“I predict the Internet will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 catastrophically collapse.”
~ – Robert Metcalfe, 1995 (founder of Ethernet and 3Com)
Imagine… 20 years ago, experts debated whether the internet was just a fad. A novelty that would quickly die…
Today we're debating the entire future of work.
How about this one?
“There’s no chance the iPhone is going to get any significant market share.”
That was Steve Ballmer, CEO of Microsoft in April of 2007…
It seems obvious to us now… but in the era of flip phones, people did not consider the iPhone a contender.
And it’s not just Steve Ballmer of Microsoft…
Blackberry, Motorolla, and Nokia didn’t take the Apple threat seriously either…
That's a lot of high-ranking industry insiders who dropped the ball.
What about Blockbuster Video?
From television and telephones to airplanes and personal computers… many people “in the know” have been dismissive of new technology.
And it’s happening again…
As we stumble our way into an economy of artificial intelligence and advanced automation, you’ll hear the naysayers…
“it’s still decades away”, “the future of work won’t be the problem people think”
… and of course… “jobs may be lost, but they’ll be replaced by new and better jobs”.
To the experts who say jobs lost to A.I. and automation will be replaced with new and better jobs… I say bullsh#!.
Will there be new jobs we haven’t yet imagined?
But how do they define the word “replace”?
To think millions of unemployed people in one industry, can simply pack their bags, sell their homes and start fresh tomorrow morning in a new industry is absolutely ridiculous.
Their jobs aren't only being replaced. They're being left to fend for themselves in the vague hope that the market will correct itself…
Experts can't even predict what tomorrow's jobs will be, so they sure as hell can't claim that people's jobs will be replaced.
How many unemployed factory workers in the 90’s were saved from the rise of Silicon Valley?
None… at least none of consequence.
California was ripe with new jobs in the tech industry during the late 90s, but the broken and boarded up remains of a once-thriving manufacturing industry still remain 30 years later.
When you look at what really matters… people's lives, the word “replaced” does not apply to the future of work.
A Job Created In One Industry, Does Not Replace a Job Lost In Another…
While listening to serious discussions about the future of work (like the one below…), you will hear some so-called experts say things like, “It’s true… driverless vehicles will eliminate most truck and delivery drivers… but don’t worry, there’s a huge shortage of computer programmers.”
They really said that.
It's apparently okay because computer programming jobs will be waiting for truck drivers and delivery drivers when there are no more trucking or delivery jobs to be had.
You can probably see where this is going…
Here's the problem. These are “experts” who,
- Believe (or at least hope) the invisible hand of the market will fix all, and…
- Economies matter more than individuals.
But that's not how reality works.
Sure, a thousand jobs over here to “compensate” for a thousand jobs lost over there might keep “the economy” balanced, which is really all they care about…
… but how does that keep an unemployed truck driver's financial situation balanced?
At the end of the day, thousands or more will become unemployed and lose their entire income? They'll lose their homes, or cash in their children's education fund just to survive?
Where is their balance?
So… in my opinion, a new job here does not replace a job lost there…
It's Just Another False Alarm
To be clear, there are a lot of important people who are taking the future of work seriously.
However, the decision-makers who walk the halls of government and the economists who advise those in positions of power are taking a “wait and see” approach.
Maybe that's all we can do. But it feels like complacency.
Here's the logic…
It's business as usual. Jobs have been lost before, and we survived just fine.
They say fears are unfounded and that people have been sounding this false alarm of job loss for centuries. It's not a big deal and will almost certainly work itself out.
Perhaps, but this time IS different. And, it hasn't always worked itself out.
This Time It IS Different
In the past, technology and machines have replaced “jobs”, but not humans.
However, we're fast approaching a tipping point…
Until now, machines and algorithms lacked the complexity and dexterity of humans, as well as the ability to identify and process abstract information, such as images.
Machines lacked general logic, and the ability to reason…
These are all deficiencies that drew a line between “them” and “us”. And there was never a threat to our dominance in the workplace.
But that's no longer true. The walls are closing in. Technology is advancing exponentially while we humans are not.
For the first time in history, technology (AI) and machines (robots) are not only matching our abilities but surpassing them.
From an economic point of view, machines and artificial intelligence will replace humans, not just jobs.
And that's not good for a society that values its humans by their ability to produce and earn money.
Martin Ford, author of Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future, in his Ted Talk (below) discusses a class of worker who at the beginning of the 20th century experienced what it was like to be replaced…
The steam engine, first built in 1698, replaced some jobs previously performed by horses…
…but the steam engine did not replace our equestrian friends entirely.
For another 200 years, they still had a job to do.
