>I looked over that Gordon essay recommended by Doug.
>
>To explain that productivity surge (which for him is much more historically
>delimited than hiterto recognized), Gordon points less to tight labor
>markets from restricted immigration or protectionist policy than to the
>exceptionality of the tech revo built on electricity, the internal
>combustion engine, chemicals, etc.
>
>Gordon makes the argument that increased computer power
>must suffer diminishing returns just as does the increased supply of labor
>on a fixed amount of land. In short, he seems to be suggesting that
>Ricardian agricultural principles apply better to computers than past
>industrial technologies. He's truly a dismal scientist.
True, and that kind of techno-skepticism - we've exhausted the supply of possible innovations - is pretty suspect. In one of those productivity papers (there are several that cover similar ground), Gordon concedes that the long-run implications of his argument are "pessimistic." On the other hand, though, he says that he projects U.S. potential GDP growth at a level well above that of the Social Security trustees, and argues therefore that there is no SS crisis. So that's non-pessimistic.
Doug