[Robert Gordon] thinks robots aren't going to destroy many jobs. And that's a problem. [circa 2016-2017]

https://www.vox.com/a/new-economy-future/robert-gordon-interview

For the present day:

https://fortune.com/2026/05/27/ai-productivity-internet-boom-solow-paradox/

Published before the present "AI boom" or "AI bubble".

What do you think about Robert Gordon? Should you have a flair for him? Regardless, I chose Daron Acemoglu because he is a techno-pessimist on automation.

I think job destruction through advanced artificial intelligence (which I don't think we're even close to achieving) is a necessary but not sufficient condition for more prosperity. That technology will increase total factor productivity.

So, in a way, to increase productivity, jobs have to be destroyed. I would imagine such a world to have some positives not yet manifested in the real world, such as being able to get into a car that can take your anywhere and not drive it. That would require an AI with almost human-level capability that can function in complex environments.

I said this in 2023:

The forecast of the Metaculus pros seems to corroborate my pessimistic framework. There is no Solow's paradox concerning the anemic growth of the 2010s and 2020s; it is just that smartphones and generative AI are not capable of generating torrid economic and productivity growth.

https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1677547/metaculus_pro_predictors_reject_tony_seba_and_ray/

I wouldn't be that against neoliberalism or whatever if John Maynard Keynes was correct about people only working 15 hours a week in 2030.