Then came the internal combustion engine, and the automobile. That was the tipping point for horses.
Some might argue horses no longer having to work is a good thing, but from a purely economic perspective, the “horseless carriage” replaced more than their job. It almost replaced them entirely.
In 1915 the horse population was 22 million. By 1960, there were only 3 million.
The horse was completely irrelevant to the economy, and in many ways, irrelevant to society.
What does that say about humans who become irrelevant to the economy?
Will they also become irrelevant to society?
One could argue they already are. The way homeless people are treated. Or society's dismissal of people who don't “produce” as lazy, useless, and less valuable.
These are not good indicators of a bright future in a world with too few jobs.
We've Been Through This Before and Everything Worked Out Fine
The second argument, that it has always worked out fine before, is false.
One common example used to “prove” it's just another false alarm, is the Industrial Revolution…
When steam power and self-propelled machinery arrived in the late 1600s and early 1700s, people believed these new technologies would replace workers.
That did not happen, it's true. Workers were not replaced.
And, naysayers correctly point out that new jobs were created and the economy grew like never before. Employment, wealth, and production rose to an all-time high.
Nothing to worry about, right?
What “experts” ignore is that it took nearly 200 years before the world that we know today emerged.
Talk about a long period of painful adjustment and unrest…
During the Industrial Revolution, the world saw 2 major Communist revolutions, 2 World Wars, and The Great Depression.
The death toll left behind by these major events is just shy of 100 million!
We didn't just softly transition into modern times.
For thousands of years, the world chugged along with relatively little change. A person alive 500 years ago wouldn't be entirely uncomfortable living in the world 3000 years ago.
And then, in the blink of an eye during the Industrial Revolution, new global superpowers emerged and the geo-political structure of the planet (which was relatively stable for thousands of years), was shaken unlike any other time in human history.
And, these were not ancient times. There are people alive today who witnessed the tail end of that turmoil.
Just because we grew up in what is considered a stable time does not mean we can take it for granted.
There is no guarantee they will continue from here on forward…
That also doesn't mean we are headed for a new age of darkness but another World War, major Revolution, or a second Great Depression is not impossible. In some ways, they feel likely.
Massive disruption has massive consequences, and massive disruption is what's coming over the next decade or two.
When discussing the challenges of today, it’s not as simple as saying new jobs will replace the ones that are lost.
This disruption is far more significant than that, and to dismiss the potential impact would be naïve.
The Future of Work Might Be No Work
The economic shift we’re heading for is often referred to as The Fourth Industrial Revolution, labeled by Professor Klaus Schwab in his book…“The Fourth Industrial Revolution”.
And, as Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, Professor Schwab knows a little about what we're talking about.
He argues that the economic change we’re about to witness is unlike any other, and far more profound than those that came before.
And, it would be hard to disagree.
In the past, we replaced animal and human labor with machines, and connected the world with electricity and telephone lines…
These were big changes that, in their own way, enabled tremendous violence, massive disruption, and political instability.
Today we’re witnessing a similar shock as physical, digital and biological technologies converge, reaching out to all economies, industries, governments, and individuals… at the same time.
Whether we’re discussing drone technology, artificial intelligence, supercomputing, nanotechnology, 3D printing, DNA sequencing, autonomous vehicles, virtual reality… the scale and scope of our changing world is impossible to comprehend.
It's overwhelming, which is why many are choosing to ignore it and hope it all works out for the best.
And, while this article talks about the economic disruption, the potential for military applications is absolutely terrifying.
The defense industry is one of the primary drivers of robotics and artificial intelligence. The advantages gained on the battlefield and in strategy rooms guarantee the relentless march forward to develop technologies that remove humans from the picture.
Here are just a few examples…
Just a few days ago CNBC published this article about Polymaker, an additive manufacturing company that just 3-D printed an electric car that costs $7,500, and took only three days to make.
From manufacturing processes and fossil fuel extraction to lending institutions and shipping companies… technology like this rewrites the rules of entire industries with global implications.
But, the impact of 3D printing goes much further.
It will transform the entire construction industry, ushering in a new era of plug-and-play buildings. From 3D printed homes and office buildings to the circuitry and plumbing embedded in the walls, jobs in the construction industry could be a serious risk.
AI is not only a threat to jobs that were once considered untouchable, but it's forcing us to ask what it means to be human.
Engineers are at risk, as are professionals in legal and medical. Even writers and artists are at risk.
In general, people form their identities around the work they do, and nowhere is this more prevalent than in creative and higher-education professions.
When AI beat chess grandmaster Gary Kasparov, he wrote about it as if he was describing death. And that was in 1997.
