What did you do during the lockdown?

Early in the Covid-19 pandemic, workers were kept from their workplaces in numbers never observed before. Workers not considered to be in “essential jobs,” or “essential employers” were directed to work from home or not work at all. That made for eerie scenes of  empty streets with traffic signals blinking, and restaurants and bars with big TVs blaring but no customers.

Knowing that technology is threatening to take jobs now filled by people, could we have just had a glimpse of that future world? In 1930 economist John Maynard Keynes predicted that within 100 years – by 2030 – “technological unemployment” would reduce the work week to just 15 hours. Finding new uses for human labor would not keep up with the loss of jobs due to technology. A new book by Daniel Susskind, titled A World Without Work: Technology, Automation, and How We Should Respond, continues this discussion. He agrees that what he calls “task encroachment” by machines will result in too few jobs available for the number of human workers.

Susskind accepts that less demand for work is inevitable, although not likely in the next ten years, but the trend presents problems that need to be taken very seriously. While it may sound appealing to reduce weekly hours of work to 15, or perhaps have no paid work at all, Susskind notes that paid employment plays an important role in individual self-esteem. Although a 15-hour work week is not on the horizon, total hours worked per year has decreased more than 10% over the last 50 years, on average, for countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Reflect, if you will, on what you did in the early weeks of the coronavirus lockdown. Did you work from home, or did you start an exercise routine? Did you work puzzles, bake bread, start a hobby, watch Netflix, visit via Zoom, join a study group or book club? Would such activities be an appealing permanent way of life for you? Or would they come up short of providing you with a “meaningful life?”

These are issues Susskind addresses, and his solutions may not be appealing. Anyone working for pay, and the businesses they run, will be taxed to support their communities at all levels. For those people who “are not able to contribute through the work that they do,” he proposes a “conditional basic income,” income that would have requirements the recipient engage in some activity in support of the community.

Those without paid work would divide their lives “between activities that they choose and others that their community requires them to do.” Susskind suggests that community activities could include politics, artistic and cultural pursuits, or educational, household and caregiving activities.

Wide-spread technological unemployment will happen gradually. As it unfolds, an increasing number of job types will no longer be performed by humans. No doubt some people will find fulfilling paid employment and, assuming they are satisfied with the pay they receive, will choose that route over a conditional basic income. Others may find satisfaction in performing community service or decide to seek reskilling in order to fill contemporary jobs. And all groups may benefit from a shortened work week.

So, what did you do in the first weeks of the lockdown?