[bayarearefugee]

> When the complexity vs cost of automation tips in the favor of humans, that’s where I’ll have to skill to. You said it, trucking, welding

Even the 'safe' jobs are going to suffer a lot relative to today because it'll be a race to the bottom as more and more people try to shift into a reduced number of jobs with less demand.

Eg. Being a welder is safe from AI at least until the robots are perfected, but even they have two huge problems to contend with in the nearer term: reduced demand for their services as ~40% of the current workforce loses their income, plus an influx of competition for their own job as these same displaced workers look to shift jobs to a safer one.

People who assume everything will be alright post-AI because everything (mostly) worked itself out in the past are underestimating the extent to which the scale of so much changing so fast will negatively impact every aspect of our economy for anyone who isn't already a wealthy asset owner.

The economy can absorb buggy whip makers being obsoleted, or car factory workers being offshored, but even though those situations sucked for the people impacted by them, the scale of them was tiny (and the time to adjust was so much longer) compared to what is coming with AI displacement.

[tartoran]

On top of that, this could trigger social unrest on a scale most of us have never seen in our lifetimes. But who benefits from AI is still politically negotiable. It is possible to build policies that spread the gains more broadly. Otherwise, the economy hollow out, society starts to fracture, and nobody wins, including the ultra-wealthy. Their wealth is not insulated from collapse; it depends on the stability of the system itself.