More recently, Google's Deepmind, Alphago defeated the 17-time world Go champion Lee Sedol. With more positions than there are atoms in the Universe, the game Go is widely considered to be the most complex and difficult game to beat.
You can watch the movie on Netflix and clearly see the psychological devastation this defeat had, not only on champion Lee Sedol, but on fans of the game and others who were beaten by Alphago.
So, when it comes to AI and the future of work, there are more than jobs to consider.
The psychological impact of spending years in school, only to be replaced by artificial intelligence that's faster, smarter, and more accurate than you, it's a problem.
While algorithms capable of interpreting data and images thousands of times faster than a human are currently being used to “assist” medical professionals (such as radiologists and pathologists), it’s not hard to imagine that over the next few years these algorithms will easily replace their human counterparts.
It’s even being suggested that leaving medical diagnostics to a human could eventually become morally unacceptable.
And it makes sense. A radiologist who looks at 20 – 100 x-rays a day might be able to compete with an AI today. But in a relatively short time (10 years perhaps) that algorithm, which can process thousands of images daily (24/7) while amalgamating the data instantly with AI’s around the world to create a central database, will far surpass human capability.
If you ask anyone what makes humans the superior species, the answer is likely intelligence. But what if we are no longer the dominant intelligence?
We don't know how to live in a world where we are not the most intelligent species, and that shift is potentially greater than any change in human history thus far.
The same thing is happening with autonomous vehicles. Fully-autonomous vehicles and semi-autonomous systems are currently collecting millions of miles worth of data which will be used to develop vehicle fleets that require no driver.
It's not perfect, and recently one of Uber's driverless cars was involved in a fatal collision with a pedestrian. But human drivers are not perfect either.
In fact, according to the World Health Organization… there are 1.2 million road accident-related deaths with humans behind the wheel.
When comparing the number of incidences to the number of miles driven, so far autonomous vehicles outperform us. And they will get better.
The number of jobs lost due to autonomous vehicles will be in the millions. It’s not a matter of if, but when.
As far as jobs are concerned, virtual reality has flown under the radar.
But again, in the near future, things are expected to change.
Take the concept of universities for example. The physical cost of a university is in the billions… from initial construction and renovations to annual maintenance costs, parking facilities, road construction (for efficient access), and utilities such as water and sewage.
These are all costs paid for by tuition and taxes.
As virtual reality get's closer to replicating the real world (and it's impressive already), it’s expected we’ll see a rise in digital environments such as buildings. Buildings like universities.
These will be digital buildings with all the detail of the real thing in which you can sit in class and talk with friends, hang out in study halls, endure long lectures and even ask your teacher questions.
And virtual reality goes so much further than what traditional schools can offer.
No longer are you confined to just a classroom. History class can take you back in time. Geography can take to the location.
Virtual reality will transport you into the audience of historical speeches, deep into the oceans, and far into space.
Practical experience can be had where only theory was previously possible, and at a price that's a fraction of today's tuition costs.
When you count the cost savings of living at home, digital education will be an attractive option for students.
Also, in an era when countries like the United States are talking about arming teachers with guns, many parents may prefer the safety of these digital schools.
And, when virtual reality is married with artificial intelligence, teaching jobs could be at risk.
Vivek Wadwa, Director of Research at The Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at the Pratt School of Engineering, and co-author of The Driver in the Driverless Car: How Our Technology Choices Will Create the Future, paints a compelling picture of what teaching may look like in the near future.
As he describes it, artificial intelligence with human-like qualities (in his example, an AI named Clifford) will spend years with our children, learning and understanding their strengths and weaknesses.
Clifford will teach them math, music, art, and many other subjects in virtual environments that make learning feel as though they're playing games and living through history.
This may occur as he suggests alongside human educators, but it's not difficult to imagine Clifford replacing a significant percentage of teachers.
Working in a digital environment will also replace your office. Why pay for an expensive downtown lease and compete locally with other businesses for experienced and talented employees?
Companies can create their own virtual offices and hire qualified employees from anywhere in the world, often paying them local wages which can benefit both the employer and the employee.
Like sitting in a real office, virtual reality will transport you and your co-workers into a digital office that looks and feels very close to the real thing.
Better in fact…
Your office view might be glacier lakes and rocky mountains. Board meetings can be held on beaches, or in locations relevant to the products you sell.
Staff will be more than happy to avoid busy commutes, as well the expense of daily travel.
But here's the thing…
In addition to the buildings themselves, think of the infrastructure and services we currently use during our daily commutes.
Production of the vehicles we travel in, the workers who fix and maintain them, the roads we drive on, the places we stop to eat along the way. They all represent a job at risk.
