, just kidding. Presenting those futures as mutually exclusive is just a rhetorical tactic. In all pragmatic likelihood, the future will probably continue to be an unsatisfying and fascinating dystopian/utopian mixture of both. It's good to be prepared for the future though, not survivalist style, but in the sense of having a greater context in which to look at your life and see if what you're doing with it now constitutes an informed choice. Whether you'll look back in 20 years, wishing you'd known what kind of world we'd be living in sooner, used your time better and made significantly different life choices.
I plan to read more of Rifkin's work soon.
Ok, so the review: It's evident that Rifkin did his homework. The book is grounded in a nice historical context, peppered with great quotations, oodles of footnotes, etc. The density of statistics listed in the books midsection was admittedly rather eye-glazing. And I can only imagine that the author cringes every time he comes back to this book and sees his phrase "information superhighway," "symbolic analysts," or considers his failure to foresee the effect of widespread piracy on digital media, but then again, who else was forecasting that shit in '95? Regardless, some sections will feel dated. His grasp of the history of computers and of AI also lacks and marks him as an outsider to the field. An understanding of the human mind grounded in evolutionary biology (Edelman) and an understanding of computers grounded in the math of formal systems (Hofstadter) seem like the sort of background necessary for a comparison, so the reader is best off assigning themselves that complementary reading.
But for the most part, the book feels very relevant. One big difference from Ford's work, is that Rifkin's proposed solutions to the challenges of technological unemployment feel much more convincing, are significantly more fleshed out, and there is nuance, with e.g. the welfare-alternative proposals of others like Milton Friedman elaborated alongside the author's. It's really helpful.
Will this book factor into my perspective on society, the future, and my own career trajectory? Yes. More so, I imagine, for anyone who has not yet been exposed to serious arguments about automation, technology-driven unemployment and consumer purchasing power declines.
Depending on how well we can address the challenges ahead of us, society will either end up in a safe, gleaming techno-utopia of free-time as technologically-enabled leisure, or a dirty, inequitable and politically volatile hell-hole of free-time as poverty and depressive loss of meaning/self-worth. Okay, just kidding. Presenting those futures as mutually exclusive is just a rhetorical tactic. In all pragmatic likelihood, the future will probably continue to be an unsatisfying and fascinating dystopian/utopian mixture of both. It's good to be prepared for the future though, not survivalist style, but in the sense of having a greater context in which to look at your life and see if what you're doing with it now constitutes an informed choice. Whether you'll look back in 20 years, wishing you'd known what kind of world we'd be living in sooner, used your time better and made significantly different life choices.
I plan to read more of Rifkin's work soon.
December 21, 2024
It’s often interesting to read some treatise on contemporary events or analysis decades after its publication. What appears unique sometimes may turn out to be common; what seems inevitable turns out to be “evitable”. You’ll also see recurring patterns or strengthening trend. As we stand on the threshold of AI revolution, “the end of work” is an apt title for a book today. Perhaps looking back a little (this current book was written about 30 years ago, when the concern was about the impact of automation), we can learn something? Here are a few example lessons. (New numbers are from ChatGPT, so take with grain of salt.)
Productivity: In the book, Rifkin mentions that to harvest an acre of wheat land took 20+hrs in 1880 and 6.1 in 1936 (a roughly 3.5x improvement in 56 years.) Continue the same speed of improvement to today, it would be another 7x. Reality? The actual improvement was 24x (it takes <15min today). This one is easy: productivity will keep on increasing. If anything, the rate of improvement will increase.
Unemployment: Rikfin listed unemployment rate rising by decades staring from 1950s 4.5%, 4.8%, 6.2%, 7.3%, before moderating a bit to 6.6% in the first 3 years of 1990. This is part of the argument for the displacement of employment by automation. Latest result? 4.1% (Oct 2024). Back in 1996, non-farm payroll was 117M out of a population of 269M (or 43.5%). Today, it’s 159M out of 337M (47.2%). So no, automation’s displacement is not as dreadful. It also creates opportunities.
Wealth concentration: Rifkin mentions that networth of 834K richest families total $5.6T, more than the $4.8T from bottom 90%. This is not easy to compare. But assuming a family of 3.2 person, then that roughly translates to top 1% population. Today, the same top 1% and bottom 90% would own $60T and $46.3T respectively. So yes the rich got richer. But the bottom 90% (which admittedly is too broad) also got a lot richer (inflation from 1995 to today is roughly 2x). So the average Joe is 5x richer in 30 years than the average Joe back then, inflation adjusted. But the same Joe is likely a lot more better off than his younger self. Incidentally, Bill Gates was the richest person back then with $18.5B. His networth is $161B today. (He’s not the richest person anymore. That’ll be Elon Musk, worth $300+B.) Adjusted for inflation, Gates is 4.4x richer. None of this is rigorous measurement. But the lesson appears to be, the rich and the average will continue to get richer.
So if this time it’s not different, then 30 years from now, productivity on many things will be through the roof; we will likely still have a job; and we’ll be another 5x richer on average.
Productivity: In the book, Rifkin mentions that to harvest an acre of wheat land took 20+hrs in 1880 and 6.1 in 1936 (a roughly 3.5x improvement in 56 years.) Continue the same speed of improvement to today, it would be another 7x. Reality? The actual improvement was 24x (it takes <15min today). This one is easy: productivity will keep on increasing. If anything, the rate of improvement will increase.
Unemployment: Rikfin listed unemployment rate rising by decades staring from 1950s 4.5%, 4.8%, 6.2%, 7.3%, before moderating a bit to 6.6% in the first 3 years of 1990. This is part of the argument for the displacement of employment by automation. Latest result? 4.1% (Oct 2024). Back in 1996, non-farm payroll was 117M out of a population of 269M (or 43.5%). Today, it’s 159M out of 337M (47.2%). So no, automation’s displacement is not as dreadful. It also creates opportunities.
