News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Should economists be more concerned about AI?. Parent comment

Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by ThomPete on Wednesday March 01, 2017 @09:26PM (#13770896)
There is no net gain, the number of jobs have only been growing because the market have been growing, but in the west the number of actual jobs are declining. In the US, 95% of jobs are temp jobs and the definition of when someone is said to have a job have been widened substantially since Bush. The number of new jobs created have gone down decade after decade since ww2
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by MagnumOpus on Thursday March 02, 2017 @07:51AM (#13773641)
> 95% of jobs are temp jobs

False. At best 40% are - and given that a full-time worker has only one job and a part-time temp can have half a dozen at a time, even this is an upward distortion.

> The definition of when someone is said to have a job have been widened substantially since Bush

Also false.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Should economists be more concerned about AI? by ThomPete on Thursday March 02, 2017 @09:33AM (#13774185)
95% of jobs created since 2008.

https://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/nearly-95-of-all...

And yes the definition got widened substantially under bush and Obama kept it.

You can see the definition here. It's quite wide.

https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

[ Parent | on HN ]