When machines are better, faster, cheaper, and safer: This creates an economic agency paradox—a death spiral of deflation and collapsed consumer demand. The solution may be tokenomics.
I found it very interesting, just one thing that was not clear for me.
What about basic survival goods like food, clothes, basic housing, water and minimum entertainment level?
If the UBI is not extensive enough to cover all the base level of that than people might never have the chance to invest because it never remains any money from it after they cover all their basic needs. Much like it is today with the majority of wages from labor.
I might have missed some key point you made but without this would't be exactly the same system as today but with UBI?
Ideal! But how to get this started and when? It was uncommonly easy to understand. Ok , I’ll say it…sounds too good to become true after the election results.
An excellent and profound piece, David. It’s great to see you back in your element—this is the terrain where your analysis truly shines. Your exploration of each industrial revolution feels both comprehensive and revelatory, with ideas that challenge and illuminate. The clarity and organization of your arguments make this a standout work.
While I can’t say I fully align with your solutions for the so-called “post-labor economics,” I have to admit, they hit the right nerve for sparking meaningful debate. That’s exactly the kind of provocation we need right now.
@David - I’m genuinely impressed. Your work has always been a mix of fascination and critique for me, but this article stands as your magnum opus in my view. And as for your advice on “psychedelics”… let’s just say I’m intrigued but cautious! I can’t promise a similar epiphany, but perhaps a milder, less cosmic route is worth exploring? Either way, keep up the stellar work—you’ve clearly upped the bar.
I created a comprehensive overview of human history going back to the hunter-gatherer phase after reading your piece; then I prompted GPT 4o to break down each revolution and their phases of development in terms of positive and negative externalities. Quite insightful to say the least!
My pleasure. I love this topic! I’m working on something similar for my Substack. It’ll be something you can refer to track the evolution of humanity, from the first Homo sapiens to humans in what I coined as “the age of augmented intelligence”.
This is imaginative and I love the democratic spirit of it.
While I’m on board with the inevitability of a post-labour economy, there’s also a good argument for why it could be sandbagged or otherwise delayed until there’s a UBI - which may seem counterintuitive at first). Or it’ll involve a lot of unnecessary suffering.
Yes! That's one of the main points - even if AI doesn't take all our jobs, we real humans still need more economic agency independent of technology (or maybe because of it? in spite of it?)
Superb. I’m unpacking this and resonating with it. It’s a cogent, crucial and pertinent essay. This rekindles my interest in economics. I’d like to see Joseph Stieglitz’s reaction to this piece, but I suspect his generation of economists are not keeping up with AI— and thus need a crash course on AI plus a big rethink.
I found it very interesting, just one thing that was not clear for me.
What about basic survival goods like food, clothes, basic housing, water and minimum entertainment level?
If the UBI is not extensive enough to cover all the base level of that than people might never have the chance to invest because it never remains any money from it after they cover all their basic needs. Much like it is today with the majority of wages from labor.
I might have missed some key point you made but without this would't be exactly the same system as today but with UBI?
Some services should be universal, namely healthcare
Dave this is brilliant. I have reservations about its implementation, but know it’s a possibility and that gives me hope. Thank you
Is there a way to prevent some having access to a better AI than others?
Ideal! But how to get this started and when? It was uncommonly easy to understand. Ok , I’ll say it…sounds too good to become true after the election results.
Honestly Trump is far more likely to implement this than Kamala. The DNC has become the party of the status quo and "do as I say, not as I do"
You’re probably right. Thank you and I hope you’re doing well.
An excellent and profound piece, David. It’s great to see you back in your element—this is the terrain where your analysis truly shines. Your exploration of each industrial revolution feels both comprehensive and revelatory, with ideas that challenge and illuminate. The clarity and organization of your arguments make this a standout work.
While I can’t say I fully align with your solutions for the so-called “post-labor economics,” I have to admit, they hit the right nerve for sparking meaningful debate. That’s exactly the kind of provocation we need right now.
@David - I’m genuinely impressed. Your work has always been a mix of fascination and critique for me, but this article stands as your magnum opus in my view. And as for your advice on “psychedelics”… let’s just say I’m intrigued but cautious! I can’t promise a similar epiphany, but perhaps a milder, less cosmic route is worth exploring? Either way, keep up the stellar work—you’ve clearly upped the bar.
Thanks! My wife actually said that this really stands out too... but I was just working to distill and crystallize what I've been working on.
As for psychedelics, caution and curiosity are the appropriate dispositions to take!
I created a comprehensive overview of human history going back to the hunter-gatherer phase after reading your piece; then I prompted GPT 4o to break down each revolution and their phases of development in terms of positive and negative externalities. Quite insightful to say the least!
Would you like to share what you have unpacked?
https://chatgpt.com/share/67396695-cd0c-8007-aa16-4355e95ed291
Thanks for sharing. Interesting to see the progression every 100 years starting from 1524 to 1924.
My pleasure. I love this topic! I’m working on something similar for my Substack. It’ll be something you can refer to track the evolution of humanity, from the first Homo sapiens to humans in what I coined as “the age of augmented intelligence”.
This is imaginative and I love the democratic spirit of it.
While I’m on board with the inevitability of a post-labour economy, there’s also a good argument for why it could be sandbagged or otherwise delayed until there’s a UBI - which may seem counterintuitive at first). Or it’ll involve a lot of unnecessary suffering.
Luckily someone has been doing research on it (in particular a calibrated UBI for economic reasons) and I got to interview him - this is Alex Howlett from the Greshm Institute in Boston https://open.substack.com/pub/beyondsurvival/p/the-economics-of-ai-universal-basic?r=40ir&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
The technological component is inevitable. UBI would just be the first step, I think.
Tis.
Reminds me a lot of Yanis Varioufarkis and his ‘Another Now’ book where he explains a similar concept.
Main thing is economic agency - the lack of which is destroying people’s faith in the system right now.
Bravo
Yes! That's one of the main points - even if AI doesn't take all our jobs, we real humans still need more economic agency independent of technology (or maybe because of it? in spite of it?)
This is an important signal...
We all have a human need to be valued and to find connection. That requires agency (Maslow etc)
The neoliberal project has gone on far too long, subjecting that need to commercialism which is degrading to the spirit.
Thanks for being a solutionist. We need more of it.
Superb. I’m unpacking this and resonating with it. It’s a cogent, crucial and pertinent essay. This rekindles my interest in economics. I’d like to see Joseph Stieglitz’s reaction to this piece, but I suspect his generation of economists are not keeping up with AI— and thus need a crash course on AI plus a big rethink.
A fascinating proposition. Lots to think about.