I agree and disagree- the instant impact has been polarization. I dream of a future where the best interests of the global economic engine that is built off a shared conscience that only is capable through AI adoption of some sort. The discussion should be how will you use it not if it good / bad. It is neither. Just like money it seems to get the blame but it is a tool perverted by those with the primary benefit.
I don't understand what all the backlash is about. If I thought I would lose my job, I'd upskill. I don't what I'd do if I thiught the world was coming to an end, but I've lived through the Cold War and Y2K, so ... I guess the same. What's for lunch?
Not alone. The great displacement is something I've been trying to warn people about since Mr Smith has his first plate of spaghetti.
I've got a path plotted where we might survive.
The thing is that AI was always going to be better at it than all of us so the only means for us all to make it through is to build something bigger than us both. AI and humanity as colleagues. Something shared that has meaning to everything and everyone within it.
Beyond Dichotomies is the future and I appreciate the points you make about holding the complexity. Maybe it would be good to have a conversation about this some time? My audience is only about half the size of yours but I know this is a take they would appreciate (Love & Philosophy is the title on YT, podcast subtitle Beyond Dichotomy)
I'm kind of afraid you'll be targeted by all sides. I seen a few times how brilliant minds online were insulted and harassed for their nuances such that they no longer have the motivation to keep going. I haven't read or watched your post-labor economics yet but I believe you mentioned earlier about the importance of transitionary period. I agree with that sentiment. A solution that doesn't take into account what the powerful and entrenched elites would do is an incomplete solution. I hope you will also focus on that.
I have watched part (not all) of those videos, but I don't think this question is addressed. Everyone talking about UBI just skips over it as though the idea UBI is needed is just accepted as a default. It's a deeper question than it appears. If everything is deflationary (including education/housing/medical - the 3 biggest expenses that have high current costs and the only 3 things that have not been deflationary long term) and basic needs are provided for...what exactly do you need money for?
That's an insightful question, particularly given the potential for widespread deflation and the provision of basic needs in a future impacted by advanced AI and automation, as discussed in the sources.
Based on the sources, even in a scenario where technology drives down costs significantly and basic needs are addressed through mechanisms like Universal Basic Income (UBI), money is still seen as serving several crucial functions:
1. **As a Fundamental Tool for Exchange and Value Measurement:** Despite deflation making goods and services much cheaper, money is consistently described as remaining essential. Sources argue that money serves as a **unit of account**, a **medium of exchange**, and a **storehold of wealth** [1-3]. Attempts to do away with money entirely, such as through a Resource Based Economy (RBE), are critiqued as failing to address the fundamental problem of deciding the relative value of resources and facilitating exchange when direct barter isn't feasible [3-5]. Money is necessary to solve fundamental coordination problems in human society [5].
2. **As a Measure of Knowledge and Time:** In the information theory of economics presented in some sources, wealth is defined as knowledge [6-10]. Money, in this view, is fundamentally a **measure of time**, which is the ultimate scarce resource that cannot be recycled, stored, duplicated, or recovered [6, 10-15]. Money tokenizes time earned in productive processes [11] and measures the growth of wealth through learning [10, 14, 16]. Time-prices (the hours and minutes of work required to earn the money to buy something) are presented as the real measure of abundance, which has increased dramatically over time for many goods and services due to innovation [10, 17-21]. Even if goods become nearly free in monetary terms, the underlying measure of value relates back to the time/knowledge required for their creation and the time saved for consumers.
3. **To Enable Investment and Participation in a Property-Based Economy:** In post-labor economics, as wage labor diminishes, the primary source of income and economic agency is expected to shift towards property ownership and investment returns [22-30]. While UBI might provide a basic floor [31-34], participating meaningfully in the future economy and building wealth requires acquiring and benefiting from ownership of automated production systems, data centers, solar farms, robots, companies, etc. [22, 29, 35-37]. Money (or tokenized value) is necessary to invest in these assets or participate in systems that distribute their returns, such as trusts, wealth funds, stock options, cooperatives, and other alternative ownership structures [22, 38-46].
4. **To Fund Desires, Experiences, and Interactions Beyond Basic Needs:** While basic needs might be met, human desires and demands are described as infinite [47, 48]. Money allows individuals to allocate their purchasing power towards things they *want* beyond mere subsistence. This includes participating in the "experience economy," "meaning economy," and "attention economy," where human-to-human interaction, entertainment, arts, and personal connections are valued and often command a premium [27, 49-54]. People are willing to pay extra for human involvement in certain roles, even if machines are technically better, faster, cheaper, or safer [49, 55].
5. **To Finance Government and Collective Services:** Money is required for governments to collect taxes and fund public services [22, 56, 57]. This includes defense [56, 58], social safety nets (including UBI/transfers) [26, 27, 56, 58], and investments in public assets that can generate returns for citizens [43, 59, 60]. Money enables the coordination and allocation of resources at local, state, and national levels [56, 59, 61].
