How Many Errors Can You Find In: "Stop Saying Robots Are Destroying Jobs—They Aren’t"

Far be it for me to argue with a think tank founder so I won't.
I will however point out...
An op-ed from MIT's Technology Review:

Many experts would have us believe that robots and other technologies are behind the job drought. That couldn’t be farther from the truth. 

MIT Technology Review editor David Rotman recently wrote an article called “How Technology is Destroying Jobs.” The title not only sums up the article’s thesis, it sums up the view of many pundits seeking to explain lackluster job growth. But technology never has destroyed jobs on a net basis and it won’t in the future.

The article focuses on MIT scholars Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee, authors of the widely cited book Race Against the Machine. For them, workers are “losing the race against the machine, a fact reflected in today’s employment statistics.” They go on to argue that, “As we head … into the period where continuing exponential increases in computing power yield astonishing results—we expect that economic disruptions will only grow as well.”

Brynjolfsson and McAfee rely on a key data point to make their case: “The pattern is clear: as businesses generated more value from their workers, the country as a whole became richer, which fueled more economic activity and created even more jobs. Then, beginning in 2000, the lines diverge; productivity continues to rise robustly, but employment suddenly wilts. By 2011, a significant gap appears between the two lines, showing economic growth with no parallel increase in job creation.”

But the reality is that there is no logical relationship between job growth and productivity. To see why, imagine two nations with annual productivity growth of around 2 percent. Nation A has a declining workforce because more people are retiring than are getting to prime working age. Nation B has a growing workforce because of higher fertility rates workers and immigration. As this example of real nations shows (Japan as nation A and the U.S. as nation B), an economy can have high productivity and low or high employment growth....MORE

Here's an easy one to get you started:

...But even if I am wrong, and I hope I am, that the rate of productivity miraculously increases to over 5 percent a year, it still doesn’t matter for jobs. For that would mean that national income increases 5 percent a year and we would all buy more restaurant meals, vacations, cars, houses, therapeutic massages, college educations, and 3-D TVs. And workers have to work to produce these goods and services. And if these are somehow automated, then we have even more money to spend and will buy other goods and services, creating jobs in these functions....

That highlighted bit is all about to whom the rents flow and glibly makes the leap from an increase in national income to an increase in the use of consumer goods and services.
I, for one don't really have much use for more massages although this sounds interesting:

23 Carat Gold Body Ceremony, Dolphin Square Spa, London
The super healing and anti-ageing powers of gold are put to the test during this opulent, two and a half hour-long treatment. It begins in the Hammam with a gold cleansing ritual to prepare the skin. The body is then treated to a full massage with oils and gold minerals, after which a luxurious 60 minute facial sees a gold and honey massage balm applied before a gold face mask, which tightens skin and acts as a natural face lift. The treatment finishes with a dusting of gold powder over the face, shoulders and arms for the perfect post-spa glow....

There are at least three other points where the writer elides over issues that were covered months ago.
We've moved on to the spicy's: Extispicy and Haruspicy in the natural gas futures market and trying to determine if Vladimir Putin has become a Bond villain.