Redistributing income in times of technological revolution
Today the focus tends to be on growth without asking who will benefit from future economic development
Today, in the West, the subject of income redistribution arouses heated debates with strong ideological overtones - essentially because 'redistribution', in this context, primarily implies taxation. It would therefore perhaps be preferable and less confrontational to focus on distribution: that is, on how to create conditions that allow everyone to benefit from the new wealth generated, at the moment it is generated, without having to redistribute it forcibly through taxation.
The theme of income distribution has been central to the theories of classical economists, from Smith to Ricardo and beyond. Ricardo, for example, analysed the clash of interests between classes: famous is the debate on the Corn Laws, the restrictions on the import of grain from Europe introduced in 1815, which for Ricardo would have harmed both workers and factory owners by increasing the share of income taken by large landowners.
It seems obvious to ask who will benefit from future economic development. Yet, today the focus tends to be on growth as such. The implication is that promoting economic growth is enough, because everyone will benefit: growth would be "a tidal wave that lifts all boats", as US President J.F. Kennedy said in 1963. Unfortunately, this is not the case, or at least there is no reason, based on historical evidence, to argue that this will happen in the short or medium term. Going back to Ricardo's time, i.e. the First Industrial Revolution, we now know that the working classes had to wait about a century before they really started to benefit from progress.
La Rivoluzione Industriale è un ottimo esempio d’una fase di crescita economica, indotta da una profonda trasformazione tecnologica, che lasciò indietro, in tutto o in parte, larghi strati della popolazione per un periodo molto lungo. Siccome oggi ci troviamo forse all’inizio di una nuova rivoluzione tecnologica, innescata dall’intelligenza artificiale (IA), dobbiamo chiederci sotto quali condizioni possiamo attenderci un’equa distribuzione della nuova ricchezza che verrà creata. Per essere chiari, tali condizioni, al momento, mancano: la storia lo suggerisce con evidenza. Alla fine del XIX secolo, la Rivoluzione Industriale aveva finito per produrre una concentrazione della ricchezza senza precedenti, anche per la comparsa di grandi imprese o cartelli con ambizioni monopolistiche. A partire dagli Stati Uniti, si diffuse la preoccupazione di come difendere l’interesse dei consumatori dalla rapacità dei monopoli: di fatto, si riproponeva in forma nuova un contrasto di interessi, tra i lavoratori
Unfortunately, the United States of today does not have the same concerns. The turning point was in 2000, when Microsoft, convicted of violating the Sherman Act itself, got off almost scot-free. It was a clear signal to all would-be 'Big Tech' companies: they were free to grow into de facto global monopolists.