Wealth concentration: Rifkin mentions that networth of 834K richest families total $5.6T, more than the $4.8T from bottom 90%. This is not easy to compare. But assuming a family of 3.2 person, then that roughly translates to top 1% population. Today, the same top 1% and bottom 90% would own $60T and $46.3T respectively. So yes the rich got richer. But the bottom 90% (which admittedly is too broad) also got a lot richer (inflation from 1995 to today is roughly 2x). So the average Joe is 5x richer in 30 years than the average Joe back then, inflation adjusted. But the same Joe is likely a lot more better off than his younger self. Incidentally, Bill Gates was the richest person back then with $18.5B. His networth is $161B today. (He’s not the richest person anymore. That’ll be Elon Musk, worth $300+B.) Adjusted for inflation, Gates is 4.4x richer. None of this is rigorous measurement. But the lesson appears to be, the rich and the average will continue to get richer.
So if this time it’s not different, then 30 years from now, productivity on many things will be through the roof; we will likely still have a job; and we’ll be another 5x richer on average.
March 23, 2018
The ever faster pace of automation will sooner or later collide with the steady growth of the world's population.
Please note that I put the original German text at the end of this review. Just if you might be interested.
From the machine-hijackers at the beginning of the industrial revolution to the trade union movements to what is currently arguably the best model of social partnership and collective bargaining in the happy countries with an eco-social market economy. It was always about working conditions, jobs, and retirement or disability benefits. What if the factor of both physical and mental work is eliminated for the majority of people?
Rifkin spins this scenario from a broad range of illustrative examples and comes to a, depending on the worldview, positive or disconcerting image. There is the one option, as in France, of drastically reducing weekly working hours and thus creating more jobs, until the ratio of a weekend to working time has reversed, allowing every person to enjoy a share of wealth.
Alternatively, an ever-increasing mass of long-term unemployed, not only difficult but virtually impossible to recruit, will bring the social structure, peace, stability, and prosperity into a dangerous imbalance. Because there are just no jobs left.
Since the global train is currently driving with crimson glowing boiler towards continuous growth and a slight reduction in speed, emergency braking or even reversal must be postponed to the realm of utopias, the question arises for alternatives.
It is true that the Scandinavian countries, which offer incredibly high tax rates for top earners, some of the best social welfare systems in the world and high academic standards, provide an alternative for the global trend of corporate structuring. Moreover, alternative economic models, which are based on specially created (social) currencies, hold potential in themselves.
It remains to be seen whether it will be enough to screw up and mend the existing system for the better or worse as long as possible, rather than strive for a truly fundamental change in the post-capitalist era.
In the best case, a peaceful change to a frivolous, job-free Utopia succeeds, in which machines produce everything, self-maintain and build what the human heart desires. In the currently somewhat realistic scenario, sooner or later not only 7, but sometime 9, 10, 12 billion people will be excluded from an antiquated, outmoded economic system.
They will be condemned to poverty and inactivity, enslaved by caste, a new needle of degenerate machine owners and their few programmers and technicians.
Die immer schneller voranschreitende Automatisierung wird über kurz oder lang mit dem stetigen Anwachsen der Weltbevölkerung kollidieren.
Von den Maschinenstürmern zu Anfang der industriellen Revolution über die Gewerkschaftsbewegungen bis zum aktuell wohl besten Modell der Sozialpartnerschaft und Kollektivvertragsverhandlungen in den glücklichen Ländern mit ökosozialer Marktwirtschaft. Es ging immer um die Arbeitsbedingungen, Arbeitsplätze und Vorsorge für Pension oder Invalidität. Was, wenn der Faktor sowohl physischer als auch geistiger Arbeit für das Gros der Menschen überhaupt komplett wegfällt?
Dieses Szenario spinnt Rifkin anhand eines breiten Bogens anschaulicher Beispiele weiter und kommt zu einem, je nach Weltanschauung, optimistisch stimmenden bis zutiefst verstörendem Bild. Es besteht die eine Option, wie in Frankreich die Wochenarbeitszeit drastisch immer noch weiter zu reduzieren und damit mehr Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen, bis sich das Verhältnis von Wochenende zu Arbeitszeit umgekehrt hat und damit jedem Menschen ein Anteil des Wohlstand zufallen kann.
Oder eine immer größer werdende Masse an nicht nur schwer, sondern faktisch unmöglich vermittelbaren Langzeitarbeitslosen wird die Gesellschafsstruktur, Frieden, Stabilität und Wohlstand in ein gefährliches Ungleichgewicht bringen. Weil schlichtweg keine Arbeitsplätze mehr vorhanden sind.
Da der weltwirtschaftliche Zug momentan mit hochrot glühendem Kessel Richtung ewiges Wachstum fährt und eine sachte Geschwindigkeitsreduktion, Notbremsung oder gar Umkehr ins Reich der Utopien verschoben werden muss, stellt sich die Frage nach Alternativen. Zwar gibt es sowohl die skandinavischen Länder, die mit extrem hohen Steuersätzen auch auf Spitzenverdiener, den mitunter besten Sozialsystemen der Welt und hohen Akademikerquoten eine Alternative zum weltweiten Trend der Gesellschaftsstrukturierung bieten. Und auch alternative Wirtschaftsmodelle, die sich auf eigens geschaffenen (Sozial)währungen stützen, bergen Potential in sich.
Nur bleibt abzuwarten, ob es reicht am bestehenden System zum Guten oder Schlechten zu schrauben und zu flicken solange es geht, anstatt einen wirklich fundamentalen Wandel ins postkapitalistische Zeitalter anzustreben. Im besten Fall gelingt ein friedvoller Wechsel in ein frivol arbeitsfreies Utopia, in dem Maschinen alles produzieren, sich selbst warten und bauen, was das Menschenherz begehrt.
Im momentan leider eher realistischeren Szenario werden über kurz oder lang nicht nur 7, sondern irgendwann 9, 10, 12 Milliarden Menschen aus einem antiquierten, nicht mehr zeitgemäßen Wirtschafssystem ausgeschlossen. Sie werden zu Armut und Untätigkeit verdammt sein, versklavt von einer Kaste, einem Neuadel degenerierter Maschinenbesitzer und deren paar Programmierer und Techniker.
