Customer Reviews

The End of Work

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(4)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

"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."

Thus ends the book, leaving no neat little answers - negative OR positive, but urging us to open our eyes and look around us. I'd seen him on C-span and promptly ordered his book through Amazon. This was when it first came out in hardcover and my oldest son, assured of a future work using skills from his newly obtained Masters in Computer Science, was concerned I was reading such a book. "Isn't he one of those Luddites?" I think of myself as a wanna be Luddite, but I saw no signs of this in the book. Instead, Rifkin seems to be concerned with the coming affects of the Informational Revolution.

The book begins with a history of the Industrial Revolution. He gives us a nice tour of the birth of materialism as a concept created and promoted by economists and businessmen. "The term `consumption," he tells us, "has both English and French roots. In its original form, to consume meant to destroy, to pillage, to subdue, to exhaust. It is a word steeped in violence and until the present century had only negative connotations."

The chapter, "Technology and the Afro-American Experience," addresses the effects of slavery, the supposed freedom of sharecropping, the loss of jobs as a consequence of the invention of the mechanical cotton picker, the rush to the cities and the subsequent loss of jobs as technology slowly progressed. There is a correlation to the success of whichever modern day technology we are experiencing, and the situation in the inner-cities. "Today, millions of African-Americans find themselves hopelesly trapped in a permanent underclass. Unskilled and unneeded, the commodity value of their labor has been rendered virtually useless by the automated technologies that have come to displace them in the new high-tech global economy."

One chapter is entitled "No More Farmers" and discusses the advances of robotizing replacing tasks such as harvesting and livestock management, as well as the end of outdoor agriculture. Other chapters deal with the future for retail, service, blue collar jobs, the declining middle class and the growing chasm between the haves and the have-nots.

In the chapter titled, "A More Dangerous World," he cites the Merva and Fowles study, saying that it "showed a striking correlation between growing wage inequality and increased criminal activity." "Rising unemployment and loss of hope for a better future are among the reasons that tens of thousands of young teenagers are turning to a life of crime and violence."

He does point out that the explosion of the Third Revolution is going to make the social wounds we've tried to heal seem like paper cuts, but does not claim that we should unhook our computers and resist the revolutionary explosion. His suggestion is that we work on `empowering' the Third Sector' - the independent sector - and turn back to community, to helping each other before it is too late. " A new generation might transcend the narrow limits of nationalism and begin to think and act as common memebers of the human race, with shared commitments to each other, the community, and the larger biosphere." He does offer that since hi-tech advances may mean fewer jobs in the market economy, the only way to make sure those whose jobs are lost will be compensated is to have the government supply compensation. Naturally, this gives a flash-back to the welfare system, which I think has freaked out a few reviewers, paralyzing them into a sort of retro response. But Rifkin isn't just talking about the recipients of old - those stereotypical lower-income, under-educated inner city folks, he's talking about many more people. In my family, my middle son is a hands on kind of worker who in the past might have been a farmer. No matter how much education he gets, he isn't one of those who will sit well in the new techno age, and already he's feeling the pressures. The high paying jobs for him are life-threatening, so the kind of work he's hired for is low paying, not enough to support himself, let alone the family he has decided he can't afford to start. Rifkin isn't doing retro work - he suggests tying the subsidized income to service in the community, which he suggests migh help the "growth and development of the social economy and facilitate the long-term transition into a community-centered, service-oriented culture."

His answers are not clearly spelled out - he offers suggestions and insight into where we might be going as a race (the human race). The truth is, we all need to ask some questions and help find the answers. For those whose minds are set firmly in any direction, you'll get from this book very little - for those with open minds, regardless of your political view of the world, you may find this to be a door to the future.

