EDIT: Replace ‘every human in the workforce’ with ‘most people’. I agree efficiency has not been gained equally across all professions.
In: Economics
It’s mainly due to the population increasing and more people having access to more advanced technologies with the improvements not meeting/exceeding the increased demand.
The world population has more than doubled since 1970 to now. In 1970, there were 3.7 billion people whilst in 2020 there was an estimated 7.8 billion people. This increases the demand of products and services.
Also, the vast majority of the extra population are from poor countries which through the development of the country means more people can afford the new and better items. So that could mean in 1970 only 30% could obtain it but through development in the country there could be 50% of people who can afford them (these are random figures).
Globally we are not there.
While automation can lead to more efficiencies it doesn’t mean there’s less work to go around. In most cases it just makes the human more efficient allowing them to do more with their time and at the same time employers can hire fewer workers working the same hours to do a particular job.
It has led to that.
There are over six-million part time workers in the US that want to be full time, but the hours are not available. In other words they do have less working hours and a shorter work week.
The utopian idea that a worker would have reduced work time and still make the same amount of money is not grounded in even the most simple economic principles.
Technology has advanced efficiency, that means that a industry needs fewer workers and needs them for less time or it means they can use the same workforce to make more of their product over the same time period.
Given the choice, if the market allows, most companies will choose to work their people the same time and make more money.
Because rather than hire two people to work 20 hours a week they hire one to work 40.
And because they pay D dollars before automation and advancements and also D dollars after no one could live off 20 hours a week of pay anyway.
It does increase production rates of the company which leads to bigger and more profitable contracts but that just translates to a more profitable business for the owners.
The rich get richer.
I’m not sure if there’s a way to answer this question without politicizing it to some extent.
Basically, business leaders didn’t see the gains in efficiency as an opportunity to reduce hours for their workers. They saw it as an opportunity to make more stuff for less money and thus make more profit.
Demand is infinite. As we become more efficient at delivering the supply it doesn’t lighten the load or get us closer to the finish line, hence no slow down. This positive feedback loop in the supply demand model is one of the things that makes capitalism so powerful at first and ultimately unsustainable
Latest Answers