Please note that I put the original German text at the end of this review. Just if you might be interested.
From the machine-hijackers at the beginning of the industrial revolution to the trade union movements to what is currently arguably the best model of social partnership and collective bargaining in the happy countries with an eco-social market economy. It was always about working conditions, jobs, and retirement or disability benefits. What if the factor of both physical and mental work is eliminated for the majority of people?
Rifkin spins this scenario from a broad range of illustrative examples and comes to a, depending on the worldview, positive or disconcerting image. There is the one option, as in France, of drastically reducing weekly working hours and thus creating more jobs, until the ratio of a weekend to working time has reversed, allowing every person to enjoy a share of wealth.
Alternatively, an ever-increasing mass of long-term unemployed, not only difficult but virtually impossible to recruit, will bring the social structure, peace, stability, and prosperity into a dangerous imbalance. Because there are just no jobs left.
Since the global train is currently driving with crimson glowing boiler towards continuous growth and a slight reduction in speed, emergency braking or even reversal must be postponed to the realm of utopias, the question arises for alternatives.
It is true that the Scandinavian countries, which offer incredibly high tax rates for top earners, some of the best social welfare systems in the world and high academic standards, provide an alternative for the global trend of corporate structuring. Moreover, alternative economic models, which are based on specially created (social) currencies, hold potential in themselves.
It remains to be seen whether it will be enough to screw up and mend the existing system for the better or worse as long as possible, rather than strive for a truly fundamental change in the post-capitalist era.
In the best case, a peaceful change to a frivolous, job-free Utopia succeeds, in which machines produce everything, self-maintain and build what the human heart desires. In the currently somewhat realistic scenario, sooner or later not only 7, but sometime 9, 10, 12 billion people will be excluded from an antiquated, outmoded economic system.
They will be condemned to poverty and inactivity, enslaved by caste, a new needle of degenerate machine owners and their few programmers and technicians.
Die immer schneller voranschreitende Automatisierung wird über kurz oder lang mit dem stetigen Anwachsen der Weltbevölkerung kollidieren.
Von den Maschinenstürmern zu Anfang der industriellen Revolution über die Gewerkschaftsbewegungen bis zum aktuell wohl besten Modell der Sozialpartnerschaft und Kollektivvertragsverhandlungen in den glücklichen Ländern mit ökosozialer Marktwirtschaft. Es ging immer um die Arbeitsbedingungen, Arbeitsplätze und Vorsorge für Pension oder Invalidität. Was, wenn der Faktor sowohl physischer als auch geistiger Arbeit für das Gros der Menschen überhaupt komplett wegfällt?
Dieses Szenario spinnt Rifkin anhand eines breiten Bogens anschaulicher Beispiele weiter und kommt zu einem, je nach Weltanschauung, optimistisch stimmenden bis zutiefst verstörendem Bild. Es besteht die eine Option, wie in Frankreich die Wochenarbeitszeit drastisch immer noch weiter zu reduzieren und damit mehr Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen, bis sich das Verhältnis von Wochenende zu Arbeitszeit umgekehrt hat und damit jedem Menschen ein Anteil des Wohlstand zufallen kann.
Oder eine immer größer werdende Masse an nicht nur schwer, sondern faktisch unmöglich vermittelbaren Langzeitarbeitslosen wird die Gesellschafsstruktur, Frieden, Stabilität und Wohlstand in ein gefährliches Ungleichgewicht bringen. Weil schlichtweg keine Arbeitsplätze mehr vorhanden sind.
Da der weltwirtschaftliche Zug momentan mit hochrot glühendem Kessel Richtung ewiges Wachstum fährt und eine sachte Geschwindigkeitsreduktion, Notbremsung oder gar Umkehr ins Reich der Utopien verschoben werden muss, stellt sich die Frage nach Alternativen. Zwar gibt es sowohl die skandinavischen Länder, die mit extrem hohen Steuersätzen auch auf Spitzenverdiener, den mitunter besten Sozialsystemen der Welt und hohen Akademikerquoten eine Alternative zum weltweiten Trend der Gesellschaftsstrukturierung bieten. Und auch alternative Wirtschaftsmodelle, die sich auf eigens geschaffenen (Sozial)währungen stützen, bergen Potential in sich.
Nur bleibt abzuwarten, ob es reicht am bestehenden System zum Guten oder Schlechten zu schrauben und zu flicken solange es geht, anstatt einen wirklich fundamentalen Wandel ins postkapitalistische Zeitalter anzustreben. Im besten Fall gelingt ein friedvoller Wechsel in ein frivol arbeitsfreies Utopia, in dem Maschinen alles produzieren, sich selbst warten und bauen, was das Menschenherz begehrt.
Im momentan leider eher realistischeren Szenario werden über kurz oder lang nicht nur 7, sondern irgendwann 9, 10, 12 Milliarden Menschen aus einem antiquierten, nicht mehr zeitgemäßen Wirtschafssystem ausgeschlossen. Sie werden zu Armut und Untätigkeit verdammt sein, versklavt von einer Kaste, einem Neuadel degenerierter Maschinenbesitzer und deren paar Programmierer und Techniker.
June 1, 2020
Great read, an incredibly meticulous if sometimes repetitive rundown on post-Fordist production and Toyotification.
That said, I agree with George Caffentzis' critique that the volunteer sector cannot possibly replace the formal economy. As far as solutions go, this book comes up short - I would recommend Andre Gorz and Inventing the Future to anyone interested in more substantive solutions.
Rifkin pretty wildly underestimates the potential of the internet, which makes for some entertaining retrospection.
That said, I agree with George Caffentzis' critique that the volunteer sector cannot possibly replace the formal economy. As far as solutions go, this book comes up short - I would recommend Andre Gorz and Inventing the Future to anyone interested in more substantive solutions.
Rifkin pretty wildly underestimates the potential of the internet, which makes for some entertaining retrospection.
