Adam Thierer is Research Fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research and a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.
It would let bureaucrats at the new Federal Automation and Worker Protection Agency sit in judgment of what constitutes beneficial forms of innovation and ask them to predict or plan our technological future.
Even if it proves to be an inexact science, the effort is worth undertaking.
Many laws and regulations create direct or indirect barriers to the emergence of new ideas and organizations.
Forcing social media sites to “disappear” or be broken up is one of the worst ways to deal with these concerns.
Statutes and regulations continue to accumulate, layer by layer, until they suffocate not only economic opportunity, but also the effective administration of government itself.
We need a vision and set of principles to fight back against neo-Luddites and their proposals to slow or stop technological change.
Today’s neo-Luddite tech critics suggest that we should just be content with the tools of the past and slow down the pace of technological innovation to supposedly save us from any number of dystopian futures they predict. If they succeed, it will leave us in a true dystopia.
If Schumpeter were alive today, he’d have two important lessons to teach us about the techlash and why we should be wary of misguided interventions into the Digital Economy.