Jeremy Rifkin has distilled much of what is brewing below the surface in our economy and weaved it into a compelling thesis that deserves serious attention from academia and the public at large. A gifted social scientist and economist, Rifkin transcends the "Megatrends" genre, and provides us with a compelling analysis and dissection of a post-market economy that sits clearly on the horizon. Many who have read and critiqued this book have siezed upon it's liberal view for the future, however, no one has disputed the issues he has raised which clearly depict an economy where labor is in declining demand, and sophisticated computer automation will replace large sectors of our current economy. Perhaps the one flaw in Rifkin's book is that he presents a vision for the future that is polemical in its political orientation. I was deeply disturbed by Mr. Rifkin's findings, because I fear that I could easily become among the ranks of the technologically displaced. But I read this book twice, because I realized that if I am to keep ahead of the game, I need to know which way the wind is blowing, and ensure that I don't fall victim to what millions of workers are destined for in the years to come. With out a doubt, the most prescient and trenchant non-fiction book I've read in ten years.

Fast forward, December 2008, and the impending economic collapse of America. Hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs lost, millions of service sector jobs, near collapse of domestic auto industry, housing and mortgage meltdown, credit card crunch, trillion dollar government bailouts. Most of these jobs will NEVER return. What are all these displaced workers going to do for sustenance? Mr. Rifkin nailed it in this book: The Rise of a Massive Welfare State. That day has arrived. Technology didn't do it, I don't think. Rampant greed and colossal corruption on all levels, including the financial industry and lack of government regulation sent this country over the cliff in a short order of time.

I must admit that when I read this book, I was a bit dissappointed at the lack of new information. As a student of labor history, I had read previously many of the ideas and concepts that Rifkin expands upon in several other books. I only wished I had picked up this one book, prior to reading all the others. It would have saved me much time and money.

In short, Rifkin decribes the transition of the worker from pre-industrial revolution, through the era of machines and mass-production, and the advent of the information age in which he predicts there will be fewer and fewer workers. His analysis describes how this effects the worker, organizational make-up, employment relationships, and even how government has been forced to change to accomodate the modern economy.

I believe that anyone interested in the dynamics of technology and globalism on the workforce will find Rifkin's work very interesting, well-written, and easy to read.

Some reviewers see this book as a "gloom'n'doom" "Malthusian" feeding of technophobia, but I disagree. Look at the news - reports of job losses despite increased productivity and corporate profits are not going to go away. Technological advances make this an inevitability. What Rifkin ultimately questions is how we deal with that - we could either head towards great social upheavals because of mass unemployment leading to people being unable to provide for their own basic needs, or we could enjoy a cultural and social rebirth where people are free from wage slavery and are free to pursue meaningful and fulfilling endeavors.

Rifkin's surveys of the development of the third sector (NGOs, arts, sports, social services, religious organizations, etc.), proposals for the guaranteed annual income for everyone, usage of time dollars, and increase in volunteerism does not indicate that he's some kind of paranoid nut who's screaming that the sky is falling - in fact, he comes across as being more cautiously optimistic. These are the similar ideas about a work-free (meaningless work, that is) future that R. Buckminster Fuller Robert Anton Wilson and Bertram Russell have written about.

If some might think that this book is "leftist anti-corporate propaganda", it is not - it's quite non-partisan; he may espouse the idea of a guaranteed annual income which most might distastefully find "socialistic", but from the capitalist point-of-view, how can consumers buy products to support a corporation's profits if they don't have any money in the first place?

With "The End of Work," Jeremy Rifkin has combined detailed research with insightful analysis to spread a warning message that any amateur futurist, economist, or social commentator needs to consider seriously before rejecting. Rifkin's thesis is simple: human labor has been, to a large extent, replaced by machinery in the production process, and this trend will continue to subsume jobs that require great amounts of skill, as computers and machines become increasingly capable of performing such tasks. The result is going to be a permanently unemployed and underemployed workforce, as labor becomes more extraneous, and the symptoms will be manifest in growing wealth disparity, and an increasingly dangerous world, as the unemployed become politically radicalized, and turn to violence, whether random, economic, and political.

First, I feel compelled to acknowledge the elephant in the room, which is that Rifkin's thesis is decidedly Marxist. The idea of post-scarcity and the replacement of labor with automation, as well as the consequences that Rifkin forewarns of, were all predicted by Karl Marx throughout his career as a political agitator. That Rifkin's prescriptions are more moderate than Marx's does not make the diagnosis less Marxist. As a longtime libertarian and believer in capitalism, I would like to be able to dismiss Rifkin's thesis out of hand, as many reviewers of a conservative bent do and have. However, the care with which Rifkin has researched this book and the consistency of his analysis, as well as his stature as a scholar, compel me to consider his argument more carefully.

