But what if AI and the robots do take all our jobs?
The only correct answer to that question is that we’re all as rich as Croesus.
Human labour being replaced by machines just isn’t a problem. Which is something we suspect writers at The Guardian should, in fact, know:
The less generous answer is that it’s about what it’s always about: money. Venture capitalist Marc Andreessen once famously said: “Software is eating the world.” Up until now there’s only been so much it could eat. Whatever software you built, you still needed people to do most of the world’s work, with the labour market itself tantalisingly out of reach for ambitious tech execs. But now Silicon Valley sees an opening. A chance to own the entire means of production. And it wouldn’t be Silicon Valley if it didn’t try to seize that chance.
As a certain German once pointed out:
….stage of socioeconomic development predicated upon a superabundance of material wealth, which is postulated to arise from advances in production technology…
Which leads to the individual being able to:
…hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening [and] criticise after dinner
Once all those usual human wants and desires are satiated by the machines we all get to do whatever we want. Forever. Which really is a synonym for being as rich as Croesus.
No, it is not possible for all of this production to flow only to the capitalists who own the AIs and the robots. If we normies don’t get to consume that production then we normies all still have jobs doing exactly what we do now - sating the wants and desires of our fellow normies through the application of our labour. There is no possible outcome where the machines do everything and we’re without both jobs and consumption. That’s not a logical space that exists.
For completists there’s also that historical proof available. By any reasonable standard machines already have taken all the jobs in farming. Back when Karl was - first, perhaps - writing 80% of all jobs were standing around in muddy fields. None of those jobs exist now, the machines, the tractors and balers and combine harvesters have taken them all. We out here, we normies, don’t own the land or the machines and yet we’ve vastly more food, food is vastly cheaper and we are vastly better off. The only possible outcome of more machines is more of the same.
Well, obviously that’s the only outcome as long as we don’t allow the planners or the human resources departments to decide what we should all do with our newly liberated time and wealth. But no one’s going to make that mistake, right?
Tim Worstall