in the 45 years since the introduction of the automated teller machine,

45 年前，自從引進自動提款機，

those vending machines that dispense cash,

就是那些會吐鈔票的販賣機，

the number of human bank tellers employed in the United States

美國銀行櫃台的從業人數

has roughly doubled,

增加了將近一倍，

from about a quarter of a million to a half a million.

從 25 萬人增加到 50 萬人。

A quarter of a million in 1970 to about a half a million today,

從 1970 年的 25 萬人 成長到今日的 50 萬人，

with 100,000 added since the year 2000.

其中 10 萬人， 是 2000 年以後增加出來的。

These facts, revealed in a recent book

這些事實，都詳細記載在 最近的一本書上，

by Boston University economist James Bessen,

作者是波斯頓大學的 經濟學家，詹姆士貝森，

raise an intriguing question:

他提出了一個有趣的問題：

what are all those tellers doing,

那麼多的銀行櫃台人員都在做什麼，

and why hasn't automation eliminated their employment by now?

為什麼自動化服務 到現在還沒有讓他們失業？

If you think about it,

回想一下，

many of the great inventions of the last 200 years

過去 200 年來的偉大發明，

were designed to replace human labor.

很多都是為了取代人力的。

Tractors were developed

拖拉機的發明，

to substitute mechanical power for human physical toil.

就是為了利用機械的動力 取代辛苦的人工勞力。

Assembly lines were engineered

工廠的組裝線，

to replace inconsistent human handiwork

就是為了利用機械的穩定性，

with machine perfection.

取代手工的不穩定性。

Computers were programmed to swap out

電腦程式化就是為了 以完美無缺的數位計算能力

error-prone, inconsistent human calculation

取代人力計算時易出錯、 不一致的現象。

with digital perfection.

這些發明都發揮了作用。

These inventions have worked.

我們再也不用徒手挖溝渠，

We no longer dig ditches by hand,

不用手工鍛鐵製作工具，

pound tools out of wrought iron

甚至記帳都不用實體帳本了。

or do bookkeeping using actual books.

但美國成年人的勞工市場就業率

And yet, the fraction of US adults employed in the labor market

在現在 2016 年

is higher now in 2016

竟比 125 年前的 1890 年還要高。

than it was 125 years ago, in 1890,

而且在這 125 年間，

and it's risen in just about every decade

每 10 年都有成長。

in the intervening 125 years.

這產生了一個矛盾現象。

This poses a paradox.

機械不斷地取代掉我們的工作，

Our machines increasingly do our work for us.

但為什麼我們的勞工沒有過剩 且技術沒有被淘汰呢？

Why doesn't this make our labor redundant and our skills obsolete?

為什麼還是有那麼多的工作岡位？

Why are there still so many jobs?

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

今晚，我會試著回答這些問題，

I'm going to try to answer that question tonight,

並說明這對我們未來的工作 有甚麼意義，

and along the way, I'm going to tell you what this means for the future of work

以及自動化對我們社會

and the challenges that automation does and does not pose

所帶來的衝擊和無法撼動的地方。

for our society.

為什麼有這麼多的工作崗位？

Why are there so many jobs?

這實際上涉及到兩個 經濟學的基本原則。

There are actually two fundamental economic principles at stake.

一個是與人類的聰明才智

One has to do with human genius

及創造力有關。

and creativity.

另一個與人類貪得無厭的天性有關，

The other has to do with human insatiability,

或者你可以叫它做「貪婪」。

or greed, if you like.

我先從 O 型環原則談起，

I'm going to call the first of these the O-ring principle,

這個原則決定了我們工作的類型。

and it determines the type of work that we do.

第二個原則是 「永不知足 」原則，

The second principle is the never-get-enough principle,

它決定了會有多少個 實際存在的工作崗位。

and it determines how many jobs there actually are.

我們先從 O 型環開始。

Let's start with the O-ring.

ATM，自動提款機，

ATMs, automated teller machines,

它給銀行櫃台人員的就業機會 帶來了兩種不同的作用。

had two countervailing effects on bank teller employment.

各位都知道，ATM 取代了很多 櫃台人員的工作。

As you would expect, they replaced a lot of teller tasks.

每家分行的櫃台人員 數量大約減少了三分之一。

The number of tellers per branch fell by about a third.

但很快銀行就發現 設置新分行的成本變便宜了。

But banks quickly discovered that it also was cheaper to open new branches,

同期內，分行的數量 成長了將近 40% 。

and the number of bank branches increased by about 40 percent

結果就是，分行越多， 櫃台人員越多。

in the same time period.

