Get FREE NRO Newsletters

 

May 28 Issue  |  Subscribe  |  Renew


New on NRO . . .
Close
America’s Technological Plateau
Tyler Cowen thinks we can’t expect restored economic growth anytime soon.

An NRO Interview

Archive Latest E-Mail RSS Send
Text  

Tyler Cowen has established himself as the indispensable economics commentator. The general director of the Mercatus Center and holder of the Holbert C. Harris chair of economics at George Mason University (where he also earned his undergraduate degree), Professor Cowen has a Ph.D. in economics from Harvard and an extensive academic publishing record. But he’s perhaps best known for — and most influential in — his work outside of academe, as an author on the popular Marginal Revolution blog and as a commentator for the New York Times, Slate, and The American Interest. He’s also published several accessible books, including Create Your Own Economy, The Age of the Infovore, and Creative Destruction.

His most recent work, The Great Stagnation, has quickly become one of the most talked-about books of the year among economics wonks. Its thesis: The U.S. has seen a slowdown in the growth of median wages since the 1970s because we have eaten “all the low-hanging fruit” in technology, education, and resources — innovations that increased the efficiency of industry, facilitated the provision of new skills to capable but previously deprived students, and expanded access to freely available land. But ever since those gains were realized, our productivity, and hence our average income, has slowed its forward march, leaving us on a technological and economic plateau. Our more recent innovations, like the Internet, improve our quality of life but don’t show up in the material measurements of Gross Domestic Product. This makes Cowen pessimistic about our prospects for regaining 1950s-style economic growth in the near term, but he has some ideas for brightening our future, or at least having more fun under gray skies.

Cowen spoke with NRO’s Matthew Shaffer about The Great Stagnation, income inequality, politicians, Dodd-Frank, Austrian economics, politicians, and more.


MATTHEW SHAFFERThe Great Stagnation is a quick read. But can you give us an even quicker taste? What’s your three-paragraph summary?

TYLER COWEN: The three-paragraph summary is that the rate of technological innovation has been slowing down in American society. Living standards for the typical household rose at a very rapid rate from the late 19th century up through the 1970s. In every generation, living standards for the average household would double.

Now they’re rising at a very slow rate, not much more than zero. In the last ten years, average living standards have fallen. In the past ten years there has been no net job creation in the U.S. economy. I refer to this as a Great Stagnation.

And it is a revolution for our economy, our politics, and our way of life.


SHAFFER: What’s the cause of the slowdown in technological change?

COWEN: Most accounts of this create some set of villains. So commentators on the Left think it’s because the rich or the Republicans now control the U.S. government. But when you look at the actual data on technological innovation, one thing you see is that what I call the “low-hanging fruit” has been exhausted. So radio, flush toilets, electricity, and automobiles — a lot of very basic inventions — have spread to almost all households. [The fact that] they’ve successfully spread means the rate of growth must slow. And other than the Internet, there has not been a comparable breakthrough in technology for quite some time.

The other factor is that we have a malfunctioning education system.  [High-school] graduation rates in this country actually have been falling for several decades. Go back to, say, 1900 or 1910 — the marginal student you’re educating is both easy to educate and quite possibly brilliant, or at least going to be highly productive. So education was bringing us significant gains for most of the 20th century — at least the first half. But now the marginal student who is not getting educated, or who is getting educated, is very difficult, and not that productive, and hard to teach. And that’s another way in which this low-hanging fruit has been taken off. It means that at the margin we find it harder to make progress. So in part it’s hard to make additional progress precisely because we’ve done so well in the past.

It’s not a tale of villains. It’s a tale of technological progress.


SHAFFER: So the major technological gain of recent years is the Internet, but the gains of the Internet are not reflected in GDP or median income?

COWEN: That’s correct. Some are, but most are not.


SHAFFER: You dedicate The Great Stagnation to Peter Thiel. But he told us just a few weeks ago that higher education is part of the problem — a bubble we need to pop, a bloated signaling mechanism that’s detaining people from productive market activities.

COWEN:  I’m more pro-education than Peter is. I think higher ed in the U.S. is fairly healthy, and by global standards it dominates, and it makes people more productive. But a lot of our K-12 is a disaster. And the single most important reform would just be to fire the worst ten or 15 percent of teachers in the lot, and we would have massive improvements. Because we’re a federal society, there’s no single top-down law that would get us there. But cities, communities, counties are working toward that.

I agree with Peter that when it comes to both education and health care, we’re adding these expenditures into our measure of GDP, and we’re valuing them at cost, as if every dollar we spend is creating a dollar worth of value. And that isn’t close to being true. It’s one reason why our measured GDP is perhaps higher than our actual living standard.

1   2   3   4   Next >
Text  

You Might Also Like...

Malkin: Obama’s Land of the LOST

Lowry: Unleash Biden!

Keune: 'Clean Coal' Means No Coal



COMMENTS   5

EXPAND  

   02/28/11 09:16

Here's something to consider...

Almost no country in the world has been able to jump-start its standard of living without first creating a large class of engineers/technicians. Those people work tremendously long hours at a single rate of pay, increasing the overall productivity of their respective societies by huge leaps and bounds. In effect, they act as modern-day slaves for the country's economy (I wonder if something similar happened in Roman times?).

However, the types of people who would have gone into such fields in the past are today looked down upon as nerds, beta males, and representatives of inauthentic white culture. Such attitudes have been well entrenched due to the trashing of social conservatism by societies' elites. (As but one of myriad examples, in Hollywood movies the computer wiz always assists the hero, and never ends up with the girl).

