自動(dòng)化會(huì)導(dǎo)致更多人失業(yè)——人們對此日益擔(dān)憂。據(jù)波爾州立大學(xué)的一項(xiàng)研究顯示，自2000年以來，美國已有約500萬個(gè)工廠的工作崗位蒸發(fā)了，其中絕大多數(shù)（88%）都是自動(dòng)化帶來的生產(chǎn)率提升所導(dǎo)致的。

至于如何扭轉(zhuǎn)這種趨勢，人們的意見卻產(chǎn)生了很大的分歧。

本周，房地產(chǎn)億萬富翁杰夫?格林在佛羅里達(dá)州的棕櫚灘主持召開了第二次“管理混亂”（Managing the Disruption）大會(huì)，本次大會(huì)討論的主題，就是如何應(yīng)對科技進(jìn)步催生的下崗潮。去年格林曾表示，機(jī)器人和人工智能技術(shù)的崛起，不僅會(huì)讓藍(lán)領(lǐng)工人下崗，也會(huì)使很多白領(lǐng)工作步入消亡，助理律師、記者、飛機(jī)駕駛員甚至醫(yī)生等職業(yè)都可能會(huì)受到影響。這番言論一時(shí)引起很大震動(dòng)。

上周，格林再次在《華盛頓郵報(bào)》上撰文談到了這個(gè)話題。他提醒到，自動(dòng)化對工作崗位的摧毀速度，可能要比新財(cái)長史蒂芬?努欽和美國總統(tǒng)特朗普預(yù)計(jì)得要快得多。上周努欽曾發(fā)表過一番頗有爭議的言論，稱他認(rèn)為自動(dòng)化技術(shù)給就業(yè)帶來的重大影響可能還得50到100年才能顯現(xiàn)出來。

然而咨詢機(jī)構(gòu)普華永道最近發(fā)布的一份報(bào)告卻顯示，美國有38%的工作面臨在2030年前被機(jī)器全面取代的“高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)”。

不過格林在本周三接受《財(cái)富》采訪時(shí)也表示，自動(dòng)化也并不完全是件壞事，隨著自動(dòng)化技術(shù)的進(jìn)一步完善和普及，它能顯著降低中產(chǎn)階層的生活成本，因此老百姓可能不需要賺很多的錢也能過活。比如使用3D打印機(jī)蓋房子，可能會(huì)將房價(jià)拉低到一個(gè)更容易接受的水平，很多家庭就不必將大部分收入用來還貸款了。

格林表示，如果3D打印機(jī)能用高密度樹脂材料“打印”出房子來，那么一套當(dāng)前造價(jià)20萬美元的房子，到時(shí)可能只需要5萬美元就能搞定。這就移除了壓在大多數(shù)家庭頭頂?shù)囊蛔笊健?/p>

能源也是普通家庭的一項(xiàng)較大的開銷。使用替代能源不失為一種很好的解決方案。如果美國開始使用太陽能給電動(dòng)汽車充電或是為家庭提供采暖，那么很多家庭也將因此省下一大筆錢。當(dāng)然，前提條件是這些替代能源的成本要低于石油。

在格林看來，如果自動(dòng)化技術(shù)真的發(fā)展到了這一步，那么一對普通的夫妻也就不必每周工作80到90個(gè)小時(shí)才能付清各種賬單了。如果他們靠更少的錢也能生活下去，也就沒有必要兩個(gè)人都出去工作了，夫妻中有一個(gè)人就可以在家里帶孩子。這反過來也就降低了青少年吸毒和早孕的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。

不過格林也坦承，他的看法“可能有些烏托邦”。而且他也發(fā)現(xiàn)，自動(dòng)化給各行各業(yè)的勞動(dòng)者都帶來了風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。

很多對自動(dòng)化表示擔(dān)憂的人也在鼓吹用所謂的“全民基本收入”來彌補(bǔ)自動(dòng)化對勞動(dòng)者的沖擊。在這一框架下，所有年齡不到加入社保體系的公民都能從聯(lián)邦政府獲得一份最低年收入保障。這個(gè)想法近年來在硅谷以及其他一些科技領(lǐng)域都很流行，很多人認(rèn)為，它不失為抵御自動(dòng)化帶來的就業(yè)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的一種好辦法。