但這些銀行職員做的工作 與之前有點不同。

The net result was more branches and more tellers.

隨著他們常規的現金業務減少，

But those tellers were doing somewhat different work.

他們變得不太像出納人員

As their routine, cash-handling tasks receded,

反而更像是個推銷人員，

they became less like checkout clerks

需要與客戶培養感情，

and more like salespeople,

幫他們解決問題，

forging relationships with customers,

並推銷他們新產品， 像是信用卡、貸款、投資型產品：

solving problems

更多的銀行職員從事著 對腦力認知需求很高的工作。

and introducing them to new products like credit cards, loans and investments:

一個普遍的原則就是，

more tellers doing a more cognitively demanding job.

我們從事的工作，

There's a general principle here.

大都需要多樣化的技能，

Most of the work that we do

既要腦力又要體力，

requires a multiplicity of skills,

既要求專業素養又要敏銳的直覺，

and brains and brawn,

用愛迪生的話來說， 就是天才加勤奮。

technical expertise and intuitive mastery,

總的來說，其中一些工作自動化了，

perspiration and inspiration in the words of Thomas Edison.

但不代表其它的工作就不必要。

In general, automating some subset of those tasks

事實上，反而變得更重要，

doesn't make the other ones unnecessary.

自動化反而增加了他們的經濟價值。

In fact, it makes them more important.

我來舉一個明顯的例子。

It increases their economic value.

1986 年，挑戰者號太空船

Let me give you a stark example.

在起飛不到兩分鐘， 失事爆炸，墜毀在地表上。

In 1986, the space shuttle Challenger

事後發現，肇事的原因，

exploded and crashed back down to Earth

原來是推進火箭上 一個不起眼的 O 型環，

less than two minutes after takeoff.

前一天晚上在發射台上凍僵了，

The cause of that crash, it turned out,

在發射不久後失效，引發了悲劇。

was an inexpensive rubber O-ring in the booster rocket

這個耗資十幾億美金的巨大工程，

that had frozen on the launchpad the night before

結果是一個不起眼的 O 型環，

and failed catastrophically moments after takeoff.

決定了是發射成功，

In this multibillion dollar enterprise

還是失敗造成 七位太空人的死亡悲劇。

that simple rubber O-ring

這場悲劇催生了一個巧妙的比喻──

made the difference between mission success

《O 型環經濟理論》，

and the calamitous death of seven astronauts.

由哈佛經濟學家麥可克雷姆

An ingenious metaphor for this tragic setting

在挑戰者號失事後所命名。

is the O-ring production function,

《O型環經濟理論》指出， 一項工作的誕生

named by Harvard economist Michael Kremer

是由一系列互相連結的步驟

after the Challenger disaster.

所組成的鏈，

The O-ring production function conceives of the work

每一處連結都必須牢固 才能保證任務的成功。

as a series of interlocking steps,

一旦有任何環節出問題，

links in a chain.

該任務、產品或服務

Every one of those links must hold for the mission to succeed.

就會失敗。

If any of them fails,

這種不確定的緊張情況， 有著一種令人驚嘆的積極影響，

the mission, or the product or the service,

因為它可以改善

comes crashing down.

過程中任一環節的可靠性，

This precarious situation has a surprisingly positive implication,

並對其它環節的改善， 起了價值增加的作用。

which is that improvements

具體來說，如果大多數的連結 都很脆弱且很容易壞，

in the reliability of any one link in the chain

那麼每個環節的可靠與否，

increases the value of improving any of the other links.

就顯得不那麼重要了。

Concretely, if most of the links are brittle and prone to breakage,

反正很有可能其它的東西也會壞掉。

the fact that your link is not that reliable

但一旦其它的環節 變得相形穩固可靠時，

is not that important.

每一個環節就變得很重要了。

Probably something else will break anyway.

到了一個極限， 每一個環節都是勝敗的關鍵。

But as all the other links become robust and reliable,

O 型環對挑戰者號很重要的原因，

the importance of your link becomes more essential.

是因為其它環節都運作地很完美。

In the limit, everything depends upon it.

如果挑戰者號的太空設備

The reason the O-ring was critical to space shuttle Challenger

類似 Widows 2000 作業系統──

is because everything else worked perfectly.

（笑聲）

If the Challenger were kind of the space era equivalent

O 型環的可靠性就不那麼重要了，

of Microsoft Windows 2000 --

因為機械會直接當機。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

the reliability of the O-ring wouldn't have mattered

這裡有個更宏觀的觀點，

because the machine would have crashed.