December 11, 2016
Jeremy Rifkin's End of Work was published in 1995, yet
seems even more relevant today; its major themes have even
become part of the current political discourse. That new
technology has resulted in elimination of jobs and displaced
workers is not a new idea. but in the past new areas in the
economy had emerged to make for new employment
opportunities. The traditional sectors of the economy
(agriculture, manufacturing, and service) no longer provide
needs for full employment. New positions in the knowledge
sector make up an elite group of entrepreneurs, scientists,
engineers, computer programmers, technical educators,
and consultants. But only a relatively small number of jobs
will replace those many millions eliminated by new advances
in information and communication technology.
This 'third industrial revolution' seems to be powered by the
displacement of workers and loss of jobs. It is very different
from the 'first industrial age' of the 18th and 19th century
when steam power was developed and replaced handicraft
work with labor in mines and factories. The 'second
industrial revolution' of the late 19th and early 20th century
was powered by fossil fuels such as oil and gas, which
replaced workers at an even higher rate. But the
'information age' of the 'third industrial revolution' has so
far not really led to massive job creation.
It is often argued that new technologies will stimulate
products and services not yet even imagined now to provide
new opportunities for millions. But realistically new future
products will probably need far fewer workers to produce,
assemble, and deliver, hence not increasing the employment
significantly.
This book presents detailed facts and figures from around
the world to show how employment in the traditional sectors
is declining. The author sees no way to reverse the trend of
automation and technology that is leading to job loss and
ultimately the 'end of work'. However, he proposes several
government policies that might accommodate the new
situation of less meaningful work for all:
- a shorter work week (30-hour week work is suggested)
This is similar to how the 60-hour work week of the early
industrial age was eventually replaced by the present
40-hour week.
- a guaranteed annual income (with requirements that
individuals work for welfare)
Finland is already experimenting with a guaranteed annual
income.
- a revised tax system that would allow deductions for time
spent in volunteer, charitable, and non-profit organizations
The author sees the last option as actually very attractive
and suggests that this be a 'third sector' for employments
in addition to the private sector ('first sector) and
government sector ('second sector').
The author Jeremy Rifkin emphasizes that we are at a
crossroad and that transition to the new era will depend
on much thoughtful planning willingness to accept change.
He concludes:
"We are entering a new age of global markets and
automated production. The road to a near-workerless
economy is within sight. Whether that road leads to a
safe haven or a terrible abyss will depend on how well
civilization prepares for the post-market era that will
follow on the heels of the Third Industrial Revolution.
The end of work could spell a death sentence for
civilization as we have come to know it. The end of work
could also signal the beginning of a great social
transformation, a rebirth of the human spirit. The
future lies in our hands." (pp. 292, 293).
seems even more relevant today; its major themes have even
become part of the current political discourse. That new
technology has resulted in elimination of jobs and displaced
workers is not a new idea. but in the past new areas in the
economy had emerged to make for new employment
opportunities. The traditional sectors of the economy
(agriculture, manufacturing, and service) no longer provide
needs for full employment. New positions in the knowledge
sector make up an elite group of entrepreneurs, scientists,
engineers, computer programmers, technical educators,
and consultants. But only a relatively small number of jobs
will replace those many millions eliminated by new advances
in information and communication technology.
This 'third industrial revolution' seems to be powered by the
displacement of workers and loss of jobs. It is very different
from the 'first industrial age' of the 18th and 19th century
when steam power was developed and replaced handicraft
work with labor in mines and factories. The 'second
industrial revolution' of the late 19th and early 20th century
was powered by fossil fuels such as oil and gas, which
replaced workers at an even higher rate. But the
'information age' of the 'third industrial revolution' has so
far not really led to massive job creation.
It is often argued that new technologies will stimulate
products and services not yet even imagined now to provide
new opportunities for millions. But realistically new future
products will probably need far fewer workers to produce,
assemble, and deliver, hence not increasing the employment
significantly.
This book presents detailed facts and figures from around
the world to show how employment in the traditional sectors
is declining. The author sees no way to reverse the trend of
automation and technology that is leading to job loss and
ultimately the 'end of work'. However, he proposes several
government policies that might accommodate the new
situation of less meaningful work for all:
- a shorter work week (30-hour week work is suggested)
This is similar to how the 60-hour work week of the early
industrial age was eventually replaced by the present
40-hour week.
- a guaranteed annual income (with requirements that
individuals work for welfare)
Finland is already experimenting with a guaranteed annual
income.
- a revised tax system that would allow deductions for time
spent in volunteer, charitable, and non-profit organizations
The author sees the last option as actually very attractive
and suggests that this be a 'third sector' for employments
in addition to the private sector ('first sector) and
government sector ('second sector').
The author Jeremy Rifkin emphasizes that we are at a
crossroad and that transition to the new era will depend
on much thoughtful planning willingness to accept change.
He concludes:
"We are entering a new age of global markets and
automated production. The road to a near-workerless
economy is within sight. Whether that road leads to a
safe haven or a terrible abyss will depend on how well
civilization prepares for the post-market era that will
follow on the heels of the Third Industrial Revolution.
The end of work could spell a death sentence for
civilization as we have come to know it. The end of work
could also signal the beginning of a great social
transformation, a rebirth of the human spirit. The
future lies in our hands." (pp. 292, 293).
April 17, 2020
20세기의 미래학자가 예측했던 오래된 미래. 그나마 개정판 서문은 21세기에 나온 것이라 읽어볼만 하려나 했는데, 이것도 16년 전에 쓴 거라 '수소혁명'과 '3차 산업혁명'에서 빵 터졌다. 지금은 '셰일혁명'과 '4차 산업혁명'의 시대라고!!! 25년 전에는 나름 심각하게 읽었는데, 책 읽던 그 때가 아득해서, 글쎄, 지금 내가 미래 여행을 하고 있는지 과거 여행을 하고 있는지, 여긴 어딘가 나는 누군가 헷갈리는 기분이다. 제러미 리프킨이 예측한 미래와는 매우 어긋난 어떤 다른 미래에, 평행우주에, 우리는 와 있는 것이다. 대체역사물을 읽은 느낌. 미래에 대한 예측은 틀릴 수밖에 없다. 움직이는 과녁을 맞추려고 하는 것이기 때문이다. 미래학에서는 노동생산성 향상으로 실업률이 높아진다는 이야기 정도만 진리인듯.