With fewer people commuting, the demand for fossil fuels will drop significantly. Great for the environment (essential perhaps), but for those working in the oil industry (I was one of them)… it'll be devastating.
We're Just Getting Started…
All the technologies listed above already exist. They are NOT science fiction, nor are they concepts off in a distant future.
They are here now, and they are evolving quickly.
Their impact will not be immediate, but the change they thrust upon us will outpace our ability to adapt.
Also, with our current economic system, it will be difficult (if not impossible) to stop them. Each one in its own way contributes to higher productivity and lower costs. And if one thing in business is guaranteed, it's the march towards higher productivity and lower costs.
But it's not without a price.
As mentioned above, a trucker who loses his or her job to a driverless truck won't just slide into a computer programming job.
These are real people who will struggle to put food on their table. It’ll induce anger and frustration and in some cases lead to serious social issues such as alcoholism and violent crime.
One can hope things work themselves out in the end but there could be a long period of adjustment. Generations maybe.
And yet, this is just the tip of the iceberg, because we're also moving into the realm of what was once considered science fiction…
For example, nanotechnology is bringing us materials such as graphene which is 200 times stronger than steel, harder than diamond, and extremely flexible.
Here we are again with another technology that could completely transform our current methods of material production.
Another example is DNA sequencing. In the 1990s, some “experts” said it would take hundreds of years to sequence the human genome. But it didn't take hundreds of years. It barely took a decade.
The human genome was sequenced in 2003.
In the mid-2000s it would cost you $20 million or more to sequence your personal DNA, but by 2016, only 10 years later, you could have it done for under $1000.
Over the next decade, you can expect DNA sequencing to tell us things about ourselves that were once impossible to know, and in the process completely alter areas of medicine and nutrition.
These changes don't necessarily indicate jobs lost, but they will lead to a period of uncertainty as no one will be trained for the new jobs, whatever they turn out to be.
And here's a big problem…
With everything else being taken over by AI, automation, and change happening at such a rapid pace, will people commit years of their lives to an education for a profession that might not even exist by the time they learn it?
Doing More With Less
It's not just automation and 3D printing that will disrupt the manufacturing, packaging, and shipping industries.
We can expect an overall reduction in manufacturing altogether, as we digitize our products. TVs, handheld devices, and computers may eventually become holograms.
Imagine a single pair of glasses that replaces several devices?
Augmented Reality (AR) such as Microsoft Hololense and Magic Leap are hoping to do just that.
Not only are they aiming to replace your phone, TV, computer, watch, and even trinkets around your house, but they also plan to transport your friends and family directly into your home (as life-like holograms).
AR is already replacing clunky clay models and prototypes with digital ones, changing how engineers and designers work.
It will also revolutionize online shopping, overlaying products in your homes like furniture and kitchen cabinets so you can see how they look before you buy.
If you're thinking you'd never get rid of a “physical” product for a digital one, people were saying the same things about CD's, DVD's, computer storage, books, photographs, and even landline phones.
Holographic AR has the potential of being amazing, with the added benefit of helping the environment.
One product that can replace several will cut back on demand for raw materials and the number of components that need to be manufactured. Fewer shipping containers will be floating around the world too.
It all leads to less pollution, toxic byproducts, and demand for energy.
It's also a huge cost benefit to consumers.
Technology has boiled what was once a million dollars worth of products (just 20 years ago), into a cheap smartphone today.
Holographic technology (as well as virtual reality) will take this a step further.
But as great as this is, people will still struggle because fewer products produced means fewer jobs, and more economic instability.
Without question, we can look forward to entirely new fields of employment not yet conceived, but those jobs (whatever they turn out to be) will provide little comfort to those who lose their jobs in the production and distribution of the products people no longer need.
From drone technology and warehouse robots to self-serve checkouts and online shopping, the disruption goes on…
Whether you believe we’ll have enough jobs to replace the old ones or not, we as a civilization are facing change unlike anything before. Are we prepared for it?
Social Unrest and Inequality
As we talked about earlier, it took 200 years from the beginning of the industrial revolution to the time society and daily life settled into the world we know today.
The problems were are facing now are similar but in many ways far more profound.
Again, technology is not only a threat to our jobs but it will force us to re-evaluate what it means to be human. Technology is so much more than new gadgets.
At a deeper level, the implications of tech like social media and deep fakes point to a difficult transition.
And another problem with new technology is that it’s expensive when introduced.
Since we’re talking about things that will bring giant leaps in productivity, and significant economic advantage in some way, those who can afford these technologies set themselves further apart from those who can't, leading to even greater inequality.
With inequality comes social unrest.
