I’d like to stick Cowen in a GM factory in 1962, and see how well he could perform this “simple” work. Arrogant buffoon.

A: Government is growing exponentially. (Though still in the x < 1 regime, if barely.)

B: Government transferred from poor to rich in every instance we have comprehensive data.

So was he strapped for historical literacy, or for integrity?

Automation does not always require higher skills; quite often, it leads to de-skilling. One example is a cashier, who not so long ago had to be able to do simple math. Now, many of them are lost if the POS terminal can’t do their calculations for them. Another example: in a factory, running a CNC machine tool (that has been programmed by someone else) is generally a lower-skill job than operating a manual machine tool. Finally, being a manager in a chain retail store where inventory & ordering are handled centrally (by automated ordering systems with some input from centralized buyers at HQ) is a lower-skill job than being a manager in a retail store where the manager has to manage inventory control directly.

His point is that, on the margin, the measurements are going to get more detailed; their granularity will increase. This is going to increase wage dispersion.

People have been measuring “what workers are contributing” for a long, long time. Did Tyler never hear of piecework? Of sales commissions? Of profit-based bonuses for regional or division executives? All of these things are very old hat.

Indeed, quite a few manufacturers have decided that it is unwise to take the quantitative measurement of performance down to an individual level, in cases where the work is being done by a closely-coupled team.