One positive trait of the book is that it was written fifteen years ago. As such, it is somewhat dated. Some of the predictions that Rifkin cites and makes have born out, while others have proven untrue. That is the nature of prediction. The intervening time since the book has been published give us experience and a frame to judge Rifkin's predictions. Also, thought the current economic climate of "recession" (not sure that word is appropriate) and combined unemployment and underemployment upwards of 15% make a thesis like Rifkin's all the more compelling now, it lends credence that this book was published in more mild economic times, and is thus not merely reactive, but foresightful.

As for the evidence, hopefully it is not in dispute that income and wealth disparity are increasing in this country. In recent years, the news has been replete with reports of the absorbent increases in executive compensation, in the financial sector but also in the general economy, all while the real wages of the worker have been stagnant. Rifkin cites that in the 1950's, average CEO compensation was 28 times the salary of the average worker. At the time of this book's publishing, this figure had increased to 93 times. I read an article recently that in 2009, in had ballooned to about 220 times. So this prediction has borne out. More importantly, the more comprehensive GINI index of economic disparity has been increasing for decades. This measure is not cited by Rifkin, however.

Rifkin gives a detailed history and recount of the evolution of labor as an institution in the United States, and also in other countries. As should be familiar to most Americans (though perhaps not in this much detail), he recounts how the bulk of labor was once invested in agriculture. As agriculture became increasingly mechanized and more efficient, labor increasingly moved to manufacturing. In the post-war era, as manufacturing has become increasingly automated, the lost jobs have been absorbed by the service sector. In turn, service jobs are in the process of being automated. It is unclear what will come in their stead. The history that Rifkin recounts is detailed, and made for dry reading at the time, but in the end the information was valuable.

In contrast, the analysis of trends and their implications is not dry reading, but holds interest the whole way through. Rifkin discusses the gradual increase in unemployment since the 1950's, and also how this increase does not tell the entire story, because real wages and benefits have been declining over the same period. Increased competition from the Japanese, Japanese innovations in the production process, and the widespread adoption of some of these have also made production more labor intensive. Of course, when this book was written the Japanese were more in the forefront of consciousness, and one wonders if the points made still hold, and if the processes introduced are still relevant.

Rifkin also discusses Say's law, which states that supply creates its own demand and that displaced labor will always eventually be redeployed. Say's law is often advanced by conservatives and free-market economists as a counter-argument to those concerned about unemployment. To this, Rifkin points out that Say's law says nothing of the quality of employment. While high-skill manufacturing jobs have often been replaced by service jobs, these replacements generally pay less, require fewer hours, and have lower benefits. This only exacerbates income disparity. In this case, Say's law holds, but the outcome is far from desirable. Even when most things of value are produced by machines and the value of production accrues to the top echelon, displaced workers will still need to do something, and the result is that they will find jobs for $10 per hour or whatever, doing work that isn't that important. The ultimate result is a "busy-work" economy (my term, not Rifkin's), full of people performing work that provides little value. The recent rise of the financial sector, which in a healthy economy should be a small segment facilitating capital allocation, corroborates this reality.

With the disease diagnosed and the evidence for the diagnosis presented, Rifkin then turns toward the question of prescription and antidote. It should be noted that though Rifkin is often considered a man of the left, his proposals in this area are actually quite moderate. These proposals include reducing the number of hours in the work week in order to "share the work," and a tax credit program that would reward volunteered time in a similar manner that monetary charitable donations are credited for tax purposes, essentially having the government pay individuals for charity work. The idea of the second idea is to revive the idea of community, while combating the problem of technological unemployment. While the goal is admirable, the potency of this proposal is suspect. Similarly, the idea of "sharing the work," may be largely antiquated in the post-industrial era, where labor is less of a fungible commodity and the work week is less well defined. Certainly it could apply to certain low-income sectors, but it has little relevance and is unenforceable in the professional, white-collar corporate world, or in sales. It should also be pointed out that the obvious solution to the problem of technological unemployment, as foreseen by Marx and others, is socialism, which Rifkin does not propose.