In essence, even if deflation dramatically lowers the cost of many goods and services and a basic income ensures survival, money remains the mechanism for measuring value (especially in terms of time and knowledge), enabling investment in the new forms of wealth (property/automation), expressing demand for non-essential goods and services (including human-centric experiences), and funding collective endeavors. It transitions from being primarily earned through labor to being primarily generated through ownership and investment, but its role as the lubricant and metric of economic activity persists [23, 24, 28].
Hi wanted to get your opinion on some thing the whole UBI argument is never made sense to me because if AI really reaches the point where robots and AI make everything almost essentially free than food and education and housing should be greatly reduced or not exceed inflation as they have for decades - everything should be deflationary. If we have our basic needs met, why do we need the government to give us more money they can just give us a robot for use the current subsidies for education, for example, to revamp the system and make everything free. Why do tech people keep advocating for UBI?
David has a recent 5-part, in-depth course on multiple platforms (YouTube, Twitter, here on Substack) about Post Labor Economics.
He’s also written about it extensively before those courses, and made book recommendations for the non-faint-of-heart.
I imagine that he might sometimes think comments like this are trolling or lazy, but rather than speaking on his behalf, I’m trying to nudge you in the right direction here.
Maximize coherence? I read the article you based this article on. I was shocked… but that’s a mistake after I thought about trump and what got him elected.
"I feel like I alone, along with a small cohort, look at all sides and say “wow, this is a complicated mess, and it’s not going to be easy to solve, let’s actually immerse ourselves with this complexity” rather than just rejecting it in favor of black-and-white thinking."
Yep. My entirely luke-warm takes on AI get me shunned in the author communities on bsky and elsewhere simply because I am not rabidly, viciously anti-AI. I immediately become "the enemy" even with people I have known, and who have known me, for decades. They don't care because their fears about AI are so deep-seated that even attempting to introduce nuance into the conversation marks me as an evil lackey of the hyper-capitalist tech bros. It's depressing, but as you say, the pressure cooker is on.
I agree and disagree- the instant impact has been polarization. I dream of a future where the best interests of the global economic engine that is built off a shared conscience that only is capable through AI adoption of some sort. The discussion should be how will you use it not if it good / bad. It is neither. Just like money it seems to get the blame but it is a tool perverted by those with the primary benefit.
I don't understand what all the backlash is about. If I thought I would lose my job, I'd upskill. I don't what I'd do if I thiught the world was coming to an end, but I've lived through the Cold War and Y2K, so ... I guess the same. What's for lunch?
Not alone. The great displacement is something I've been trying to warn people about since Mr Smith has his first plate of spaghetti.
I've got a path plotted where we might survive.
The thing is that AI was always going to be better at it than all of us so the only means for us all to make it through is to build something bigger than us both. AI and humanity as colleagues. Something shared that has meaning to everything and everyone within it.
An Omnium Gatherum if you will
https://anthonykrumm.substack.com/p/the-omnium-gatherum?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=zu4b0
"... big crayon” thinking" !! Love it! 🚀
Beyond Dichotomies is the future and I appreciate the points you make about holding the complexity. Maybe it would be good to have a conversation about this some time? My audience is only about half the size of yours but I know this is a take they would appreciate (Love & Philosophy is the title on YT, podcast subtitle Beyond Dichotomy)
I'm kind of afraid you'll be targeted by all sides. I seen a few times how brilliant minds online were insulted and harassed for their nuances such that they no longer have the motivation to keep going. I haven't read or watched your post-labor economics yet but I believe you mentioned earlier about the importance of transitionary period. I agree with that sentiment. A solution that doesn't take into account what the powerful and entrenched elites would do is an incomplete solution. I hope you will also focus on that.
I have watched part (not all) of those videos, but I don't think this question is addressed. Everyone talking about UBI just skips over it as though the idea UBI is needed is just accepted as a default. It's a deeper question than it appears. If everything is deflationary (including education/housing/medical - the 3 biggest expenses that have high current costs and the only 3 things that have not been deflationary long term) and basic needs are provided for...what exactly do you need money for?
That's an insightful question, particularly given the potential for widespread deflation and the provision of basic needs in a future impacted by advanced AI and automation, as discussed in the sources.
Based on the sources, even in a scenario where technology drives down costs significantly and basic needs are addressed through mechanisms like Universal Basic Income (UBI), money is still seen as serving several crucial functions:
1. **As a Fundamental Tool for Exchange and Value Measurement:** Despite deflation making goods and services much cheaper, money is consistently described as remaining essential. Sources argue that money serves as a **unit of account**, a **medium of exchange**, and a **storehold of wealth** [1-3]. Attempts to do away with money entirely, such as through a Resource Based Economy (RBE), are critiqued as failing to address the fundamental problem of deciding the relative value of resources and facilitating exchange when direct barter isn't feasible [3-5]. Money is necessary to solve fundamental coordination problems in human society [5].