只不過這個(gè)計(jì)劃還有一個(gè)小問題。在此次大會(huì)的發(fā)言嘉賓、美國前財(cái)長勞倫斯?薩默斯看來，美國政府是無力發(fā)放這筆“全民基本收入”的。如果這一計(jì)劃真的付諸實(shí)施，按每個(gè)成年人每人發(fā)放2.5萬美元來算，美國政府每年就要掏出約5萬億美元給全體國民發(fā)錢，比當(dāng)前美國政府的年財(cái)政收入還多了4萬億。

據(jù)《棕櫚灣郵報(bào)》報(bào)道，薩默斯對該計(jì)劃的評論是：“這道算術(shù)題幾乎是無解的?！?/p>

還有一些人想到了一些規(guī)模稍小但更有策略性的法子，比如提高學(xué)生的科技教育水平，對現(xiàn)有勞動(dòng)者進(jìn)行重新培訓(xùn)等等。上周，通用電氣公司就為波士頓地區(qū)的公立學(xué)校捐助了5000萬美元，用于提高這些學(xué)校的科學(xué)、技術(shù)、工程和數(shù)學(xué)等學(xué)科的教育質(zhì)量，使學(xué)生能夠具備這些在通用電氣看來目前最急缺的技能。

這個(gè)方向無疑是正確的，但要想在全國范圍內(nèi)解決技能缺口的問題，就需要在更大的規(guī)模上對勞動(dòng)者進(jìn)行再培訓(xùn)。然而在共和黨占多數(shù)的國會(huì)里，提高教育支出似乎并不是什么急務(wù)。

還有一些人提出，一些新興技術(shù)或許有助于提高現(xiàn)有勞動(dòng)者的生產(chǎn)率。以現(xiàn)實(shí)增強(qiáng)技術(shù)為例，它可以通過眼鏡或眼罩，將信息疊加到真實(shí)世界上。比如現(xiàn)場維修技工如果使用這種技術(shù)，就可以在AR眼鏡上隨時(shí)看到各種圖表和指令說明甚至視頻，這樣他們就不用停下來查找手冊了，工作效率也會(huì)因此顯著提高。目前，弗吉尼亞州赫恩登市的一家名叫Upskill的公司已經(jīng)開始為通用電氣和波音客戶提供類似產(chǎn)品了，而這兩家公司也為Upskill進(jìn)行了大量投資。

Upskill公司的執(zhí)行總裁瑪吉德?亞伯拉罕上周在參加通用電氣的一次活動(dòng)時(shí)表示：“這項(xiàng)技術(shù)能夠增強(qiáng)那些不需要太多專業(yè)性的員工的技能，并且提高專家員工的工作效率?！?/p>

再回到這次大會(huì)上來：格林表示，大會(huì)的多數(shù)發(fā)言者的樂觀態(tài)度讓他感到很驚訝——與會(huì)者還包括前英國首相卡梅倫、《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》專欄作家托馬斯?弗里德曼等知名人士。格林表示：“如果我也很樂觀的話，我就不會(huì)花這么多時(shí)間和精力在這次大會(huì)上了?！?/p>

在說到19世紀(jì)的工業(yè)革命與當(dāng)前的形勢有哪些區(qū)別時(shí)，格林指出，工業(yè)革命爆發(fā)后，雖然機(jī)器的力量取代了人力，但圍繞著產(chǎn)出的各種工業(yè)產(chǎn)品，也催出了一批諸如零售、記賬、機(jī)器維修和會(huì)計(jì)之類的工作。然而如今，機(jī)器人不僅正在取代體力勞動(dòng)者，人工智能也在取代腦力勞動(dòng)者。

格林最后表示：“我們無法同時(shí)與物理機(jī)器和思想機(jī)器競爭?！保ㄘ?cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：樸成奎

Fears that automation will kill more jobs continues to grow. An estimated 5 million U.S. factory jobs have evaporated since 2000 and most of those (88%) were lost to increased productivity due to automation, according to a study by Ball State University.

