Writing for Forbes, research affiliate Thomas Davenport examines the feasibility of robot taxation based on a debate at MIT Technology Review’s Emtech Next conference. “At some point we may need to replace the tax revenue from human jobs lost to automation,” writes Daveport. “If that day ever comes, I hope that the tax revenues issue is the most critical one we have to deal with.”
Preliminary research findings from an MIT team suggest that subsidizing subway fares increased usage of the MBTA by low-income riders, reports Michael Norton for State House News. “Low-income riders who received a subsidy, when compared to others who used a non-subsidized CharlieCard, took more MBTA trips, including trips for health care and social services,” writes Norton.
A preliminary report by MIT researchers examines how subway subsidies affect the rates of MBTA ridership among low-income residents, reports Crystal Haynes for Boston 25 News. “Researchers also found low-income riders took more trips to health care and social services than they would without the subsidized Charlie Card,” Haynes explains.
Prof. Amy Glasmeier speaks with New York Times reporter Eric Ravenscraft about the Living Wage Calculator, which uses specific data to estimate the cost of living in different areas of the country. “The question is, can you live on a minimum wage? And the answer is basically, no,” explains Glasmeier.
In an article for The Wall Street Journal, visiting lecturer Irving Wladawsky-Berger highlights how MIT researchers have proposed a new method for measuring the value of digital goods to consumers. Using this new metric, researchers found that “the digital economy is contributing more consumer value than we’ve realized,” Wladawsky-Berger writes.
Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Edward Glaeser spotlights a new book from Profs. Johnathan Gruber and Simon Johnson titled, “Jump-Starting America.” Glaeser writes that Gruber and Johnson have “produced a superbly argued case for public and private investment in education and research.”
Writing for Bloomberg, Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson argue that federal investment in scientific research can help address income inequality. “America desperately needs more hubs of growth,” they write. “It’s a problem that the government can and should address, by identifying and investing in the technologies of the future – and ensuring that the American people as a whole share in the gains.”
In an article for The Boston Globe, Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson underscore how federal investment in scientific research could be used to help ease income inequality in America. “Scaled-up and deployed strategically across most states, we estimate that an investment of $100 billion per year in public research and development could help create 4 million good new jobs,” they write.
Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson speak with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle about their book, which argues that government investment in scientific research can help tackle income inequality. Gruber explains that inequality in America is place-based, noting that “we need a solution that is going to help the rest of the country, not just super-star cities, and we think place-based federal R&D can do that.”
Axios reporter Steve LeVine highlights several new studies co-authored by Prof. Daron Acemoglu that examine the negative impacts of automation on the labor market. “So far, we've used our know-how singularly automating at the expense of labor,” says Acemoglu. “If we keep on doing that, we will keep on destroying more jobs without job gains. It's completely our decision."
Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson discuss their new book, which argues that investment in scientific research is key to jump-starting the American economy, on Boston Public Radio. “We invest in science, turn that science into jobs,” says Johnson, “and spread that around the country. The coastal superstar cities have become extremely expensive, but there’s a tremendous amount of talent spread across the U.S.”
In an article for Bloomberg News, Noah Smith highlights a study by MIT researchers that examines the factors influencing the decline in solar prices. The researchers found that, “from 1980 to 2001, government-funded research and development was the main factor in bringing down costs, but from 2001 to 2012, the biggest factor was economies of scale,” Smith explains.
Forbes contributor Joe McKendrick writes that MIT researchers have developed a new metric for analyzing the value of the digital goods and services people use. McKendrick writes that the research provides “an idea of what digital goods -- those free or paid-for subscription services available via the internet and mobile -- add to our economy.”
Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson speaks with Sabri Ben-Achour of Marketplace about his work quantifying the economic benefits of goods and services that GDP does not measure. “We haven’t been measuring the value of the environment or digital goods,” says Brynjolfsson. “That means policy makers, when they are trying to see where is value coming and how is the economy growing, they have been missing that understanding.”
Wall Street Journal reporter Mike Bird writes that MIT researchers have proposed a new metric for GDP that would incorporate free digital goods and services. Bird explains that the researchers found that Facebook “would have boosted U.S. economic growth by between 0.05 and 0.11 percentage points a year” under the new metric.