人類所扮演的角色就像 O 型環。

(Laughter)

沒錯，ATM 是可以 作一些現金交易的任務，

Here's the broader point.

速度也比櫃台人員快，

In much of the work that we do, we are the O-rings.

但卻無法完全取代櫃台人員。

Yes, ATMs could do certain cash-handling tasks

因為他們的問題解決能力，

faster and better than tellers,

及他們維持客戶關係的能力， 增加了他們的重要性。

but that didn't make tellers superfluous.

同樣的原則也適用於蓋房子、

It increased the importance of their problem-solving skills

診斷及照顧病人、

and their relationships with customers.

或者在教室裡

The same principle applies if we're building a building,

向一整間的高中生教課。

if we're diagnosing and caring for a patient,

一旦我們的工具改進了，

or if we are teaching a class

科技反而放大了我們的引響力，

to a roomful of high schoolers.

提高了我們專業度、

As our tools improve,

判斷力及創造力的重要性。

technology magnifies our leverage

講到這，帶出了第二原則：

and increases the importance of our expertise

永不知足。

and our judgment and our creativity.

你可能會想，好， O 型環理論，我懂了，

And that brings me to the second principle:

人類所從事的工作將會很重要。

never get enough.

這些任務無法由機械完成， 但又不能不做。

You may be thinking, OK, O-ring, got it,

但這無法說明我們還需要多少工作。

that says the jobs that people do will be important.

如果你仔細想想， 這有點無法自圓其說，

They can't be done by machines, but they still need to be done.

一旦我們對某樣東西 有了足夠的生產力，

But that doesn't tell me how many jobs there will need to be.

我們基本上不就會自動失業了嗎？

If you think about it, isn't it kind of self-evident

1900 年，40% 的美國就業人口，

that once we get sufficiently productive at something,

從事的工作都是農業。

we've basically worked our way out of a job?

如今，農業人口比例已經少於 2%。

In 1900, 40 percent of all US employment

為什麼農夫會變得這麼少？

was on farms.

不是因為我們吃得少。

Today, it's less than two percent.

（笑聲）

Why are there so few farmers today?

百年來農業生產力的成長，

It's not because we're eating less.

讓我們現在只需數百萬個農夫，

(Laughter)

就能養活全國的 3.2 億人口。

A century of productivity growth in farming

這真的是個很大的進步，

means that now, a couple of million farmers

但這也意味著農產業中， 也只剩這麼多類似 O 型環的工作。

can feed a nation of 320 million.

所以很明顯地， 科技會消彌掉工作機會。

That's amazing progress,

農業只是其中一個案例。

but it also means there are only so many O-ring jobs left in farming.

還有很多類似的案例。

So clearly, technology can eliminate jobs.

但事實是，一個單一產品、 服務或產業的表現，

Farming is only one example.

不能代表總體經濟的實質表現。

There are many others like it.

很多我們現在從事的產業──

But what's true about a single product or service or industry

健康、醫療、

has never been true about the economy as a whole.

理財、保險、

Many of the industries in which we now work --

電子、電腦──

health and medicine,

在上一世紀僅有少數人在從業 或根本還不存在。

finance and insurance,

很多我們花很多錢消費的產品──

electronics and computing --

空調、休旅車、

were tiny or barely existent a century ago.

電腦、手機設備──

Many of the products that we spend a lot of our money on --

這些在上一世紀，不是貴得要死，

air conditioners, sport utility vehicles,

不然就是還沒有被發明出來。

computers and mobile devices --

當自動化騰出了我們的空閒時間， 增進了各個領域的可能性，

were unattainably expensive,

我們就會發明新產品、 新想法、產生新的服務，

or just hadn't been invented a century ago.

來控制我們的注意力、

As automation frees our time, increases the scope of what is possible,

占據我們的時間，

we invent new products, new ideas, new services

並刺激消費。

that command our attention,

你可能會想有些東西 真的是多餘的──

occupy our time

極限瑜珈、冒險旅遊、

and spur consumption.

口袋怪獸──

You may think some of these things are frivolous --

我都同意。

extreme yoga, adventure tourism,

但人們就是喜歡這些東西， 而且很願意在它們身上付出心力。

Pokémon GO --

2015 年的一般勞動階層，

and I might agree with you.

如果想獲得 1915 年的 一般生活水準，

But people desire these things, and they're willing to work hard for them.

只要每年工作 17 周就可達到，

The average worker in 2015

只要三分之一的時間。

wanting to attain the average living standard in 1915

但大部分的人不會那樣做。

could do so by working just 17 weeks a year,

他們寧願選擇努力工作

one third of the time.

