I suppose that what I tended to focus on more was the explosion of high-tech job opportunities. I didn't realize that there was such a large discrepancy between the two, that though high-tech industries certainly have generated many employment opportunites, these numbers are still quite significantly less than the number of jobs lost in manufacturing sectors. I tried to read it, I read most of it, and I was so disappointed that I stopped reading before I completed the chapter. The authors don't know anything about economics or why computers are in the workplace. Computers should be in the work place because computers increase output.
Computers increase the output of every individual.
Output is directly related to income and income is directly related to the standard of living. The surge in the output in the 1990's and continued surge into the 21st Century is directly a product of innovations in technology. Technology is not the only factor in the longest continuous non-war economic boom, however, in economic circles it is argued that Intel's microprocessor is the one and only single invention that has ever shifted the entire SRAS curve. The economic boom that is a function of computers spills over to other aspects of society. Companies are begging workers to work for them.