Name: 全球化、機器人和全民基本收入。傑森-弗曼關於未來工作的看法 (Globalization, robots, and universal basic income: Jason Furman on the future of work)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T08:20:52.000Z
Duration: 6 min 20 s
Description: 【看影片學英語】數萬部 YouTube 影片，搭配英漢字典即點即查，輕鬆掌握單字發音與用法，長久累積看電影不必再看字幕。

Globalization is a fact. A lot of globalization is

because of technological improvements that

祈使句型

enable it; some is because of policy choices.

Unbalanced globalization is good for the working class,

but it comes with really big downsides and

we need to do a better job of dealing with those downsides.

you know, our globalization problem isn't because

other countries are unfair to us. So if your goal is

to make other countries more fair to us, that's

going to do very little to solve the problem.

The bulk of what we need to do manage globalization

better isn't in the international arena at all.

It's in our domestic policies, and what we do to

help educate and train our workers to succeed,

what we do to help our workers be more mobile

from place to place in the economy, and to let

our businesses have the infrastructure to take

Most important is what we can do to equip people

to succeed in a world with globalization, a world

with artificial intelligence, changing technology.

If you look just at training right now we

States on training (labor-market programs). That's the lowest of any of

the advanced economies in the oecd. So I think

that's something that we actually just need to

invest more in. Now we also need to be smart about

those investments. Training programs have a mixed record.

some have been bad, some of have been good, and we need

good. Community colleges is one where the

evidence is overwhelmingly strong for it.

That's something where we've made very little

A lot of it depends on the person's age. If the person is

30, 35 -- there is training that can help. But you

know, a lot of what we can do is invest also in

their children, and their jobs, and their economic

future. And there is a huge amount we can do.

By the time you're 55 or 60, we need to have

a more honest conversation and say, you know what,

if you used to have a job making $70,000, and the best

you can do now is $40,000, we're not gonna spend

$15,000 training you and get nothing out of

it. We'll just give you $15,000 in cash. You'll

get it every year for the next couple of years.

And it's sometimes called wage insurance and

that eases some of the transition helps keep

The unemployment rate being below four percent

business cycle. We have really strong demand.

The fact, though, that 12 percent of men between the

age of 25 and 54 aren't working and aren't trying

to find a job -- that's a really big problem.

That's a problem that has been decades in the making.

It wasn't caused by the recession, although it was

exacerbated by the recession, and it's not a

problem that we could solve with monetary or

fiscal policy. It's something we need to make

to deal with. So I would increase demand for

those workers by, for example, investing in

infrastructure. I would make it easier to find a

unemployment insurance program to make it much

more of a job placement or even apprenticeship

education and training -- it's not gonna work for

I think those are three steps that we could take.

When it comes to women, all those steps would help

United States moved more in line with the rest of the world

in terms of subsidies for child care, paid leave,

more flexible workplaces, to enable more women, especially, to work.

really good at flexibility in labor markets. We're

really bad at security in labor markets. And the

places that have been most successful, like the

Nordic countries, have combined the two of

those. If people had more security they would

feel free to take a little bit more of a risk --

they'd be a little bit less worried about the

And we could make our labor markets function better.

I tend to be a little bit "small-c" conservative

that if they're making too big a change, it makes

me nervous. Universal basic income would require

nearly doubling income taxes in this country.

I think it's based on the premise that there

won't be jobs for people. I think our premise

should be that there will be jobs for people.

The one big idea that I do have some sympathy for, and

it might be worth thinking more about, would

be a larger-scale system of wage subsidies that

as much at your job, the government would pay [you].