Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

That’s because that 30% found different jobs. What if employment at the national level goes down by 30%? I doubt US will produce more output.

AI is more productive and will fill the gap.

Would be nice if A.I. could take over all the customer service telemarking overseas crap.

Every single corporation goes to pot when they sell out to overseas companies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

That’s because that 30% found different jobs. What if employment at the national level goes down by 30%? I doubt US will produce more output.

AI is more productive and will fill the gap.

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible for the economy to grow with less jobs? In other words, can the economy keep growing by employing less people?

Speaking about GDP? Of course it is possible.

Fewer, not less

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

That’s because that 30% found different jobs. What if employment at the national level goes down by 30%? I doubt US will produce more output.

You just build more prisons and employ some of that 30% to run them.

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible for the economy to grow with less jobs? In other words, can the economy keep growing by employing less people?

Off topic, but the appropriate word here is “fewer” jobs and “fewer” people. Not “less.”
As a rule, if you can count the object in question (in this case “jobs” or “people”) then the word to use is fewer.

You might cry less or weigh less than you did before. Or a person has less money than they did last year. But the number of dollars in your pocket is fewer than twenty.

Anonymous wrote:We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

The Wall Street Journal recently ran an article which stated that a lot of companies are increasing their output while decreasing the number of employees. AI is allowing companies to do more less employees.

Anonymous wrote:We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

That’s because that 30% found different jobs. What if employment at the national level goes down by 30%? I doubt US will produce more output.

We will see in the years to come. Let me give my company as an example. I have been with them for 20 years. We have shrunk by 30% in that time and at the same time produced more output.

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible for the economy to grow with less jobs? In other words, can the economy keep growing by employing less people?

Not really.

And if the unemployed are a financial drag. Maybe high earners can support a family and it's back to Ozzie &Harriett. But GDP would be less than if both of them were high earners and hired contractors for lawn and house care,

It depends on how the remaining employed people are doing.

The trouble is GDP is a false statistic. Sure, GDP will continue to go up. GDP can grow while unemployment rises. A booming GDP may benefit only the wealthy, while most people see no improvement or even worsening conditions. GDP can also increase due to things like high, unsustainable debt. So the answer depends on what you mean by the economy - if you mean GDP, the answer is yes but it will make us more of a banana republic.

Think about it...

Is it possible for the economy to grow with less jobs? In other words, can the economy keep growing by employing less people?