제러미 리프킨의 예측과 많이 다른 방식으로 역사가 전개된 이유 중 하나는 '수소혁명'이 아니라 '셰일혁명'이 일어난 것이 아닐까 생각한다. 제러미 리프킨은 <수소혁명>이라는 책까지 쓰면서 수소혁명이라는 아이디어를 밀어주었는데, 아직 수소 자동차는 상용화되지 않았다. 수소는 어디에나 있으니 산유국이 아니라 개발도상국에게 유리할 것이라는 제러미 리프킨의 예측은 들어맞지 않았다. 미국이 어마어마한 셰일을 보유하고 있고 그 셰일을 활용하는 기술이 개발되면서 유가가 안정되고 굳이 수소 전기를 개발할 필요가 없게 되었던 것이다. 그로 인해 미국은 과거처럼 산유국에 내정간섭을 할 필요가 없어졌고, 따라서 트럼프는 "America first"를 외치며 더 이상 세계 경찰을 자처하지 않는다. 얼마 전 유발 하라리가 코로나와 관련해서 국제 사회에서 아무 역할도 하지 않으려는 미국의 행보를 비판했었는데, 이게 다 셰일 때문일지도 모르겠다. 더 자세한 것은 사놓고 안 읽고 있는 <21세기 미국의 패권��� 지정학>를 읽어봐야 알겠다.
제러미 리프킨의 예측과 많이 다른 방식으로 역사가 전개된 이유 중 하나는 '수소혁명'이 아니라 '셰일혁명'이 일어난 것이 아닐까 생각한다. 제러미 리프킨은 <수소혁명>이라는 책까지 쓰면서 수소혁명이라는 아이디어를 밀어주었는데, 아직 수소 자동차는 상용화되지 않았다. 수소는 어디에나 있으니 산유국이 아니라 개발도상국에게 유리할 것이라는 제러미 리프킨의 예측은 들어맞지 않았다. 미국이 어마어마한 셰일을 보유하고 있고 그 셰일을 활용하는 기술이 개발되면서 유가가 안정되고 굳이 수소 전기를 개발할 필요가 없게 되었던 것이다. 그로 인해 미국은 과거처럼 산유국에 내정간섭을 할 필요가 없어졌고, 따라서 트럼프는 "America first"를 외치며 더 이상 세계 경찰을 자처하지 않는다. 얼마 전 유발 하라리가 코로나와 관련해서 국제 사회에서 아무 역할도 하지 않으려는 미국의 행보를 비판했었는데, 이게 다 셰일 때문일지도 모르겠다. 더 자세한 것은 사놓고 안 읽고 있는 <21세기 미국의 패권��� 지정학>를 읽어봐야 알겠다.
Want to Read
February 2, 2026این کتاب را میتوانید با قیمت بسیار پایین از کتابفروشی من سفارش دهید:
t.me/turnipbooks
t.me/turnipbooks
October 2, 2016
I read this book on the suggestion of a friend. In general, I'm not a fan. Here are some highlights.
On the positive side of the book, Rifkin has obviously done a very thorough job researching employment throughout the century, various periods, etc. He also makes some interesting points with respect to the manner in which technology rids people of jobs. He does articulate that the net result is that production increases past the point of which the economy can absorb the excess.
However, where I really disagree with him is on the following points. First, he has not really normalized his data to incorporate those that were not included in the count during the different periods in question. He also fails to see some of the other fairly pertinent changes that have occurred throughout history as well that also impact unemployment rates, i.e. changing population demographics due to war, the opening of communist economies, the end of dictatorship/regimes.
Further, he does not quite articulate the need to reinvest. He hints at it a bit, but he does not see that with each economic downturn and rise in unemployment, society has created a better secondary net. The loss of jobs is at the lowest level, and I get that it effects those that are the poorest. However, cheap goods leads them to have a slightly better time of fulfilling basic needs. In other words, though the poor continue to be poor, we should consider at each period what the poor had at resources and judge technology along those lines as well. Alternatively, you could comparatively do the analysis across countries with varying levels of technological access (though of course, that would be a mess to neutralize second order affects).
He somewhat completely misses that the end game is for people to become smarter as a whole. Or that the increase in goods does make life - from a basic needs standpoint - easier.
I do agree with him that people need to think past the rat race and try to figure out how to evolve and think of creation of things outside of material goods to be exchanged for in the name of greed. I get that. And perhaps an alternative solution is to fulfill basic needs but foster enlightened understandings/education of what "choice" of livelihood really means. I recognize that only the greatest of optimists would think that people would not just choose to be a lazy stump and watch reality tv all day, but hey, maybe.
Still, I'd like to see the conclusion be to improve education; not to hate technology or see it as the enemy. Instead, an enlightened group can use technology to make long lasting changes for the better. Moreover, if technology is the way of enlightenment, than how about we train more people to be equip to be a part of it. Let's face it; there are quite a few blue collar jobs were flat out dangerous. It might not be the worst thing in the world that some of those jobs have become slightly mechanized.
On the positive side of the book, Rifkin has obviously done a very thorough job researching employment throughout the century, various periods, etc. He also makes some interesting points with respect to the manner in which technology rids people of jobs. He does articulate that the net result is that production increases past the point of which the economy can absorb the excess.
However, where I really disagree with him is on the following points. First, he has not really normalized his data to incorporate those that were not included in the count during the different periods in question. He also fails to see some of the other fairly pertinent changes that have occurred throughout history as well that also impact unemployment rates, i.e. changing population demographics due to war, the opening of communist economies, the end of dictatorship/regimes.
