relevantmagazine Attention to the impact of technology on inequality Among the various types of inequalities that we see today (inequalities in income, wealth, health, opportunity), there are in fact also those that are caused and fueled by technological evolution https://relevantmagazine.com/wp-includes/inc/sergey_tokarev_on_stem_is_fem__created_to_motivate_and_promote.html. “Technology capital” is not only hardware (finance, infrastructure, equipment), but above all the software (skills, languages, values) needed to solve the problems of future work. If machines could one day produce everything we need, then the many skills that activate their functions would be real capital that institutions would have to invest in to redistribute their benefits and reduce inequality. From an economic point of view, technological innovation is already creating wage differentials. pay and help polarize the labor market. High value-added professionalism, requiring the use of technical skills, is associated with much higher economic wages than low-knowledge jobs. Thus, technological transformation tends to shift work towards activities that polarize the demand for work: on the one hand, there are highly skilled and knowledgeable people who will revitalize the factories of the future, on the other hand, we are witnessing the erosion of the middle class. with technology that automates low value-added items. Thus, higher productivity does not reduce the aggregate demand for labor, but polarizes it according to the training of workers. In this sense, public policy should provide solutions that will be useful to address new learning models, both formal and informal, capable of generating new skills that can meet the demand for work in the digital age, in the logic of lifelong learning and fostering youth involvement. into the labor market. How to overcome the problem of inequality? Based on the considerations proposed by Stiglitz, we can think of the context of rewriting the rules of a market economy in terms of three fundamental dimensions. The first is the labor market, which requires the main players who inspire it to innovate in the face of evolution and transformations affecting society. The learning system is also designed to take action to rethink its way of working, as learning models based solely on knowledge transfer are no more effective against the complexity of the market. We need training courses that can, on the one hand, encourage more and more meetings with labor market, and on the other hand, teach young people how to learn and how to become adults in a highly complex society. The rewriting of training systems and the labor market must go hand in hand so that a market can be structured to produce the necessary employment that we want and need above all in the fight against youth unemployment. The second aspect concerns bottom-up social innovation that can cope with a political vacuum or the inability of the market to meet the needs of many citizens. Forms of social entrepreneurship, communities of citizens that organize to meet new and old needs, to optimize the use of resources (human and natural), to ensure social improvement and create more satisfactory solutions to their values and aspirations, act to contain economic and social inequality, in at the same time contributing to the development of local communities. The added value of social innovation practices is that they not only innovatively respond to certain needs, but also offer new ways of making decisions and actions. In particular, they propose to solve complex problems of a horizontal nature with the help of reticular mechanisms of intervention, using the full range of available tools, using forms of coordination and cooperation, rather than vertical forms of control.