Economist challenges AI labor paper: diff-in-diff can't support wage-loss claims
paulnovosad · x · 2026-09-16
Economist paulnovosad publicly critiques a paper on AI's labor market impact, arguing its diff-in-diff design across exposure percentiles says nothing about aggregate wages or employment losses. He notes one could equally conclude that the least exposed workers saw 10% wage gains due to AI — a reading he says Figure 1 of an earlier draft supports. He urges the authors to distinguish between AI lifting some workers' wages and AI causing aggregate job losses, calling the paper's text loose in places.
More from AGI Musings
- 'Meatwashing': manually rewriting AI output to hide its origin, and why it's a double waste — JeremyNguyenPhD · 2026-11-02
- AI safety researcher: AI companies entirely lack this kind of effective human oversight — davidmanheim · 2026-11-02
- Long-read: AI's real value comes after the efficiency era—infra glut, agent tooling boom — yangyi · 2026-11-02
- vikhyat predicts alternating compute oversupply and undersupply on the road to AGI — TheZachMueller · 2026-11-02
- Sam Altman: AI has surpassed top scientists, and 2026 will be a turning point year — kimmonismus · 2026-11-02
- DeepSeek design doc: a person can only follow 3-5 agent sessions at once, attention is the real bottleneck — heyshrutimishra · 2026-11-02