Yes, except for the fact that the flip side of those is that software, almost by definition, is automating away jobs in other industries.
So when it gets easier / cheaper to write software, other industries will spend an increasing amount on it to replace their workers. That’s one of the reasons the software industry has continued to grow, even though it’s gotten easier to write.
Sure, but also almost by definition, using tech to replace workers in other industries will reduce the total amount of workers needed for that job as you made the tech presumably to make the job easier or faster. My post was talking about the tech industry just because that was the topic, but as you mention, tech definitely replaces jobs in all sectors.
almost by definition, using tech to replace workers in other industries will reduce the total amount of workers needed for that job
The data on this is actually uncertain. Installing ATM machines to replace bank tellers should have been a slam dunk, but didn’t really cut into bank teller total employment.
https://www.aei.org/economics/what-atms-bank-tellers-rise-robots-and-jobs/
Don’t get me wrong, the ATM was the first step in a long chain of improvements that still ought to soon make bank tellers obsolete, and the dept of labor predicts 15% lower demand next year.
But even this relatively one-for-one swap of machines for people has taken half a century, so far.
That goes back to the point I was making earlier. For some reason a bank teller is hired for the same wage for the same hours, but I can almost guarantee you that because of the ATM they spend significantly less of their work day “working” because the ATM was designed to do a significant portion of their job. There certainly is an excuse to keep them around all day, there are some unavoidable tasks that only a human can do and they come up at random times throughout the day, but the ATM has replaced many of the working hours the bank tellers used to have even if the job didn’t go away.