來賺取科技所帶給他們的精神食糧。

But most people don't choose to do that.

豐富的物質永遠 消除不了內心的空虛。

They are willing to work hard

套一句經濟學家 托斯丹范伯倫說的話：

to harvest the technological bounty that is available to them.

「發明是需求之母。 」

Material abundance has never eliminated perceived scarcity.

現在……

In the words of economist Thorstein Veblen,

如果你同意上述的兩個觀點，

invention is the mother of necessity.

O 型環原則以及永不知足原則，

Now ...

那你就會認同我說的，

So if you accept these two principles,

一定會有工作岡位產生。

the O-ring principle and the never-get-enough principle,

那是否意味著都不用煩惱了呢？

then you agree with me.

自動化、就業機會、 機器人和工作──

There will be jobs.

它們自己會自動幫我們安排好？

Does that mean there's nothing to worry about?

不。

Automation, employment, robots and jobs --

這不是我的論點。

it'll all take care of itself?

自動化為我們帶來了財富，

No.

讓我們可以用 更少的時間做更多的事。

That is not my argument.

沒有經濟規則說，

Automation creates wealth

我們會好好地善用 自動化所帶來的財富，

by allowing us to do more work in less time.

這的確值得我們擔心。

There is no economic law

想想這兩個國家，

that says that we will use that wealth well,

挪威和沙烏地阿拉伯。

and that is worth worrying about.

兩個國家都有豐盛的石油，

Consider two countries,

他們的錢好像是直接從 地底下的洞口噴上來的。

Norway and Saudi Arabia.

（笑聲）

Both oil-rich nations,

但兩個國家利用這筆財富 幫助人民繁榮、

it's like they have money spurting out of a hole in the ground.

幫助人民成功的方式卻不相同。

(Laughter)

挪威是個欣欣向榮的民主國家。

But they haven't used that wealth equally well to foster human prosperity,

總體而言，它的人民都過很舒服。

human prospering.

國家人民的幸福指數排名，

Norway is a thriving democracy.

基本上都在第一到第四之間徘徊。

By and large, its citizens work and play well together.

而沙烏地阿拉伯卻是個 君主專制的國家，

It's typically numbered between first and fourth

很多人民的生活水平， 都沒有機會可以獲得改善。

in rankings of national happiness.

國家人民的幸福指數， 全球排名基本上都落在 35 名左右，

Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy

這麼有錢的國家，排名竟這麼落後。

in which many citizens lack a path for personal advancement.

只是讓大家比較一下，

It's typically ranked 35th among nations in happiness,

美國大都排在第 12 到第 13 之間。

which is low for such a wealthy nation.

這兩個國家的差別

Just by way of comparison,

不在他們有錢與否，

the US is typically ranked around 12th or 13th.

也不在科技是否發達。

The difference between these two countries

而是他們的制度。

is not their wealth

挪威長期來致力於

and it's not their technology.

建立一個充滿機會 與經濟活躍的社會。

It's their institutions.

雖然沙烏地阿拉伯的 生活水平已經有提升，

Norway has invested to build a society

但人民仍飽受壓抑。

with opportunity and economic mobility.

兩個國家都很有錢，

Saudi Arabia has raised living standards

但人民卻有著不同的幸福。

while frustrating many other human strivings.

接下來，我要來談談 我們目前所面臨的挑戰，

Two countries, both wealthy,

自動化給我們所帶來的挑戰。

not equally well off.

這挑戰不是因為我們會沒有工作。

And this brings me to the challenge that we face today,

美國自金融海嘯以來，

the challenge that automation poses for us.

已經增加了 1400 萬個就業機會。

The challenge is not that we're running out of work.

我們的挑戰是，這些工作

The US has added 14 million jobs

都不是好工作，

since the depths of the Great Recession.

因為很多人都不適任

The challenge is that many of those jobs

目前已經創造出來的工作。

are not good jobs,

美國以及其它 已開發國家的就業環境，

and many citizens cannot qualify for the good jobs

現在看起來像是個啞鈴，

that are being created.

兩端都特別重。

Employment growth in the United States and in much of the developed world

其中一端，

looks something like a barbell

這群人受高等教育、有高薪工作，

with increasing poundage on either end of the bar.

像是醫生、護士、 程式設計師、工程師，

On the one hand,

市場及銷售經理。

you have high-education, high-wage jobs

這些工作的就業機會相當穩固， 就業機會會持續成長。

like doctors and nurses, programmers and engineers,

同樣地，低技術工作的 就業機會成長也很穩固，

marketing and sales managers.

低學歷工作像是餐廳服務生、