Take, for example, biomedical enhancements. Medical science in the near future will enable those who can afford it to be “better than normal”.
Better than normal might mean higher intelligence, stronger resistance to illness and disease, and even the ability to live indefinitely.
All of these “enhancements” provide advantages to wealthy individuals and countries that in effect, lead to more wealth while the rest of humanity is left behind.
The same is true for automation. While business owners use robots to increase their wealth through better productivity and reduced costs… the employees of those businesses will lose their jobs and fall further into financial hardship.
In time, costs will come down, and technology may level the playing field (like Napster did to the music industry or YouTube to video production and distribution companies). But in the meantime, the damage is done.
With economic turmoil and a widening gap between rich and poor, the potential for anger and violence is real, which could force governments to act aggressively towards their own people.
How this plays out is well beyond the scope of this article, but it’s necessary to point out that technological unemployment poses a serious risk to life as we know it. The stability we’ve enjoyed for the last few generations is not guaranteed.
Universal Basic Income
Technological unemployment is such a concern that governments, as well as billionaires such as Elon Musk, Richard Branson, and Mark Zuckerberg, are speaking out in favor of a Universal Basic Income (UBI).
The quick explanation of UBI is simply paying people to live.
While UBI is a hot-button topic that elicits strong fears amongst some with visions of socialism, and lazy drug users sitting around playing video games all day, studies suggest the reality is different.
Often viewed as a handout, proponents of Universal Basic Income point out that our societies have been built by those who came before us.
Put simply, none of us get rich in a vacuum. We are all standing on the shoulders of giants and whether you are rich or poor, you belong to a society built by our ancestors and are therefore entitled to a portion of it.
Also, as one of society's “producers”, your wealth was paid for by “consumers”.
So, just because you built a business and worked hard does not mean you achieved everything on your own. Your products were shipped on roads paid for by public funds. Your customers have money to spend because their income (from employment) was made possible by public education, and so on.
And, the things we typically attribute financial success to, like hard work and intelligence, are terrible indicators of a person's monetary status.
We like to think the universe is fair, but the truth is, that many lazy people are wealthy while some who live in poverty work extremely hard.
And there are many “jobs” (like stay-at-home Mom or Dad) that society has deemed unworthy of pay but are important nonetheless.
Is Universal Basic Income a fair distribution of the commons? Does it recognize that everyone contributes in their own way? Does it provide equal opportunity and not equal result?
Advantages to Universal Basic are said to include (among others),
- Better working conditions
- Reduced inequality (and the social problems that come with inequality)
- A more balanced distribution of jobs
- Less crime
- Stronger democracy…
Having said that, UBI presents some challenges as well.
One of the questions that come up is whether people will just become lazy and sit around smoking dope all day.
While research does not support this assumption, one area of concern is for teenagers attending school.
In general, studies show that UBI can lead to more meaningful work.
For example, without the burden of constantly chasing your next meal, people are far more likely to train for, and seek out work in areas that interest them; they’d take advantage of the time opportunity.
They may choose work that's not only meaningful to them, but to society as well. It's a lot easier to help others when your own needs are met.
This would also lead to a more entrepreneurial mindset, making UBI a strong case FOR capitalism, not against it.
However, this poses a problem for teenagers who are typically uncertain what they want to do with their lives and are more interested in having fun.
What incentive do they have to learn and get good grades knowing their basic income will be provided when they graduate?
It's been suggested that the amount of basic Income is higher for those who do well in school, but then it's no longer “universal”.
It becomes a Conditional Basic Income, which takes away one of the advantages that UBI provides; the elimination of administrative costs for complex benefit programs.
Another issue with Universal Basic Income is that globally, it’s not really universal. The same argument that we are all beneficiaries of the society we live in applies to everyone.
Our economic world is no longer defined by borders.
So, UBI is great if you live in a country that provides it, but what if your country doesn’t? The impact of technological unemployment still applies to you, no matter where you live on this planet.
There are obvious right-left political issues to deal with (which may disappear as people on both sides become irrelevant to the economy). And then there are the industry titans and elites who'll fight with their last breath to hang onto the status quo.
While the sentiment of UBI is great, putting it into practice presents real challenges.
In addition to those listed above, another significant problem is determining how much?
And, how do you prevent landlords from raising rents to take it all, creating more inequality between homeowners and renters?
It opens up an entirely new dialogue of rules and regulations…
Whether UBI is a viable answer to the future of work remains to be seen, but at least the conversation about how we should tackle the next decade has begun.
For thousands of years, very little had changed from generation to generation…
What your parents taught you (and what their parents taught them) applied directly to the world you lived in.
