[robinhoode]

> This is a bad deal. Capital makes the marginal worker more productive, not less.

Why should workers care about being more productive if they do not reap the rewards in terms of wages?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decoupling_of_wages_from_produ...

[zozbot234]

Total compensation involves more than just wages. Providing benefits such as healthcare coverage is inherently expensive, since productivity gains in healthcare have been limited.

[sailfast]

At least in the United States we are not getting this benefit.

If AI does begin to really crater the job market, only owners of AI (yes including shareholders) will benefit but most folks do not own stock - or at least do not own any significant amount of stock.

[grigri907]

The point still remains, it's not like I get double the healthcare if I increase productivity.

[IAmBroom]

A bad-faith argument.

Workers do not benefit in increased compensation of any sort when AI increases company productivity.

[triceratops]

That's not such an ironclad argument lmao. If we are to believe Baumol's cost disease, rising productivity in other sectors is partly responsible for healthcare cost increase.

Obviously I don't seriously believe we should depress productivity so that nurses make less money and hospital stays are cheaper. But, you know, it doesn't make it untrue.

[tt24]

This concept has been thoroughly debunked. Wages and productivity track each other very very well.

[insane_dreamer]

That has not been true since the early 70s. Increases in productivity are multiples of the increase in wages since then.

World Economic Forum: https://www.weforum.org/stories/2020/11/productivity-workfor...