All in all, I found this book informative. Rifkin argues his position well, and provides a wealth of information, data, and analysis regarding the problem of technological unemployment. I recommend this book to anybody interested in the underlying causes of our labor economy.

This book is a must for anyone interested in an easy to follow, in depth, unbiased study of current and past labor trends as well as the silent revolution that is currently forever altering those trends. The central conclusion of the analysis is that with the increasing role of "smart" machines and other labor saving innovations, globalization, societal overemphasis on consumerism, trends toward conglomerates, and other factors, massive groups of workers are slowly (and as quietly as possible) being obsoleted. Lines of work drying up is nothing new, but historically, workers who were obsoleted could find new jobs in a different sector. Here, Rifkin convincingly argues that that for the first time there are no longer sectors available to swallow up the obsoleted workers. The only possiblity, the highly touted "information" sector, is shown to lack the ability to accept the influx of workers contrary to the pronouncements of numerous giddy prognosticators. Though the book was written in the early 90's, more recent events (the recent flurry of dot-com layoffs, increasing consolidation in numerous sectors, etc.) certainly support Rivkin's bleak view. Pessimistic though it may seem, Rivkin's analysis seems hard to refute, and he does offer some sensible ways in which the situation might be improved.

As with many futurists, their analysis of trends are insightful and can provide a glimpse of the future; however, often their glimpses are of the extreme nature. Having studied trends regarding the advancement of technology, I came to the same conclusion Rifkin did, that sooner or later work and income must be disassociated with one another. A guaranteed income is one answer to this. Just as wage labor made no since in pre-industrial eras, so will wage labor make little since in futuristic economies. Societies that insist stubbornly to this notion are doomed for collapse. My concern with American society is that we won't make this jump until economic catastrophe hits us. Just as it took a Great Depression to convince policy makers that the Federal Govt. did have a role in preventing poverty to occur through social insurance mechanism, so to will it take an economic upheaval to convince the populace that wage labor as a primary means of allocating income in this society is antiquated and cannot continue.

If you are on the dole, this book is for you. You will discover you are part of an epochal turning point,and you'll feel more or less like a T-Rex seconds before the meteor collided with Earth causing his extinction. If you are not on the dole, the future will look slightly less bright.If you are more or less illiterate in economics, you will enjoy the historical part that's entertaining like no other book about this kind of subject can be. The solutions proposed at the end of the book can be appealing and are worth all our simpathy. Probably, if you are jobless or somewhat at risk, they are also a bit discouraging. But, as the book teaches us, the whole world is at risk. Happy new century to us all

A must read. Written back in the 90s but arguably more relevant today than it was back then. Very thoroughly chronicles the progression of the 3 Industrial Revolutions---the 3rd of which we are entering now---and their impact on global economics and politics.

The message is clear: Millions of people are becoming economically obsolete; because of technology we no longer need them to help produce things like automobiles, steel, and many consumer goods. At the same time, they can no longer afford to purchase these things due to job displacement. They have been shoved out of the world economy, and if we don't do something about it, we will have a global French Revolution situation on our hands as their ranks continue to grow exponentially due to outsourcing and tech upgrades and the chasm between haves and have-nots continues to widen daily.

There are two futures that the author sees as possible. The first---and more probable according to him---is a bleak one with rising crime and massive backlash of the poor on each other and the wealthy. The other is a refocusing on the volunteer/social sector and employing the displaced masses in worthy contribution to communities. Rifkin does not realize it, but he is basically suggesting a casting away of European values originating from Platonic dichotomies of good/bad, us/other, valuable/expendable, etc...then evolving into the "us" VS. "other" mentality of medieval Europe...before finally maturing into full-scale imperialism, colonialism, manifest destiny, etc.....the ULTIMATE "Entitlement" mentality...resulting in the unapologetic exploitation of land, people, and resources until imploding on itself out of its own greed and ravenousness. When he talks of the 3rd/social sector--the "'post-market" area, he is actually suggesting the adoption of more cooperative and community-conscious African principles once the European worldview has collapsed on itself.