In the 20th century, this was no longer true. The world you grew up in was in many ways dramatically different than the one your parents grew up in.
Today change is marked by decades… or even less. We don’t even know what the jobs of tomorrow will be, or if there will be enough to go around.
How do we prepare our children?
How do we prepare ourselves?
This is a serious issue, one of (if not the) most important of our lifetime.
While I think all ideas and suggestions to approach this challenge on a global scale are welcome, we need to first figure out how we can best deal with the future of work as individuals.
In my opinion, we need a new way of thinking.
It's often said that the commodity of the future is information. For companies like Facebook and Google that might be true. But for individuals, I think it will be the ability to ask better questions and solve problems.
Not math problems or puzzles, but situational problems. The ability to spot trends, ask what those trends mean, process the bigger picture, and act accordingly.
It'll be the mindset of an entrepreneur, or freelancer rather than the employee, doing mindless tasks and depending on regular paychecks.
More and more we’ll find it more difficult to lean on traditional institutions to earn a living. The world of tomorrow will not guarantee enough jobs to satisfy those who are willing to look for them.
And we certainly can't count on elected representatives to tackle the problem.
We'll be constantly adapting to something new, something unexpected.
If you have a particular skill or hobby, playing guitar, for example, try finding ways to leverage it.
You could become an online freelancer, start a work-at-home job or side hustle, or spend some spare time learning how internet businesses work.
And preparing for a world where jobs are scarce isn’t all about making money, depending on your values, it might simply mean learning to live with less.
As Yuval Noah Harari, author of Sapiens and Homo Deus suggests, this is not a story about jobs, but a story of humans. Specifically what it means to be human.
Jobs will disappear, maybe not tomorrow or the day after, but eventually technology will render us irrelevant to the economy and all that will be left will be our quest for purpose.
Please share your thoughts below. Are you concerned about the future of work? Do you think a Universal Basic Income is the answer?
12 thoughts on “What Is The Future of Work? The Fall of Humans in a World Without Jobs”
Universal Basic Income is the answer.
It’s been tested for decades now, its shown good for people and the economy.
It’s not “rocket science”! It’s time to stop just talking about it and start implementation. Its time we treat our fellow human beings like brothers and sisters, because we are. Its good for us, the earth and the economy.
Hey Sam, thanks for reading and you might be right about UNI. I definitely agree with it in concept. The argument against UBI is that it takes away incentive but I strongly believe the reverse is true. Nothing kills motivation more than spending years at a tedious job, dealing with negativity and having very little time if any to pursue the thing you were once passionate about.
By far… most people are unhappy in their job and while the idea of a paycheck for labour seems like a great incentive, it falls short.
Ask anyone who just spent the entire day at work arriving home after a long commute with dinner to make and who knows what other chores… how motivated they are? How creative they’re feeling? Or how inspired they are to do something great? Our system promotes consumerism, not creativity.
Rather than being a disincentive, UBI (I think) would unleash a wave of inventors, artists, entrepreneurs, and so on… Having your basic needs met would relieve tremendous pressure and reduce crime, improve relationships, promote greater social interaction as people not only have more time but given the opportunity to pursue their passions would be generally happier, more fun, and interesting to be around.
The list of benefits goes on… but truthfully, I don’t think it’s the benefits that matter. It’s the reality that even many who are against UBI, who think it’s just lazy people looking for handouts and believe that doubling down on our current system is the answer, will find themselves obsolete in an economy where people are simply less relevant. I think it will be sooner than we realize, but even if I’m wrong… which I usually am 😀 and it takes longer, the time will come.
A lot has already been written about the decoupling of wages and productivity and while some might think a return to Nationalism is the answer, I disagree. I fully understand the desire and nostalgia of wanting to go back to a golden age when… well, I’m not sure what that golden age was because it’s different for everyone. And logistically, it’s not so simple even if we could go back. The only way manufacturing jobs will return for example is if it’s financially beneficial to do it… which means even more automation, fewer jobs, smaller wages and higher prices to consumers (exactly the opposite of what workers want).
Anyway… my point is, I think the UBI decision is inevitable whether people want it or not.
Having said that, there are some significant challenges with it as well. What stops landlords from increasing rents to a bare minimum that meets UBI leaving nothing left for living expenses? The potential for inflation in all sectors is significant and will be extremely difficult to regulate without fundamental changes to our system. I think people will be responsive to those changes, but only when it’s their job chopping block… not before. So any serious talk of UBI will require a tipping point and when that tipping point comes, no one knows. Nor do we know how much damage our economy will incur before that happens.
