Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, a 15th-century Italian scholar, wanted to know everything there was to know. Nobody in the 21st century could entertain such a hope, except if he really knew nothing about the world. Are we lucky enough to have an American exception under our eyes? (On Pico, see Henri de Lubac, Pic de la Mirandole, Paris, 1974.)
In a social media post supporting the demand of a trade union (the International Longshoremen Association or ILA) to block automation at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports, the president-elect of the United States wrote:
There has been a lot of discussion having to do with “automation” on United States docks. I’ve studied automation, and know just about everything there is to know about it. The amount of money saved is nowhere near the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen. Foreign companies have … got record profits, and I’d rather these foreign companies spend it on the great men and women on our docks, than machinery, which is expensive, and which will constantly have to be replaced. In the end, there’s no gain for them, and I hope that they will understand how important an issue this is for me. For the great privilege of accessing our markets, these foreign companies should hire our incredible American Workers, instead of laying them off, and sending those profits back to foreign countries.
I think the qualification “just about” is not enough to save Mr. Trump from the claim that he is the 21st-century Pico. To know “just about everything there is to know” about automation at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports, one would have to be capable of answering, on the basis of credible theories and empirical studies one understands, the following questions—and this is just a sample of broad questions (hint: economics helps):
- How does automation affect production functions, product prices, as well as the production possibility frontier (ppf) of an economy?
- How does automation affect employment and real wages, both inside and outside the industry under consideration? Test your understanding by applying your conclusion to, say, American agriculture (whose proportion of the labor force decreased from 84% in 1810 to about 1.5% today).
- What impact did automation have on the Industrial Revolution? What would likely have happened to workers’ wages and general prosperity if the early-19th-century Luddites had won their combat?
- Are port operators and maritime companies willing to pay more or less for dockworkers who work with less capital and equipment and are thus less productive? How, and how long, can the companies and their shareholders be compelled to pay more?
- How can we compare the harm done to the shareholders’ families with “the distress, hurt, and harm it causes for American Workers, in this case, our Longshoremen”? How are such comparisons of utility scientifically possible?
- What is the elasticity of substitution of demand (foreign and domestic) of the services of East and Gulf Coast American ports for West Coast American ports?
- What is the elasticity of substitution of maritime shipping for air freight by American exporters and importers?
- To which extent does a relative cost and price increase at East Coast American ports translate into the substitution of shipping from the East to the West, or of maritime shipping for air shipping?
- How is remuneration related to productivity? How would stopping automation at East Coast and Gulf Coast ports affect the relative remuneration of the incredible American Workers at East and Gulf Coast ports compared to the no less incredible American workers of West Coast ports?
- Should containers and bar codes, which the ILA also unsuccessfully opposed some decades ago, have been stopped? What would have been the likely consequences?
- What would be the consequences of presently banning containers and barcodes (or, say, computers) on our incredible American Workers’ wages?
- How and for whom is a political system useful in which policies are decided according to how important an issue is for the main ruler (“for me”)?
- Why is the most efficient American container port at the 53rd rank of 405 such ports in the World Bank’s Container Port Performance Index (2023), preceded by a few Latin American ports and a large number of Asian ones?
- How can machines that “constantly have to be replaced” ever be profitable? Could this depend on the discounted difference between their productivity and cost over time? Or, to quote George Will, will America “be made great again using only machines that last forever”? Are workers themselves eternal and can they never go on strike?
- What would be the effect of the direct or (through trade union privileges) indirect control of the costs and prices of American ports on the efficient use of knowledge in society? How useful is F.A. Hayek’s analysis of this general issue in his 1945 American Economic Review article “The Use of Knowledge in Society”?
For the keywords “economics automation American maritime ports”, Google Scholar shows 25,800 results excluding citations, of which 15,600 refer to studies published over the past two years. The titles range from “Automation in Logistics Port and Freight Transport With Blockchain Technology” (Transportation Research Procedia) to “Investment in Infrastructure and Trade: The Case of Ports” (National Bureau of Economic Research). A modern Pico would have a lot of work to do if he wants to know just about everything of even a tiny part of everything there is to know.
******************************
The featured image of this post is just a surrealistic shadow of what I instructed DALL-E to do. Interestingly, though, and perhaps by happenstance, the AI bot chose the name of the ship.
READER COMMENTS
Craig
Dec 22 2024 at 11:40am
Trump shouldn’t be involved and neither should Biden:
“As our nation climbs out of the aftermath of Hurricane Helene, dockworkers will play an essential role in getting communities the resources they need. Now is not the time for ocean carriers to refuse to negotiate a fair wage for these essential workers while raking in record profits. My Administration will be monitoring for any price gouging activity that benefits foreign ocean carriers, including those on the USMX board.”
From the point of view of the longshoreman though I will say that if you are presented with a situation where you are needed ‘today’ but won’t be needed ‘tomorrow’ then you should be attempting to extort as much money out of them today as humanly possible.