Further, he does not quite articulate the need to reinvest. He hints at it a bit, but he does not see that with each economic downturn and rise in unemployment, society has created a better secondary net. The loss of jobs is at the lowest level, and I get that it effects those that are the poorest. However, cheap goods leads them to have a slightly better time of fulfilling basic needs. In other words, though the poor continue to be poor, we should consider at each period what the poor had at resources and judge technology along those lines as well. Alternatively, you could comparatively do the analysis across countries with varying levels of technological access (though of course, that would be a mess to neutralize second order affects).
He somewhat completely misses that the end game is for people to become smarter as a whole. Or that the increase in goods does make life - from a basic needs standpoint - easier.
I do agree with him that people need to think past the rat race and try to figure out how to evolve and think of creation of things outside of material goods to be exchanged for in the name of greed. I get that. And perhaps an alternative solution is to fulfill basic needs but foster enlightened understandings/education of what "choice" of livelihood really means. I recognize that only the greatest of optimists would think that people would not just choose to be a lazy stump and watch reality tv all day, but hey, maybe.
Still, I'd like to see the conclusion be to improve education; not to hate technology or see it as the enemy. Instead, an enlightened group can use technology to make long lasting changes for the better. Moreover, if technology is the way of enlightenment, than how about we train more people to be equip to be a part of it. Let's face it; there are quite a few blue collar jobs were flat out dangerous. It might not be the worst thing in the world that some of those jobs have become slightly mechanized.
July 29, 2016
Bueno, la portada es un poco así de FLIPAR donde han puesto en pequeñito "the" y "of" así que se ve gordo END WORK que podría ser la pintada de un colega o tu bio de tuiter.
El caso es que Jeremy Rifkin no es El Revolucionario Definitivo sino El Socialdemócrata Definitivo, un señor que publicó este libro en 1995 y todavía estamos por ver que las políticas que propone (ha asesorado a organos de la UE y a jefes de gobierno como Zapatero) se cumplan. De hecho, la edición que me he leído yo es la de 2005 (sí, contad con los dedos, han pasado unos cuantos años) y eso, que es una nueva edición, no ha necesitado un libro nuevo porque ya estaba casi todo dicho.
Básicamente, el análisis del bueno de Rifkin es que entre la crisis y el desarrollo de las TIC cada vez va a haber menos trabajos, así que la solución es combinar las siguientes historias: una "tercera vía" económica entre el Estado y lo privado (asociaciones, ONGs, organizacones sin ánimo de lucro... algo así estilo "economía colaborativa" pero de la de verdad, no Airbnb), repartir el trabajo asalariado existente (transformar horas extra en contrataciones nuevas, reducir jornadas laborales para que más gente pueda trabajar... esto se ha hecho ya en ocasiones y el libro tiene bastantes ejemplos de ello) y por supuesto, CÓMO NO, la renta básica!!!! aunque me parece que Rifkin lo llama de otra manera (ingreso garantizado, o algo así).
El tema es que todo lo que dice Rifkin es bastante poco revolucionario (aunque el libro se llame EL FIN DEL TRABAJO no es que se acabe y nos vayamos a librar, nop) pero, al mismo tiempo, ni tan siquiera eso ha podido ponerse en marcha.
Lo que sí me gusta es que toca muchos palos. O sea, Rifkin no es el pesao que te dice "hay que votar" sino algo así como "hay que votar y sindicarse y echar una mano en la PAH" y el primer paso para conseguir hacer todo eso a la vez es, por lo menos, planteárselo. Así que palante, te doy 4 estrellitas, Jeremy.
Ánimo con tu movida de intentar convencer al mundo de que hay que darle pasta gratis a la gente, mil apoyos ahí.
El caso es que Jeremy Rifkin no es El Revolucionario Definitivo sino El Socialdemócrata Definitivo, un señor que publicó este libro en 1995 y todavía estamos por ver que las políticas que propone (ha asesorado a organos de la UE y a jefes de gobierno como Zapatero) se cumplan. De hecho, la edición que me he leído yo es la de 2005 (sí, contad con los dedos, han pasado unos cuantos años) y eso, que es una nueva edición, no ha necesitado un libro nuevo porque ya estaba casi todo dicho.
Básicamente, el análisis del bueno de Rifkin es que entre la crisis y el desarrollo de las TIC cada vez va a haber menos trabajos, así que la solución es combinar las siguientes historias: una "tercera vía" económica entre el Estado y lo privado (asociaciones, ONGs, organizacones sin ánimo de lucro... algo así estilo "economía colaborativa" pero de la de verdad, no Airbnb), repartir el trabajo asalariado existente (transformar horas extra en contrataciones nuevas, reducir jornadas laborales para que más gente pueda trabajar... esto se ha hecho ya en ocasiones y el libro tiene bastantes ejemplos de ello) y por supuesto, CÓMO NO, la renta básica!!!! aunque me parece que Rifkin lo llama de otra manera (ingreso garantizado, o algo así).
El tema es que todo lo que dice Rifkin es bastante poco revolucionario (aunque el libro se llame EL FIN DEL TRABAJO no es que se acabe y nos vayamos a librar, nop) pero, al mismo tiempo, ni tan siquiera eso ha podido ponerse en marcha.
Lo que sí me gusta es que toca muchos palos. O sea, Rifkin no es el pesao que te dice "hay que votar" sino algo así como "hay que votar y sindicarse y echar una mano en la PAH" y el primer paso para conseguir hacer todo eso a la vez es, por lo menos, planteárselo. Así que palante, te doy 4 estrellitas, Jeremy.
Ánimo con tu movida de intentar convencer al mundo de que hay que darle pasta gratis a la gente, mil apoyos ahí.
January 3, 2017
I read this book more than twenty years ago. Then I gave it away. Then in view of recent events, I thought that it was worth another read so I read it again. I'm glad that I did. It was a little bit like "Back to the Future".
The first two-thirds of the book is a glum elaboration of the title. The last one-third is about the possibility of a silver lining on this very dark cloud of unemployment and poverty.