Anyway… the list of challenges is as long as the list of benefits, but I do agree with you that UBI will have to play a significant role in the future. It’s so disruptive though, with so many moving pieces and uncertainty (because we don’t know exactly what the future economy will look like) that my views and thoughts on UBI are constantly changing.
Thanks again for reading and for your insight 🙂
Hello. Another great article. I keep reading books and articles about this “new revolution” in order to see some questions answered but unfortunately I do not found them! I totaly agree that technology and AI will take our jobs, or at least 80% of them, If I look at this subject without to many thoughts I think: Wow, great! More time for myself, let the Ai and robots do that because I’m going to the beach and read a book without no schedule. But then, I think: and how I get money to pay my food, my water, my doctor, or even the book I’m reading on the beach? That is the main question I never see answered. Some say that I could be a freelancer, yes, ok, but being a freelancer is not working?! If I’m a freelancer I have to work. And I understand that, because if we do not earn money we die, because food and water (just the basic to survive) cost money. What if all of us became freelancers of something? At some point there’s no need to deal with money, We start to make exchanges of services or goods. I do believe that AI will take our jobs, maybe more than 80% of them, but I can’t see the future of the 7 or 8 billion of humans! And the UBI? How? Today we are leaving with a major problem because the use of petrol, and there’s a lot of good inventions that could put our cars moving without petrol, but as long as the oil lords can sell oil they will never let our cars use rubbish for example, to be moved. This type of economy will never let us live without money, and when we are living only to make and spend money… this requiers work! Someone has to pay us for something. perhaps in the future I have to pay to reply this article! Anyway, thanks for the article, very clear, and thanks for letting us the chance to reply! (please excuse my english, I’m Portuguese and I’m not using AI in this text!!) Best wishes for all
Hi Suzy, you make a lot of great points. A lot of people in high places are starting to talk about UBI now as well. How it would work is a great debate (and by great I mean both big and interesting), but even the richest corporations collapse when people no longer have money to spend. The biggest takeaway though is that no one has an answer. We can theorize all we want and hope that change comes a lot slower than predicted, but the truth is we don’t have a roadmap to the future. I think some countries will get it right, others will get it horribly wrong.
The thing about freelancing is having an entrepreneurial mindset. It’s not necessarily an answer in and of itself. It’s the ability to be creative when thinking about what you’re going to do. A lot of people feel helpless when they lose their job… and that’s a terrible place to be at the moment you lose your job. If you can diversify and find ways to earn money outside of your job, you’ll be better equipped to survive financially if that day comes. Maybe not doing the exact thing you’re doing, but the act of being creative and trying new things outside of your comfort zone can better prepare you a future that’s more uncertain than we’re used to.
Thanks for ready Suzy, I appreciate your insight 🙂
Well – that was eye-opening and downright depressing!
I look at it as survival of the fittest. My husband is one of those factory workers who has lost his job again and again due to factories closing down and he and I have had to adapt.
We live in upstate NY where a certain senator who later ran for president promised 100,000 jobs if she was elected – we got more factories closing down and no jobs.
We have to forge forward, help our fellow men and women (or whatever non-gender) and live the Golden Rule – do to others as you would have them do to you. Help each other. Give more and you are going to get more.
To your massive success!
Hi Heather, thank you for you comment. I certainly didn’t intend on the post being depressing… just, as you say, an eye opener. The future isn’t set in stone and as Yogi Berra famously quoted, “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future”.
Respectfully, I do disagree with survival of the fittest… at least in spirit. Of course, some will survive and some won’t, but circumstance plays just as big a part, if not bigger than being the best, fittest or capable of adapting. Certainly all those things matter (as well as awareness and preparation which is the real point of this post)… but in general, when a storm hits it doesn’t discriminate. If we could predict when and where the storm will hit, who exactly will be affected and who won’t… and what the most important skills required will be… but I’m getting on rant, and I don’t think we’re staring down the barrel of doom.
However, I mention in the article about 2 World Wars and the Great Depression… it should be noted that all three of those things have happened within the last 100 years and some people who have experienced those terrible events are still alive today. Also… there are people in countries today whose struggles are equal to anything those global events could have thrown at them, so our relative stability is not guaranteed.
On the positive side… many of these technologies have the “potential” to provide the world with cheap (near free) renewable energy, an abundance of food, water, housing and so on… which are points I should have maybe emphasized more, points that are much closer to my personal view of what the future holds. For references about the good things we have to look forward to I recommend reading Peter Diamandis’ books Abundance and Bold… both paint a bright future for humanity 🙂
Thanks again for reading and stopping by,
You are right of course. There are many people out there that believe 1) The invisible hand of the market fixes all, and 2) that economies matter more than individuals.