But opinions about what, if anything, can be done to reverse the trend differ greatly.

Real estate billionaire Jeff Greene, who hosted his second Managing the Disruption conference on the topic of job destruction and what to do about it in Palm Beach, Fla., this week, has some ideas. Last year, he raised a ruckus by saying that robotics and artificial intelligence would kill not just blue-collar factory jobs but also many white-collar careers. Paralegals, journalists, airline pilots, even surgeons could be impacted, for example.

Greene continued the drumbeat last week in a Washington Post article, warning that automation will kill jobs much faster than Steven Mnuchin, President Donald Trump's Treasury secretary, expects. Last week Mnuchin said, controversially, that he didn't think major automation-related job losses would kick in for another 50 to 100 years.

In contrast, a recent report by consultancy PricewaterhouseCoopers estimates that 38% of U.S. jobs have a "high risk" of being wiped out by automation by 2030.

Greene's take is that automation isn't entirely bad if it can be perfected and deployed to lower the cost of living for the middle class so that they wouldn't need to earn as much money to get by. For example, using 3-D printers to build homes could cut the cost of housing to a more manageable level so that families wouldn't have to devote most of their income to mortgage payments, Greene told Fortune on Wednesday.

If machines could 3-D print homes using high-density resins, a structure that now costs $200,000 might cost $50,000, Greene said. That would take a big chunk of debt off the table for most families, he said.

Another huge drain on family budgets is energy. Part of that problem could be solved by using alternative energy. Families could save money if the U.S. used solar energy to power electric cars and heat homes. Of course that assumes that the cost of alternatives goes lower than the cost of oil.

The net impact, in his opinion, is that a couple would no longer have to work 80 to 90 hours a week to pay the bills. And if they can live on less money, the need for a two-income household is lessened, allowing one parent to stay home with any children. That, in turn, reduces the risk of children turning to drugs or getting pregnant.

Greene acknowledges that his ideas are "possibly Utopian" in that he's seeing the use of automation that poses risks to workers across the spectrum in the best possible light.

Many who worry about automation also tout universal basic income as a way to make up for lost jobs. In this scenario, all citizens who are too young for Social Security would receive a flat annual payment from the federal government. It's a trendy idea in Silicon Valley and other tech enclaves, where it's seen as a way to hedge against automation-induced job losses.

One small problem: It is unaffordable, according to former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who spoke at this week's event. It would cost about $5 trillion annually, or about $4 trillion more than the country's annual income tax revenue, to pay each American adult $25,000 a year.

"It's almost impossible to make the arithmetic work," Summers said, according to The Palm Beach Post.

Others see hope in smaller, more tactical steps, like improving tech education for students and re-training current workers. Last week, General Electric contributed $50 million to the Boston Public Schools to improve science technology engineering and math (STEM) education to train students to help fill what the company sees as a gaping skills gap.

That's a step in the right direction, but retraining people on a much broader scale is needed to address skills gap nation-wide. There does not seem to be much desire in the Republican-controlled Congress to boost funding on education.

Others say technologies like augmented reality, which layers information onto the real world through connected eye glasses or goggles, could help. For example, field repair technicians could get diagrams and instructions, even video, projected into their goggles so that they can work faster and better without having to stop to consult manuals. That's technology that Upskill, a Herndon, Va.-based tech company, already provides to customers like GE (ge, -0.17%) and Boeing (ba, -0.91%), which just invested in the company.

"This technology can augment the skills of less specialized workers and help expert workers work faster," Upskill executive chairman Dr. Magid Abraham told Fortune at a GE event last week.

But back to the conference: Greene says he was struck about how optimistic most of the speakers were—the roster also included former British Prime Minister David Cameron and New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. "If I were optimistic, I wouldn't spend all this time and energy on this conference," he said.

The difference between the industrial revolution of the 19th century and the current situation, he said, is that back then machines replaced physical labor but also created many retail, bookkeeping, machine repair, and accounting jobs related to the goods produced. Now, however, the world is dealing not only with robots that do physical labor but with AI that does mental labor as well.

Says Greene: "We can't compete with both physical machines and thinking machines."