The supply of engineers will continue to dwindle, and so this country cannot increase its productivity and general economic advancement. Feminism, the sexual revolution, multiculturalism, and affirmative action have all wreaked havoc on this nation's technology geeks. Is it any wonder that nobody wants to be one anymore?

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   02/28/11 10:20

I enjoyed this article and will definitely buy his book. I have been telling people in my family that we have reached a technological plateau where all of our innovations are only improvements on an existing idea, but there have been no breakthrough technologies that really would be the equivalent of a NOS boost in a turbocharged car. I'm glad that a guy as smart as Mr. Cowen was able to pick up this theme and put the hard data behind it to support his thesis.

I also liked his recommendation to the politician, however I would just like to add another. If I could give a pol one piece of advice I would say, "You are but one man, and there is no possible way what you have planned or are planning can work in general practice." Truly, leaving things unplanned has been the source of our technological leaps, but as we try to plan more we shouldn't be surprised when we plateau quicker technologically.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
cnl
   02/28/11 11:35

If you want people to do science and engineering you have to pay them for it. Scientists and engineers will sacrfice a lot of potential income because they love their field butthey have to eat and support their family.
The career track for engineers peters out after 10 years. Then it either go into management or never get another raise. And for scientists its even worse. At least 10 years of grueling work in difficult fields and then spending all your time scrabbling for grants or throw in the towell and do basic computer work.
And what many who are not involved in sci/eng don't understand is that it takes a whole ecosystem of elite geniuses and smart grunts in a diversity of fields to those momentus discoveries. Without nurturing all the John Doe physicists you will never get another Einstein or Schottky.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
 JPK
   02/28/11 11:56

I think the author hits upon some very important ideas. But he also failed to highlight inflation, which is built into our economy. And this inflation coincides with the creation of the Fed. I am not one of those typical Fed debunkers who wish to go back to the gold standard per se. However, even "modest" inflation (1-2%) per anum is corrosive. A 1% inflation rate means that for every dollar that is saved, one penny is lost. In 20 years that means that the value of the dollar has been reduced by 20%. Of course we haven't had modest inflation in recent decades. Since 2000, the purchasing power of the dollar has dropped 22%.

For 100 years we've been able to overcome this currency problem through revolutionary changes in our industrial efficiencies. Better management techniques, the inclusion of women in the workforce, automation, and most recently off-shoring made up for loses in our buying power.

But, that phase of our economies have come to an end. Demographics will work against everyone. You need a large pool of educated, ambitious young people to keep the technological marvel going. And that just isn't the case. From North and South America, most of Asia and Europe there is a dearth (or approaching dearth) of children. We have reached a plateau -in more ways than one.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse
   03/01/11 21:58

Tyler Owen observes that the rate of technological innovation has been slowing down in American society and that average living standards have declined in the past ten years. He attributes this to America having eaten all of the low-hanging fruit. However, he overlooks the drastic demographic change that has occurred in America's science and engineering programs and, as a consequence, the high-tech sector. That is, for the past thirty years, science and engineering programs have been de-Americanized. According to official statistics, more than half of all science and engineering graduate students are now foreign; a visit to a randomly chosen graduate program would likely leave one with the impression that the percentage of foreign graduate students is even higher. We have been told that it is vital that America continue to import foreign scientists and engineers, a veritable flood, so that this country can remain competitive. Clearly, this flood has not helped the U.S., and it seems the more we rely on foreign scientists and engineers, the less innovation there is.

Professor Owen states that higher-ed is fairly healthy but a lot of our K-12 is a disaster. American science and engineering curricula are not only solid, rather they are superb, and the facilities at our colleges and universities are outstanding. However, there are some very big problems with higher education. There has been a lot of criticism of the quality of K-12 instruction- much of it is deserved- but there has been little or no criticism about the quality of college and university instruction. If we are serious about addressing why America apparently has reached a technological plateau, shouldn't we investigate the institutions that are responsible for educating and credentialing scientists and engineers?

There are too many professors and instructors who are not competent to teach either because they have not mastered the material they are supposed to be teaching or because of an inability to communicate effectively in English. There are also too many professors who think that foreign students are more worthy than American students and will do whatever they can so that the former can succeed at the expense of the latter. America spends a great deal of taxpayer money educating foreign students- currently there are more than 800,000- because the tuition any student pays does not completely cover the expense of his education. At the graduate level, science and engineering students receive taxpayer-funded support in the form of teaching assistantships, research assistantships, fellowships, and tuition waivers.

Professor Owen asserts that Chinese prosperity has helped out the U.S. economy, an assertion that is belied by his own observation that average living standards have declined in the U.S. Further, he prognosticates that major gains will kick in when Chinese science and technology equal or are past where we are, but he does not tell on what he bases his prognostication. The economic rise of China has been possible only because of the eagerness of American business to hire Chinese nationals and to transfer technology and the fanaticism of American higher education in recruiting Chinese students. Currently, there is no evidence of indigenous technological progress in China.

Tyler Owen says that we need to have a respect for science and scientists as role models. True enough, but it would more beneficial for self-styled elites to disabuse themselves of the notion that young Americans have been so enervated by the luxury of modern amenities that too few possess the intellectual vigor to pursue careers in science and engineering.

Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse

Add a Comment

Already Registered? Log In Here.


The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.


* Designates a required field.
© National Review Online 2012
All Rights Reserved.
Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital

Gift Subscriptions
NR / Print
NR / Digital
NR Apps
iPhone/iPad
Android

NRO Apps
iPhone
Support Us
Donate
Media Kit
Contact