RE: AI: A future without Firewood
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I think there are deep flaws in your UBI assumptions. Like you said, technological leaps have been disruptive in the past, but the end result has not been systemic unemployment. Instead labor has been freed up for new industries to emerge, and the productive callpacity of each worker has been multiplied, generating more wealth.
The difficulties today seem to stem from our mesaed-up monetary system and corporate protectionism which have been transferring wealth to corporate and political powerbrokers instead of economic producers. I disagree with the Marxist analysis that this is somehow an inevitable effect of vague capitalism, though, and especially proper laissez-faire free markets.
I agree we're at the very beginning of AI development, and we can also look at how many early internet ideas have flipped to see how hype alone doesn't bring progress.
I'm not taking a Marxist position, but I can see why it can be interpreted as if I am. I do however feel convinced that Capitalism is morphing into something else. I'll grant you what you said the other day, Late stage capitalism is an umbrella term for things that we don't like. That was, regrettably so, spot on. But, I appreciate those push backs, because they help me refine my positions.
All that said. We are not really in disagreement, not really. Like you, I think we will come up with new jobs and lots of people will probably find themselves busy doing something. However, I feel like what we call today "low skill job" (i do have a problem with the label, but for efficiency I'll use it) will have no replacement per se. To be blunt: Mcdonalds won't have a single human in the restaurants.
If we reach that stage, which I think we will, then UBI becomes the only viable solution in my opinion.
I only meant my reference to Marxism as a clarification of my own argument, not an assumption about yours, so I apologize if I was unclear there.
The root problem with all UBI schemes is that consumption can only follow production, so if someone is to receive UBI, someone else must produce first without recompense. AI is not able to do that.
The Andre Yangs of the world think that this is precisely what AI and Automation will do. In other words, machines would be working our land, our factories, driving out cars, generating surplus. People would have "rights" to the surplus generated by the machines.
I think I should re-read the book, its been a while. But Yang released a book called "the war on normal people" that sold me on this UBI thing back in 2018. Since then I've read a few more on the subject. Utopia for realists, also a great book.