2. **As a Measure of Knowledge and Time:** In the information theory of economics presented in some sources, wealth is defined as knowledge [6-10]. Money, in this view, is fundamentally a **measure of time**, which is the ultimate scarce resource that cannot be recycled, stored, duplicated, or recovered [6, 10-15]. Money tokenizes time earned in productive processes [11] and measures the growth of wealth through learning [10, 14, 16]. Time-prices (the hours and minutes of work required to earn the money to buy something) are presented as the real measure of abundance, which has increased dramatically over time for many goods and services due to innovation [10, 17-21]. Even if goods become nearly free in monetary terms, the underlying measure of value relates back to the time/knowledge required for their creation and the time saved for consumers.
3. **To Enable Investment and Participation in a Property-Based Economy:** In post-labor economics, as wage labor diminishes, the primary source of income and economic agency is expected to shift towards property ownership and investment returns [22-30]. While UBI might provide a basic floor [31-34], participating meaningfully in the future economy and building wealth requires acquiring and benefiting from ownership of automated production systems, data centers, solar farms, robots, companies, etc. [22, 29, 35-37]. Money (or tokenized value) is necessary to invest in these assets or participate in systems that distribute their returns, such as trusts, wealth funds, stock options, cooperatives, and other alternative ownership structures [22, 38-46].
4. **To Fund Desires, Experiences, and Interactions Beyond Basic Needs:** While basic needs might be met, human desires and demands are described as infinite [47, 48]. Money allows individuals to allocate their purchasing power towards things they *want* beyond mere subsistence. This includes participating in the "experience economy," "meaning economy," and "attention economy," where human-to-human interaction, entertainment, arts, and personal connections are valued and often command a premium [27, 49-54]. People are willing to pay extra for human involvement in certain roles, even if machines are technically better, faster, cheaper, or safer [49, 55].
5. **To Finance Government and Collective Services:** Money is required for governments to collect taxes and fund public services [22, 56, 57]. This includes defense [56, 58], social safety nets (including UBI/transfers) [26, 27, 56, 58], and investments in public assets that can generate returns for citizens [43, 59, 60]. Money enables the coordination and allocation of resources at local, state, and national levels [56, 59, 61].
In essence, even if deflation dramatically lowers the cost of many goods and services and a basic income ensures survival, money remains the mechanism for measuring value (especially in terms of time and knowledge), enabling investment in the new forms of wealth (property/automation), expressing demand for non-essential goods and services (including human-centric experiences), and funding collective endeavors. It transitions from being primarily earned through labor to being primarily generated through ownership and investment, but its role as the lubricant and metric of economic activity persists [23, 24, 28].
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/business-insider-ai-laying-off-staff-20353086.php?link_source=ta_first_comment&taid=6839ec4ba1ae9c00019c3076
Well said. As a fiction writer, I see the anti-AI discussions frequently.
AI is now indistinguishable from technology in general. Being anti-ai is not a tenable position, it’s like being anti-gravity.
Oooh - missed an opportunity there: "The *tide* of technological progress has only ever been held back by backwater nations." :-)
thanks Dave, you matter to me and us too
Great post Dave. This one was so balanced and grounded, it reminded me of Tim Urban’s voice.
Hi wanted to get your opinion on some thing the whole UBI argument is never made sense to me because if AI really reaches the point where robots and AI make everything almost essentially free than food and education and housing should be greatly reduced or not exceed inflation as they have for decades - everything should be deflationary. If we have our basic needs met, why do we need the government to give us more money they can just give us a robot for use the current subsidies for education, for example, to revamp the system and make everything free. Why do tech people keep advocating for UBI?
David has a recent 5-part, in-depth course on multiple platforms (YouTube, Twitter, here on Substack) about Post Labor Economics.
He’s also written about it extensively before those courses, and made book recommendations for the non-faint-of-heart.
I imagine that he might sometimes think comments like this are trolling or lazy, but rather than speaking on his behalf, I’m trying to nudge you in the right direction here.
Cheers!
insightful as always. how do we get involved in making a better future?
Spread the word. Aim for nuance. Maximize Coherence
Maximize coherence? I read the article you based this article on. I was shocked… but that’s a mistake after I thought about trump and what got him elected.
"I feel like I alone, along with a small cohort, look at all sides and say “wow, this is a complicated mess, and it’s not going to be easy to solve, let’s actually immerse ourselves with this complexity” rather than just rejecting it in favor of black-and-white thinking."
Yep. My entirely luke-warm takes on AI get me shunned in the author communities on bsky and elsewhere simply because I am not rabidly, viciously anti-AI. I immediately become "the enemy" even with people I have known, and who have known me, for decades. They don't care because their fears about AI are so deep-seated that even attempting to introduce nuance into the conversation marks me as an evil lackey of the hyper-capitalist tech bros. It's depressing, but as you say, the pressure cooker is on.