🔍 Read the full analysis: A Look At Jobs In The Field, Factory, And Office on ThorstenMeyerAI.com
Get business pricing on office and shipping supplies
- Business-only prices and quantity discounts
- Tax-exempt purchasing
- Multiple users, one account, clear invoices
TL;DR
ThorstenMeyerAI.com published the first installment of Work After Work on Nov. 2, 2026, examining how employment shifted from farming toward manufacturing and services. The article cites historical and modelled estimates, including a global services-employment crossover in 2001; it also presents a possible future automation sector as the author’s thesis, not an established forecast.
ThorstenMeyerAI.com published the first episode of Work After Work on Nov. 2, 2026, using the familiar categories of field, factory and office to trace how employment has moved from agriculture toward manufacturing and services. The article cites estimates that farming accounted for about three-quarters of U.S. workers around 1800, compared with a modelled 1.5% in 2025, and says services have employed more people worldwide than farming since 2001, according to International Labour Organization estimates.
The episode describes the categories as the primary sector, which takes resources from nature; the secondary sector, which makes or builds goods; and the tertiary sector, which provides services. Farming, fishing and forestry are primary activities. Manufacturing, construction and energy are commonly classed as secondary, while trade, transport, health, education and government fall within services. The boundaries are not uniform: mining and some jobs within manufacturers can be classified differently across statistical systems.
The piece reports a long decline in farming’s share of U.S. employment. It cites economic historian Stanley Lebergott’s estimates of 73.7% in 1800, 54.8% in 1850, 40.2% in 1900 and 12.0% in 1950. Those figures describe the share of the labor force, not the number of people working in agriculture. The article then gives the ILO’s modelled 2025 estimate of 1.5%; the historical series and the recent modelled figure have different sources and should not be read as a single census count.
The article also points to shifts elsewhere. It says China’s primary-sector share of employment fell from 83.5% in 1952 to 22.2% in 2024, while Japan’s census recorded a drop from 53.8% in 1920 to 3.2% in 2020. It identifies 2001 as the year when, in ILO modelled estimates, services first employed more people worldwide than farming. These figures chart changes in employment composition; they do not by themselves explain each country’s causes or differences in job quality.
Why Sector Shifts Matter
The sector map matters because it shows that technological and economic change can move workers between kinds of work rather than simply eliminate the need for labor. The article’s historical account links declining farm employment with the growth of factory, retail, office, health and education jobs. That is relevant to current debates about automation: the central question is not only which tasks machines can perform, but also where workers may find employment as industries change.
The source also challenges a common shorthand about U.S. manufacturing. It says factory employment is about 35% below its June 1979 peak, while real manufacturing output in 2025 was about 1.9 times its 1979 level. Those measures can move in different directions as productivity and production methods change. The comparison does not mean that factory jobs have recovered, or that output growth has benefited workers equally; it distinguishes the amount produced from the number employed.
For readers, the series’ framing offers a way to follow changes in work over time without treating every job loss as evidence that an entire sector has vanished. The figures describe broad shifts, not a guarantee that workers displaced from one occupation will readily enter another. Training, geography, wages and the pace of change all affect that process, and the supplied episode does not quantify those effects.
Popular right now
Vitamix 5200 Professional-Grade Blender, 64 oz. Container, Black
KitchenAid Classic Series 4.5-Quart Tilt-Head Stand Mixer, Onyx Black
Ninja CREAMi Scoop & Swirl 13-in-1 Ice Cream and Soft Serve Maker (NC701)
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Economists Built the Three Sectors
The classification took shape in the first half of the 20th century. The article credits New Zealand economist Allan G. B. Fisher with adding the term “tertiary” to the established primary and secondary categories. Fisher wrote his book The Clash of Progress and Security in 1934; it was published in 1935. He later set out the three-part division in writing, arguing that employment in developing economies moved from primary activities toward secondary and, to a greater extent, tertiary production.
Economist Colin Clark compared employment patterns across countries in The Conditions of Economic Progress, published in 1940. As the episode recounts, Clark described movement from agriculture to manufacturing and then to commerce and services as a major accompaniment of economic progress. He also observed that industry’s share of employment need not keep rising indefinitely. The categories are useful for comparing broad patterns, but they simplify an economy in which a worker’s classification may depend on the statistical system used.
French economist Jean Fourastié offered a related argument in 1949: technical progress, he said, could reduce the labor needed in some sectors while services absorbed workers. The article presents that idea as an influential historical argument, not proof that future technological change will always create enough service work. Its 60-episode series is framed around how the economy is built, how work has moved, and which tasks may remain human as machines take on more.
“The boxes show where people earn their living, and how that changes over time.”
— Thorsten Meyer, author of the episode
Limits of the Employment Comparisons
The figures combine historical estimates, census data and modelled estimates, drawn from different periods and sources. They do not all use identical definitions of employment or sector. The episode notes that classifications can differ, including whether mining is counted as primary or secondary work. Readers should treat the percentages as indicators of broad change rather than perfectly comparable measures across every country and year.
The supplied material does not give a detailed methodology for the ILO’s 2025 U.S. estimate or the global 2001 crossover, nor does it provide confidence ranges. It also does not establish how the reported manufacturing output figure is calculated beyond describing it as real output. The relationship between sector shifts, wages, job security and individual workers’ experiences remains outside the figures presented.
The proposal that automation could become a distinct sector and perform up to 90% of work is Meyer’s stated thesis, not a confirmed development or an independently substantiated projection in this episode. The source says a later installment, episode 48, will examine it. How “work” and “automation sector” would be defined, and what evidence supports the 90% figure, are not specified here.
The Series Turns to Automation
Work After Work is described as a daily series of 60 episodes on economic structure, changes in employment and work that may remain human as machines take on more tasks. The first installment establishes the three-sector framework as the series’ starting point. The source says episode 48 will put Meyer’s automation thesis on trial; it does not provide a publication date for that episode or further details about the analysis it will contain.
Until then, the episode’s main evidence is historical: employment has shifted sharply away from farming in the United States and other countries, while services have grown in relative importance. Whether automation will produce another broad shift, and what jobs might follow, remains an open question rather than a conclusion established by the figures in this installment.
Key Questions
What is the three-sector model?
It divides economic activity into the primary sector (extracting or growing resources), the secondary sector (making and building), and the tertiary sector (providing services). Statistical definitions can vary, particularly for activities such as mining.
What does the article say about U.S. farm employment?
It cites historical estimates that farming accounted for 73.7% of the U.S. labor force in 1800 and 12.0% in 1950, followed by an ILO modelled estimate of 1.5% in 2025. The 2025 figure is modelled, while the earlier numbers come from a historical series.
Does the source say the United States no longer makes things?
No. It says U.S. factory employment is about 35% below its June 1979 peak, while real manufacturing output in 2025 was about 1.9 times its 1979 level. Employment and output measure different things.
Is the 90% automation figure a confirmed forecast?
No. The author labels the possibility that automation could become a sector doing up to 90% of work as a thesis, not a fact. The episode does not supply a forecast method or evidence establishing that figure.
Source: ThorstenMeyerAI.com
