4 ms·

I'm no economist but here is how I think of it. In an ideal world let's assume every worker is replaced by one AI / robot that is an exact clone of them. Then l

I'm no economist but here is how I think of it. In an ideal world let's assume every worker is replaced by one AI / robot that is an exact clone of them. Then let's say there is an ideal government that taxes all the income each person's clone makes and hands it directly to them. In such an economy nothing would change, things would go on as they always have. Now some will be unlucky and end up with a clone that makes them way less than average. So to fix this the salaries of all the clones are put into one pot and redistributed as "UBI". Given the wealth disparity, most people would end up better off than before, the high earners of the past will be a bit worse off though. But of course we are not in a perfect world, in reality there are many inefficiencies, and no company would accept a 100% AI worker tax. However, these AIs are presumably not just our clones, but 100x better. So we are in a position of abundance not scarcity. There's enough eggs for everyone. It becomes a question of distribution and policy

augment_me 1mo ago
Where do you live? Do all houseowners get kicked out of their homes? Do you raze all houses and build similar apartments and resettle people? If not, there will be inequalities. How does someone who is born into a shit house at a polluted street move up to a nice house in a forest? You still need full control and acceptance of inequality from all sides.
- frabcus 1mo ago
  There's a bunch of quite good speculation like this in Plan A https://ai-2040.com/supplements/economics-of-plan-a https://ai-2040.com/supplements/economics-of-plan-a And yes, moved into skyscrapers: "This implies that the price of housing will become dominated by the price of the land (as opposed to the cost of building housing), so dense housing (e.g. skyscrapers) will become relatively much cheaper than sparse housing" There's a later bit that talks about keeping earth as a reserve too.
  - augment_me 1mo ago
    I want to see the political climate and situation that lead up to a decision like this. Like, if you just go off basic human desires, politics, the amount of money invested in outcome D, and how previous global events are handled. Humans are reactive and not proactive, similar concept can be seen with climate change, terrorist attacks, financial crashes, etc, shit has to get really bad before a decision to change is made. From the site, I think the most realistic outcome is Plan D and then eventually Plan C when people start freaking out. I dont see any path where you get even close to Plan A. So either lay out how Plan A is supposed to happen in the population, or revise the answer.

augment_me 1mo ago

Where do you live? Do all houseowners get kicked out of their homes? Do you raze all houses and build similar apartments and resettle people? If not, there will be inequalities. How does someone who is born into a shit house at a polluted street move up to a nice house in a forest? You still need full control and acceptance of inequality from all sides.

frabcus 1mo ago
There's a bunch of quite good speculation like this in Plan A https://ai-2040.com/supplements/economics-of-plan-a https://ai-2040.com/supplements/economics-of-plan-a And yes, moved into skyscrapers: "This implies that the price of housing will become dominated by the price of the land (as opposed to the cost of building housing), so dense housing (e.g. skyscrapers) will become relatively much cheaper than sparse housing" There's a later bit that talks about keeping earth as a reserve too.
- augment_me 1mo ago
  I want to see the political climate and situation that lead up to a decision like this. Like, if you just go off basic human desires, politics, the amount of money invested in outcome D, and how previous global events are handled. Humans are reactive and not proactive, similar concept can be seen with climate change, terrorist attacks, financial crashes, etc, shit has to get really bad before a decision to change is made. From the site, I think the most realistic outcome is Plan D and then eventually Plan C when people start freaking out. I dont see any path where you get even close to Plan A. So either lay out how Plan A is supposed to happen in the population, or revise the answer.