Cassandra, make room for modern life
I recently spent two days at a hotel and never talked to a
soul. Is that a good thing or bad?
The queue at the registration counter looked to be at least
20 minutes long. Bored and looking around, I spotted a small kiosk nearby.
Above the ATM-like device was a sign saying it could be used
for check-in.
With some hesitation, I got out of line. Into one slot, I
put my credit card. My reservation appeared on screen. The machine offered me a
choice of three available rooms, with a brief description of each ("21st
floor, view of the street, queen bed, nonsmoking"). I pressed the touchscreen to pick the one I wanted.
Next, I chose the number of keys I needed. After some
rumbling, an electronic key popped out along with a receipt with my room number
and welcoming me to Hilton Hotels. Soon I was in my room.
When it was time to depart, I used the by-now familiar video
checkout. Total human contact while at the hotel: Zero.
Some will lament this as a further sign of the
dehumanization of everyday living. Not me. I've never
found my conversations with desk clerks especially scintillating. And by avoiding a long wait in line, I was probably in a
much better mood when I later joined up with some real humans for dinner.
Yet there is another aspect that is more worrisome.
My experience at the Hilton was a concrete example of an
oft- heard but somewhat vague notion: productivity growth. More broadly, it was
an illustration of how computers, the Internet and
electronics are transforming the nation's economy. If widely used, the kiosks
will mean the Hilton needs to hire fewer clerks, saving it money and boosting
its profitability.
That's great if all you care about is the creation of wealth
(and no question, productivity growth is critically related
to real economic growth). But how about if you care
about jobs?
For writ large, the check-in kiosk is a good example of this
season's hottest domestic political issue: the jobless recovery. It's jobless
precisely because places like the Hilton are figuring out how to make more
money while using fewer people. And it creates the
seeming paradox of an economy expanding while people remain unemployed.
So I sat in my hotel room and wondered: Should I get a bat
and smash the kiosks? Hold picket signs telling people to go to hotels with
live check-in clerks?
If so, I wouldn't have been the first. In 1811, English
textile workers - followers of (the probably mythical) Ned Ludd
- rioted, smashing the machines that were replacing them. Nearly two centuries
later, the fears that propelled the Luddites can still readily be found. Whether it's because of
globalization or the frenetic change in technology, there is a sense among many
that this time, we've gone too far; that this time, perhaps, humans will no
longer have anything to do.
Don't believe it. The jobless recovery may be a political
problem for George W. Bush, but it's only temporary, a matter of timing, not
fundamentals. An easy prediction: Whether Bush or John Kerry wins in November,
the number of jobs created by the
Why the confidence in that prediction?
It has less to do with economics and more with human nature. Humans are basically smart, adaptable creatures. They learn new
skills, figure out new things to occupy their time and, in general, end up
better off than they were before. Cassandras have
worried about the loss of jobs since the Industrial Revolution began. They've
always been wrong before and they are just as wrong now.
Yet how about the desk clerks at the
Hilton? Suppose all they know is how to clerk?
Their problem is the soft underbelly of the so-called
"creative destruction" that results from productivity gains. In
general, it's a good thing. But when it comes to
specifics - to individual people - it can wreak havoc.
And in truth, there is no good
answer. Sure, one can offer training and assistance in finding a new career.
Yet for the uninterested, the unlucky or the unable,
that may not be enough.
I believe firmly that technologies such as those on display
at the Hilton are good things. As a society, we're richer for them;
individually, most of us are too.
But not all. Some will be left behind.
Talk back to Tom Keane at tomkeane@tomkeane.com.