Question

Don’t Blame Robots for Low Wages

The other day I found myself at a conference discussing declining wages and increasing inequality. One thing that struck me was how many of the participants just assumed that robots are a big part of the problem. But automation just isn’t a big part of the story what happened to American workers over the past 40 years. We do have a big problem, but it has very little to do with technology, and a lot to do with politics and power.

Economically speaking, a robot is anything that uses technology to do work formerly done by human beings. And robots in that sense have been transforming our economy for centuries. David Ricardo, a founding father of economics, wrote about the destructive effects of machinery in 1821. These days, when people talk about the robot destruction, they don’t usually think of things like strip mining(露天采矿) and mountaintop removal(削山开采). Yet these technologies completely transformed coal mining: Coal production almost doubled between 1950 and 2000, yet the number of coal miners fell from 470,000 to fewer than 80,000.

So the destruction brought by technological change is an old story. What’s new is the failure of workers to share in the fruits of that technological change. I’m not saying that coping with change was ever easy. But while there have always been some victims of technological progress, until the 1970s rising productivity translated into rising wages for a great majority of workers. Then the connection was broken. And it wasn’t the robots that did it.

What did? There is a growing agreement among economists that a key factor in wage decreasing has been worker’s declining bargaining power—a decline whose roots are ultimately political. Most obviously, the federal minimum wage has fallen by a third over the past half century, even as worker productivity has risen 150 percent, which rooted in politics, pure and simple.

The decline of unions, which covered a quarter of private-sector workers in 1973 but only 6 percent now, may not be as obviously political. But other countries haven’t seen the same kind of decline. What made America exceptional was a political environment deeply unfriendly to labor organizing and friendly toward union-destroying employers. And the decline of unions has made a huge difference. Consider trucking, which used to be a good job but now pays a third less than it did in the 1970s, with terrible working conditions. What made the difference? Deunionization was a big part of the story.

American workers can and should be getting a much better deal than they are. And to the extent that they aren’t, the fault lies not in our robots, but in our political leader.

1.The people present at the conference about lower wages and increasing inequality _________.

A.believed that robots have contributed to wage decline

B.agreed that robots should be used to help increase wages

C.predicted that lower wages and increasing inequality would relate to robots

D.assumed that lower wages and increasing inequality rooted in politics and power

2.The author mentions the case of the coal mining to show _________.

A.the robot destruction started from coal mining

B.the influence of the technology on jobs is not a new phenomenon

C.the number of jobs increases as a result of technological advancement

D.strip mining and mountaintop removal completely changed the coal mining industry

3.According to the passage, we know that _________.

A.the destructive effects of machinery started in 1821

B.25% of private-sector workers were covered by unions in 1973

C.rising productivity didn’t bring about rising wages until the 1970s

D.the minimum wage has decreased with the dropping of worker productivity

4.What’s the main idea of the passage?

A.Technological changes have resulted in lower wages.

B.Political leaders have intended to shift people’s attention from robots.

C.The decline in wages has resulted from bad policies rather than the application of robots.

D.Technological changes have contributed to rising wages instead of causing unemployment.

Answer

1.A

2.B

3.B

4.C

【解析】

本文是一篇议论文。本文主要就工资的下降问题造成的原因展开了讨论，作者认为工资的下降是政策原因导致的，而非科技的应用。

1.细节理解题。根据第一段的a conference discussing declining wages and increasing inequality.…how many of the participants just assumed that robots are a big part of the problem.（讨论工资下降和不平等加剧的问题……许多参与者只是认为机器人是问题的主要原因）可知，出席会议的人认为，认为机器人导致了工资的下降。故选A。

2.推理判断题。根据第二段的And robots in that sense have been transforming our economy for centuries.（几个世纪以来，机器人一直在改变着我们的经济）和下文的Yet these technologies completely transformed coal mining（这些技术彻底改变了煤炭开采）由此判断出，作者以煤矿开采为例说明技术对就业的影响并不是一个新现象。故选B。

3.细节理解题。根据第五段的The decline of unions, which covered a quarter of private-sector workers in 1973 but only 6 percent now, may not be as obviously political.（在1973年，工会使私营部门四分之一的工人获得保障）可知， 1973年有25%的私营部门工人得到了工会的保障。故选B。

4.主旨大意题。通读全文以及文章的第一段的We do have a big problem, but it has very little to do with technology, and a lot to do with politics and power.（我们确实有一个大问题，但它与技术关系不大，而与政治和权力关系很大）和最后一段内American workers can and should be getting a much better deal than they are. And to the extent that they aren’t, the fault lies not in our robots, but in our political leader.可知，美国工人可以而且应该得到比现在更好的待遇。在某种程度上，他们没得到，错不在我们的机器人，而是在我们的政治领袖。所以本文主要就工资的下降问题造成的原因展开了讨论，作者认为政策原因导致的，而非科技的应用。由此可知，C选项（工资的下降是由于糟糕的政策，而不是机器人的应用）可以概括本文内容，故选C。