The pre-1980 history part of the book could have been written in 2016. Nothing there has changed. The 1980-to-the-present part was kind of funny. Rifkin foresaw to some extent the communication revolution that has taken place, but he didn't foresee the "flattening" of the earth. India is barely mentioned; China isn't at all. In the last part of the book he discusses a third factor apart from capitalism and government intervention, a kind of volunteerism the silver lining that will mitigate the effects of unemployment. Sadly in addition to the NGO's he mentions like volunteer fire departments, the Red Cross and others, there are also church-based organizations. When looked at from a global perspective, they would include the madrassahs of Saudi Arabia and elsewhere which has fueled fundamentalist Muslim zeal, in some cases to undesirable ends.
I recommend this book as much as a historic artifact as it is an analysis of the end of work.
The first two-thirds of the book is a glum elaboration of the title. The last one-third is about the possibility of a silver lining on this very dark cloud of unemployment and poverty.
The pre-1980 history part of the book could have been written in 2016. Nothing there has changed. The 1980-to-the-present part was kind of funny. Rifkin foresaw to some extent the communication revolution that has taken place, but he didn't foresee the "flattening" of the earth. India is barely mentioned; China isn't at all. In the last part of the book he discusses a third factor apart from capitalism and government intervention, a kind of volunteerism the silver lining that will mitigate the effects of unemployment. Sadly in addition to the NGO's he mentions like volunteer fire departments, the Red Cross and others, there are also church-based organizations. When looked at from a global perspective, they would include the madrassahs of Saudi Arabia and elsewhere which has fueled fundamentalist Muslim zeal, in some cases to undesirable ends.
I recommend this book as much as a historic artifact as it is an analysis of the end of work.
May 10, 2015
"The End of Work" sets up the problem of technological unemployment very well. Rifkin traces the broad technological and socioeconomic trends that have led to the rise of the service sector and now the erosion of those jobs. Interestingly (and controversially!) he presents the African American population as a demographic sector that has become a "permanent underclass" as a result of technological unemployment (he points out that in 1993 or so, 70% of all African American college graduates took jobs in government - largely administering welfare programs). He also points out that technological unemployment has shifted power away from labor unions and back into the hands of entrepreneurs and business owners. Rifkin suggests that the rise of the "third sector" (volunteerism and other publicly-spirited work) and wealth redistribution may be able to blunt the harsh surge of technological unemployment.
Also interesting that he was fairly prescient about the current day (2011) even though he was still referring to the Internet as the "Information Superhighway"
Also interesting that he was fairly prescient about the current day (2011) even though he was still referring to the Internet as the "Information Superhighway"
January 26, 2016
Mildly persuasive, but long in the tooth, this book makes the case that work, in the traditional sense, is going to decrease in the future, due to increases in productivity brought about by technology. He sees this headed in one of two directions: unemployment skyrockets and crime goes up, or, his proposed alternative, that we mobilize all this manpower where they're needed: non-profit organizations, the "third sector."
The rest of the book is a shockingly large number of pages are devoted to celebrating how amazing non-profit organizations are. They're just so amazing, it's like social capital, everyone pitching in and helping each other, amazing, amazing, amazing! This really taxed the number of ways someone can say the same thing without adding anything new.
The rest of the book is a shockingly large number of pages are devoted to celebrating how amazing non-profit organizations are. They're just so amazing, it's like social capital, everyone pitching in and helping each other, amazing, amazing, amazing! This really taxed the number of ways someone can say the same thing without adding anything new.
November 22, 2015
It was written in 1995 and I'm just now reading it in 2011. The author gives a good historical background to bring the reader up to the current era. Much of what he has hypothesized has come to pass, some is yet to be realized, but I do think that the only thing that is uncertain is the time-frame. Human labor will be phased whenever and wherever it is possible. The question will be how will societies that have been previously organized around human labor be organized in the future when it is mostly unnecessary? No answers for that yet. This is a very thought-provoking book and I do recommend it for anyone interested in politics, economics or sociology.
May 26, 2020
3.5 El libro fue publicado originalmente en 1994. Es un libro que no ha envejecido bien. El autor hace varias previsiones como el uso masivo de automóviles de hidrógeno que no se han cumplido. Su tesis central sobre la reducción de puestos de trabajo debido a la introducción de la tecnología si bien es acertada, especialmente en el sector de la producción, no ha ocurrido en la escala prevista. Al final propone un rol central de la economía social para salvar a los trabajadores que son despedidos, previsión que tampoco se ha cumplido.
March 1, 2008
There is so much Rifkin could have done with this book, but didn't. I was disappointed that more time wasn't spent discussing the transition to an automation economy. But alas, Rifkin is a socialist, and we can't see eye to eye on things economic. Bottom line: as the world becomes more automated, those who want to derive the benefits of automation had better become owners of the means of production.
August 8, 2010
This was good but not for everybody. It focuses on unrealistic realities like people have satiable desires, which they do not.
July 22, 2011
Une analyse intéressante, des perspectives avancées. Date d'y à 15 ans déjà.
January 16, 2022
Un buen libro con ideas interesantes que aún pueden ser aplicadas.
Sin embargo, hay dos críticas fuertes al libro.
La primera es que es muy repetitivo. El libro contiene algunas ideas básicas, muy interesantes cómo que el sector servicios no cubre las pérdidas de empleos de otros sectores, o que la tendencia es a trabajar menos y está generando inequidad. Pero es muy repetitivo, estas ideas son constantemente mostradas en distintos capítulos mostrando argumentos diferentes; a veces me sentía re leyendo. Creo que para el contenido, podría ser más interesante un ensayo corto o una entrada de blog.
La segunda es que está completamente desactualizado. Si, tienes ideas que permanecen en el tiempo, pero como es un libro lleno de datos específicos, casi todos están relacionados a la década de los noventa. Me extraña que lo sigan leyendo en librerías, puesto que pocos datos son pertinentes al día de hoy; a menos que hagan una nueva edición, no entiendo si vuelven a imprimir este libro.
