Choose an institution to see its records and dossier, or choose a topic.
Through year 2027 · all records, including scheduled dates 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2008 2005 1965 Show Organisations and infrastructure All types Organisation Person Document Concept Infrastructure Public body Reset filters
94 people, organisations and other records · 122 relationships · 34 claims about a valueEverything recorded up to the chosen year, whether or not still in effect · Undated records included
Claim and evidence Close ×
National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, “Technology and the American Economy: Report of the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Volume I” (1966-02) contests M05. Opening of the Commission's report, signed by all 14 members, including the economists Bowen and Solow. Concludes the Commission's opening argument that persistent post-Korea unemployment came from inadequate demand, not accelerated technology. Copy claim link
Copy claim reference
Machine-checked, not reviewed by an editor Stated in source Supported
Supporting evidence: primary · 1 source
Date 1966-02 · publication Role Earliest located in tier 2, Contesting Register (kind of text) Nonfiction Engagement Engages a premise. The Commission rejects imminent employment-obsolescence and provides evidence on technological continuity and demand later in the report; the Commission links total employment to demand and purchasing power rather than equating job elimination with elimination of work. Tier Tier 2. Main Commission report: tier 2 by maintainer decision of 2026-10-12 (most members were not economists; the chair Bowen and Solow were). Was tier 1. The chairman's introduction (pp. xi–xiv, by Bowen) is outside the official report; it stays here at tier 2 by maintainer decision of 2026-10-12. Conditions (M05-11) Also dissents from 'the other extreme view of complacency'. The ellipsis omits '— or at least the United States —'. (M05-12) Followed by: 'It is the continuous obligation of economic policy to match increases in productive potential with increases in purchasing power and demand.'. Scope and limits (First passage) Corporate (Commission) text reflecting 'combined judgment and general agreement' (letter of transmittal). Individual members' footnoted comments are separate. Checked against the raw djvu text (.html); the cached .txt omits this page. The Bowen and Mangum condensation (1966, p. 8) has 'The Commission dissents from this view.' Holds the tier-2 earliest-located role for contests of M05 (2026-10-12). The second passage has the same source and date and comes later in the report (p. 9). Armer (his passage recorded as contesting M05, tier 2) is dated only to 1966, in a condensation that postdates the February 1966 report. (Second passage) Matches the cached .txt. Engagement (first passage): (GPT cross-family check of 2026-10-12, accepted by the maintainer on 2026-10-12.) The Commission states the extreme view of productivity making gainful employment obsolete and dissents, saying 'the evidence does not support it' and it 'diverts attention from the real problems'. Engagement (second passage): (GPT cross-family check of 2026-10-12, accepted by the maintainer on 2026-10-12.) Asserts that technical progress leaves the total of work in place, so the employment outcome depends on demand policy. This contradicts machines displacing labour across the board, though the passage does not discuss that prospect.
The evidence 02 primary source Supports the claim
Technology and the American Economy: Report of the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Volume I ↗ Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1966, xiv + 115 pp.; ERIC ED 023 803 · 1966-02
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt · shown only with its context “According to one extreme view, the world … is on the verge of a glut of productivity sufficient to make our economic institutions and the notion of gainful employment obsolete. We dissent from this view.” Read it with this context. The quote must keep 'We dissent' (it does). The Commission also dissents from 'complacency'.
Why: Fresh-context audit (A1) judged that the quotation misleads when shown alone.
Location in source printed p. 1 (Part I, ch. 1 'The Pace of Technological Change', opening paragraph)
Machine-checked · 2026-10-14
Source details and check notes Authors National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress Version Internet Archive OCR text (djvu.txt) of a scanned copy, retrieved 2026-10-09 from https://dn790006.ca.archive.org/0/items/ERICED023803/ERICED023803djvu.txt; OCR errors possible; quotes checked only against clean stretches. Current copy; no earlier capture compared. SHA-256 d23de21a0c05416f957dda13acb680f1baa77ee88e3c094966e8eaba50db637b. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-09 Language English (en) Attribution National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, “Technology and the American Economy: Report of the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Volume I”, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1966, xiv + 115 pp.; ERIC ED 023 803, 1966-02. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage M05-11 (research/economics-mainstream). The quotation (35 words) matched the retrieved current copy (SHA-256 d23de21a0c05416f957dda13acb680f1baa77ee88e3c094966e8eaba50db637b) in the pack's verification. Re-checked at admission on 2026-10-14 against a copy retrieved that day. primary source Supports the claim
Technology and the American Economy: Report of the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Volume I ↗ Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1966, xiv + 115 pp.; ERIC ED 023 803 · 1966-02
Copy source reference
Cite the original source Cite the original document, not Selekoa. Check these details against it.
Copy APA
Download BibTeX Download RIS Download CSL-JSON
Source excerpt · shown only with its context “The basic fact is that technology eliminates jobs, not work.” Read it with this context. Preserving demand is a policy obligation; the statement acknowledges displacement and temporary unemployment.
Why: Misleads when shown alone (GPT cross-family check of 2026-10-12, accepted by the maintainer on 2026-10-12).
Location in source printed p. 9 (Part I, ch. 2)
Machine-checked · 2026-10-14
Source details and check notes Authors National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress Version Internet Archive OCR text (djvu.txt) of a scanned copy, retrieved 2026-10-09 from https://dn790006.ca.archive.org/0/items/ERICED023803/ERICED023803djvu.txt; OCR errors possible; quotes checked only against clean stretches. Current copy; no earlier capture compared. SHA-256 d23de21a0c05416f957dda13acb680f1baa77ee88e3c094966e8eaba50db637b. Canonical address Open the canonical source ↗ Accessed 2026-10-09 Language English (en) Attribution National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, “Technology and the American Economy: Report of the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, Volume I”, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, February 1966, xiv + 115 pp.; ERIC ED 023 803, 1966-02. Reuse No open redistribution licence asserted. Bibliographic metadata, editorial paraphrases and short attributed quotations (at most 50 words each). Recheck terms before wider redistribution. Check notes Candidate pack passage M05-12 (research/economics-mainstream). The quotation (10 words) matched the retrieved current copy (SHA-256 d23de21a0c05416f957dda13acb680f1baa77ee88e3c094966e8eaba50db637b) in the pack's verification. Re-checked at admission on 2026-10-14 against a copy retrieved that day. Status and meaning Editorial status. Not reviewed by an editor . An exploratory record that no editor has accepted. This status does not say whether a person has read any linked passage. Each evidence record above shows how it was checked.
Relation. A passage of the document disputes the proposition or a premise it depends on. The record documents the text’s position, not who is right.
Date. Report dated February 1966. The chairman's introduction (pp. xi–xiv) is stated not to be part of the official report. Checked in a current copy; an archive capture was not available, so earlier bytes are not authenticated.
Record ID ec-m05-technology-and-the-american-economy-1966-c