'classical economics doesn't know how technology affects the wage' - ridiculous, classical economists were addressing exactly how technology was changing society and economic relationships. they didn't have accurate/useful models but they described the relationships in great detail. Sentences like this make me question the author's ability to evaluate their own paper.

Yes, crack open an intro to macroeconomics textbook and it has to discuss total factor productivity (technological progress) in the Cobb-Douglas production function, and its short run and long run effects on wages, or it's quite easy to connect the dots if it doesn't discuss that relationship directly. You'll get medium run too if you go a little beyond classical. It's funny someone claims to be writing economics papers but refuses to spend 100 hours, maybe less, to learn the fundamentals of macroeconomics as understood by everyone working in a related field.

> I simply could not have written this piece. I myself have no formal economics background

No shit, me neither, I read a couple macroeconomics textbooks at the age of 30 and now I wouldn't make arrogant and obviously wrong claims like the above. And I don't have the hubris to publish a paper.