Sin embargo, hay dos críticas fuertes al libro.
La primera es que es muy repetitivo. El libro contiene algunas ideas básicas, muy interesantes cómo que el sector servicios no cubre las pérdidas de empleos de otros sectores, o que la tendencia es a trabajar menos y está generando inequidad. Pero es muy repetitivo, estas ideas son constantemente mostradas en distintos capítulos mostrando argumentos diferentes; a veces me sentía re leyendo. Creo que para el contenido, podría ser más interesante un ensayo corto o una entrada de blog.
La segunda es que está completamente desactualizado. Si, tienes ideas que permanecen en el tiempo, pero como es un libro lleno de datos específicos, casi todos están relacionados a la década de los noventa. Me extraña que lo sigan leyendo en librerías, puesto que pocos datos son pertinentes al día de hoy; a menos que hagan una nueva edición, no entiendo si vuelven a imprimir este libro.
July 28, 2023
Jeremy Rifkin's "The End of Work" offers an in-depth exploration of labor dynamics and technological advancement. Although the book was penned nearly 30 years ago, it holds resounding relevance in our current era where artificial intelligence (AI) and automation increasingly feature in the world of work.
Rifkin examines the long-term impacts of technological progress on employment, illustrating both positive and negative repercussions of this process. He observes that technology has diminished jobs in many traditional sectors, resulting in a new class of the unemployed.
While these phenomena may be aged, they continue to raise critical questions in the context of the impending AI revolution. If computer technology, as it has emerged over the past decades, has so dramatically changed the world, what will AI and automation, the forces on the horizon, mean for the future of work?
Rifkin examines the long-term impacts of technological progress on employment, illustrating both positive and negative repercussions of this process. He observes that technology has diminished jobs in many traditional sectors, resulting in a new class of the unemployed.
While these phenomena may be aged, they continue to raise critical questions in the context of the impending AI revolution. If computer technology, as it has emerged over the past decades, has so dramatically changed the world, what will AI and automation, the forces on the horizon, mean for the future of work?
November 15, 2025
A pesar de tener más de 30 años, el análisis del Dr. Jeremy Rifkin, adquiere una mayor relevancia aún en la era de la Inteligencia Artificial. Hemos sobrepasado la tercera revolución industrial, y asistimos a la cuarta. Conceptos que eran disruptivos en los años 90, cómo el ingreso mínimo vital, están siendo adoptados masivamente. El problema persiste, que hacer en un mundo en el que el trabajo ha dejado de ser algo humano, cómo abordar los retos mundiales en esta nueva economía de la inteligencia artificial. No creo que nadie tenga la respuesta, pero apostar por la economía de los cuidados y por el tercer sector parece una senda interesante a explorar en el futuro más cercano
January 5, 2018
This is a +20 year old book, about technology, job market and globalization, but, still very relevant on current days.
The author drives us into a very detailed scenario pointing out several characteristics of our current market and the world and how they are going to create a jobless future... very near to us.
The author also advocates on a growing share of third sector activities and non-lucrative occupations as a healthy and a valid alternative to the future when finding a job will be harder or even impossible.
The author drives us into a very detailed scenario pointing out several characteristics of our current market and the world and how they are going to create a jobless future... very near to us.
The author also advocates on a growing share of third sector activities and non-lucrative occupations as a healthy and a valid alternative to the future when finding a job will be harder or even impossible.
July 27, 2023
The book has obviously aged somewhat, and a lot more has taken place since; our understanding of tech and its impact of work is more thorough today.
For instance Jeremy had underestimated the importance of the human touch and our ability to find more interesting things to do at work, for instance predicting an end to bank jobs due to the rolling out of ATMs.
I would recommend this for people who really interested in the topic as a whole to have on their shelf. But if you are to read just one book on it, go for something more recent.
For instance Jeremy had underestimated the importance of the human touch and our ability to find more interesting things to do at work, for instance predicting an end to bank jobs due to the rolling out of ATMs.
I would recommend this for people who really interested in the topic as a whole to have on their shelf. But if you are to read just one book on it, go for something more recent.
January 28, 2024
This is the third book that I read from the author, it was probably before he embarked on his identity politics ideology which produced dubious results, this book anticipates some serious issues that we are living with now due to automation, and the situation will only get worse, and in his book he is definitely more precise than the later ones. He pushes for a type of socialism or strong welfare to deal with the situation, it is a work that deserves to be read, still, it is a little bit old at the moment.
April 16, 2018
Covers a good summary of automation and the industrial revolution. Looking ahead, its forecasts of the future are yet to be fulfilled, twenty years after its release. The author has multiple ideas about how to prevent mass unemployment, and although many of the ideas have been tried, far from all have been successful.
Still, the book raises important questions which we have to deal with as automation continues and artificial intelligence evolves.
Still, the book raises important questions which we have to deal with as automation continues and artificial intelligence evolves.
December 4, 2019
For a book that was published in 1995, the content is still incredibly relevant. Unemployment and job displacement due to automation is real and it impacts the working class first. Lots of solid research and statistics here. Would be nice to have an updated intro/foreword on how the last 20 years have fared.
December 30, 2019
"Finally, by the mid-1970s more than 19 percent of all U.S. workers had jobs in the public sector, making the government the largest employer in the United States." (Page 33)
I found a lot to quote in this book, but the above is the only thing that I copied into my notes.
I found a lot to quote in this book, but the above is the only thing that I copied into my notes.
April 19, 2023
Autor ma wiele ciekawych spostrzeżeń, bardzo trafnych na pewno, jednak mimo upłynięcia ponad 20 lat od publikacji nie widzę aby jego główny strach - zastepienie ludzi przez maszyny - miało miejsce teraz czy w najbliższym czasie.
November 26, 2024
Aunque el autor vaticina una caída mundial de las horas trabajadas en el mundo desarrollado y no se han cumplido de momento sus expectativas, no deja de resultar interesante confrontar su bien argumentados puntos de vista económicos.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 65 reviews