We have an environmental issue in my country at the moment where the mining & oil & gas industries want to destroy the environment, but they keep say “don’t worry we are creating jobs. Jobs are good, Profits are good”.
I think you are right, we may indeed be heading for the “Fourth industrial revolution”. Driverless cars are coming ( I am opposed to them – if they crash and kill someone, who should be help accountable?)
I also agree with you that a truck driver can’t just flick a switch and become an advanced computer programmer.
social issues will result.
These are very complex problems and they are coming, one day (sooner than we think) they will become very real. We need to start working towards solutions today.
Oil and gas dominate the economy where I live as well. And it’s the same story… jobs. And I get it, I used to work and depend on that industry as well. And to be fair, those on the environment’s side don’t care about the oil and gas worker losing his or her job either… which is also a legitimate (if not a relatively short-term) concern.
I’m glad you mentioned the environment vs. economy issue because I didn’t really touch on it in this article. But it is a big problem…
The future of both the economy and environment are incredibly complex… and yet the media has been able to divide opinions of them into well-packaged political ideologies and attach them to a dozen other complex issues. It doesn’t make sense to me how we can learn where a person stands on one issue… and automatically know where they stand on a dozen other seemingly unrelated issues.
It’s almost as if people don’t own their own opinions anymore. If you believe climate change is a hoax for example, you must also believe electric cars are unrealistic, solar power is inefficient, and that more pipelines are the future. I won’t pick a side here… but whatever side a person does choose… none of those things (electric cars, solar power, or pipelines) care. They will happen (or not happen) based on technology and demand, not politics and opinions…
And if they do happen (which I personally believe is inevitable), they will lead to massive consequences for the future of work. Putting blinders on will not change that. Like climate change, if we can’t come together and discuss it without injecting ideology into the conversation… we’re going to be in big trouble.
But, I agree with what you say… we need to start working towards solutions today.
And… thank you for reading and sharing 🙂
Wow, you Make very many valid points in your article. I won’t be around for many of these changes but my grandchildren certainly will.
I don’t think we’re at the point yet where universal income is needed but down the road, it certainly might be the only solution.
One thing is certain, we can count on our politicians to make sure it’s a mess.I suppose progress is inevitable, how that shakes out in the future remains to be seen. One can hope that we have a visionary driving the bus.
Lol… Yes I agree, the politicians will make sure it’s a mess. In general, I’ve been in support of a Universal Basic Income. It’s not perfect, but I believe in people… and given the opportunity to have their basic needs met, in my opinion, would unlock a flood of talent and entrepreneurship. It would allow people to find work that’s aligned with their values and aspirations leading to happier and healthier society for many.
The cynic would say people will do nothing and just rot away, but that doesn’t support the research. People do nothing and rot away when they have no hope, when they don’t see a path to a better future. Give them that path and I believe the majority will follow it.
Having said that… as I said, I’ve been supportive… but having considered the hurdles I doubt it’s viability. Not without other major changes as well. If treated a simple patch, it’ll be too complicated in practice. For example, how can inflation be regulated so it doesn’t rise abruptly and negate the benefits of UBI? Not that there isn’t a solution, but as you say… getting politicians to vote on a solution is nearly impossible. Few are experts at anything except pandering to opinions and campaign financiers… but that’s a topic for a different article 😀
Thanks for stopping by and reading, I appreciate you comments and insight.
Great article and you touch so many topics it’s overwhelming. I will just say that one advantage we have as humans is that one way or another we find a way to adapt to every situation. So as technology evolves and our way of life changes we will find a way to evolve how we live also. The transition is not always smooth as history has taught us but this is what evolution is. And we need to be prepared for the changes that are coming in order to survive in this harsh environment.
Hi Stratos, thanks for stopping by, I appreciate your comment. You are right, we do find ways to adapt… it’s that transition period that will be the challenge. What worries me now is that we’re less prepared both as individuals and as society to endure those transitions. We’re connected globally now in a way that when one of us stumbles, the rest of us get dragged along. Also… I think (at least for me anyway), we are less capable as individuals to fend for ourselves in a crisis situation.
Not to get all doomsday, because I don’t subscribe to that future… but what I mean is, in a situation where supermarket shelves are empty for even a short period, or our infrastructure and accessibility is interrupted in any way, most of us wouldn’t know what to do. We’re not as well equipped with the skill-set for survival like previous generations. So… in a situation where there is a difficult transition, even if it’s not a long one… our ability to endure it might not be very good.
Hopefully that’s never the case though… it would be nice to think that blending these technologies into our daily lives will have minimum disruption.
Thanks again for you comment and stopping by