Re: Speed, Technology, Progress does not mean BETTER

Patrick T. Brooke (pbrooke@david.wheaton.edu)
Wed, 25 Jan 1995 11:20:38 -0600

-----
Host's Note: I'm concerned that this thread could get going strong on
economics, tax policy, and productivity -- Interesting, but not on the
topic we've promised for people who've subscribed to this list. I'm
especially concerned about staying on-topic because the volume of our
mail is a problem for some of our subscribers.

So, those of you who want to carry this line further -- can we connect it
to learning, organizational learning, etc.? Thanks.

(Patrick, this is not directed to you.)

-- Rick Karash, rkarash@world.std.com, host for learning-org
-----

Ingo Puhl wrote:

...
>
>My point is that the use of technology is not something intrinsic to human
>beings, but something that can be traced down to an incentive structure
>that is created by the tax system.

How do you explain the use of (then) new technology in the early days of
the Industrial Revolution before there was an income tax in the US? Many of
the capital budgeting analyses I've seen can justify the use of technology
even if you ignore the effect of tax savings. Some technology increases
productivity, and much (not all) of the technology implementations I've
seen so not replace people, but allows them to do more or to do threir jobs
more effectively.

Does this follow, or did I completely miss the focus of your point? (I do
that sometimes.)

------
Patrick T. Brooke, CPA, MBA
pbrooke@david.wheaton.edu
Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois
pbrooke@david.wheaton.edu
------