Pierre Lemieux
Dec 22 2024 at 12:01pm
Craig: “From the point of view of the longshoreman…”: That is, if you are an immoral or at least amoral longshoreman without any understanding of the world and an incapacity to reason about the world that your children may be prisoners of. Would you hire such a person as a babysitter? A good book on the theory behind this is James Buchanan’s short book Why I, Too, Am Not a Conservative.
This being said, Gordon Tullock might have replied that in a free society, somebody can be as greedy as he wants. But in a free society, of course, nobody would have the coercive power to loot other people.
Jose Pablo
Dec 22 2024 at 1:40pm
Yes, he knows everything.
https://www.wsj.com/economy/trade/trump-warns-europe-to-buy-more-u-s-oil-and-gas-or-face-tariffs-1bc4d16b
He knows, for instance, what individual Americans should be selling to individual Europeans and what should these bastards (the Europeans) be buying.
I wonder what happens in Trump’s “all-encompassing economic model” when the Europeans use all the US$ brought into their hands by this “tremendous” trade deficit to buy goods and services, instead of what they are willing to buy now.
What are they buying now with this US$? Why is better that they buy oil and gas than whatever they are buying now?
It should be great to have access to Trump’s macro model!!
Ahmed Fares
Dec 22 2024 at 3:14pm
re: “labor push” versus “labor pull”
An interesting article I was reading about the transition from agriculture to manufacturing.
Why Did the Industrial Revolution Happen?
The above article links to this study.
Structural Change Out of Agriculture: Labor Push versus Labor Pull
steve
Dec 22 2024 at 7:39pm
Trump has declared himself a stable genius who knows more than the generals and as much ormore than the doctors about their respective crafts. It’s part of his schtick but it’s sad that so many of his followers seem to think it’s true.
On this specific topic the Construction Physics guy had a piece on this. Automation results are mixed. Ports in Asia generally perform best but they arent necessarily automated. Some ports have performed worse after automating and the worst performing parts in the US already partially automated, as is its best high volume port, NY-NJ. If you want a much better idea how automation works and rankings of ports it’s at the link. But, while it’s not clear automation will improve ports or reduce costs as the author points out automation is presently the worst it will ever be. Its only going to improve.
https://www.construction-physics.com/p/do-us-ports-need-more-automation
Steve
Pierre Lemieux
Dec 22 2024 at 10:56pm
Steve: This Potter article you link to is very good. His point that automation is, like any production process, not necessarily good is important and I should have mentioned it. Like anything, it is a matter of prices–what is the production function of the port, what are the input prices, and what the ultimate consumers are willing to pay–besides the physical constraints and the local conditions. No all-knowing politico, no engineer, no economist, and no guru knows what are the most efficient production processes in particular circumstances. Only competition can discover that. It doesn’t help that port authorities are often (if not always) public bodies, and that trade unions, benefiting of publicly granted coercive powers, further interfere with the search for efficiency (as Potter himself notes). Abolishing or seriously loosening these constraints would let each port and each operator adjust to prices and competition. In that sense, my point #15 is probably the most important to understand.
john hare
Dec 23 2024 at 4:18am
I think your picture might be more useful than the written article on demonstrating the sheer stupidity of preventing improvements. Many people either can’t or won’t bother to understand your points, but might possibly ask “where are the forklifts and cranes?” after seeing that illustration.
I’m not for or against automation. I’m for what works to make our lives better. I am biased in my thinking that most unions are no better than protection rackets. With the caveat that i can be wrong in individual cases. Even with my low opinion, I don’t see banning unions anymore than I see banning “Buy here Pay here” car lots, which I also despise.
Worked for a company that did both union and non-union work for a year. Had the hall called on me many times for doing things outside my “specialty”. Also did work with my own company on a union jobsite where they couldn’t get union concrete finishers. We got along okay until I stupidly showed one of the carpenters a W2 from one of my Mexicans and it turned out that he was making more than the union workers. They got us off that jobsite afterwards. I don’t know what they did for the rest of their concrete pours.
Jose Pablo
Dec 23 2024 at 3:02pm
The point is not whether automatization is good or bad or irrelevant. The point is who should be making this decision.
The company in charge of operating the port, which is the agent with the right incentives, is the one that should be making this decision. Not the President of the United States (and not Pierre).
The fact that DJ Trump believes that decisions like this are better centralized in Him, is extremely worrying.
That he knows “just about everything about automatization”, even if true, doesn’t make me feel any less worried. If this is the case, the company in charge of operating the port will be more than happy to hire Trump as an external consultant.
Maybe He was just postulating for the job.
Roger McKinney
Dec 23 2024 at 9:29am
Great points! Trump is a sucker for the ancient mercantile nonsense that we should fixate on producers and jobs. But no one produces anything just to be producing. The goal of all production is consumption. Trump should fixate on what’s best for consumers, not producers. Producers will adjust to what consumers demand.
Higher standards of living have come almost exclusively from reducing the costs of production. If automation does that, it’s a great blessing. The money consumers save will be spent on other goods or saved and invested.
Comments are closed.