Automation and Worker Displacement: A rudimentary consideration of the“AI Boom”Nico MastrangeloMay 29, 20235 min readWhile a liberal economic view accounts for constant progress and economicgrowth over time, workers in the modern era remain frustrated with seeminglyincreasing wealth inequality.¹ While economic outputs have invariably grown sincethe digital revolution², and time spent at work has somewhat decreased,³ Workerwages adjusted for purchasing power, seem to have trended down.⁴ Suggesting arise in income inequality among many Western nations. It remains unsurprisingthen that AI itself has gained considerable traction in almost every sector. Beingused for everything from writing essays for students, copy for business, scripts forwebsites, and algorithms for day traders. Needless to say, it has taken the media bystorm, yet little of the conversation seems to be geared toward the socio-politicalchallenges AI could possibly bring to global and domestic economies. Therefore,having set the stage for relevance, this essay will attempt to re-consider the notionsof what it means to work, and how a restructuring of our thinking about labor andemployment in the modern world may be necessary in regard to forecasting theeconomic change that AI may bring.An analysis by Goldman Sachs of occupational tasks in the United Statesand Europe determined that approximately 66% of existing jobs face some level ofexposure to AI automation. Additional estimates of generative AI say that there ispotential that AI could replace around 25% of current job roles. Furthermore,applying these findings on a global scale, suggests that generative AI couldautomate the equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs.⁵ This kind of replacement ofworkers would be what Economists call “Structural Unemployment”, structuralunemployment itself is traditionally remedied by a re-training of the workforce.And while no one is certain about the likely outcomes, one of three situationsseems likely 1) A large portion of the workforce may lose their jobs and be able tobe ‘re-trained’ and able to find work elsewhere. 2) A large portion of theworkforce will lose their jobs, and either lack of ‘re-training’ or jobs in the marketwill lead to a reduction of participation in the workforce. 3) Nothing happens, thefree market adapts and everything ‘levels out’ so to speak. Logically, with regardto AI point 3 will not need to be discussed, larger conversations about gradualincreases in wealth inequality or workforce participation will occur, yet it wouldlikely not be in response to AI itself.So beginning with point 1, it is important to note that the most at-riskprofessions in regard to AI exposure are within the domains of administrative,legal, scientific, or other ‘Highly Qualified’ professions that require highereducation. With the least, at-risk sectors being blue color work such as agriculture,service, repair, and food preparation.⁵ Considering the amount of educationnecessary for individuals in the highly skilled group, it follows that there may beresistance from these individuals to re-enroll themselves in re-training programs.Thus some degree of government spending may be required to motivate and equipthese individuals to work in other sectors. Otherwise, a large part of the workforcewould be out of work, poor, and likely angry. Regarding the second camp,blue-collar workers are typically more at risk of injury, disease, or early mortality.⁶Thus, if a large section of the workforce was forced into these types of jobs, anincrease in the strain on hospitals is to be expected. (If we learned anything fromCOVID-19 hospitals are already understaffed, funded, and strained) likely creatinga need for more government spending once again. Therefore, in tandem with alikely necessary increase in spending of governments, global growth in GDP,productivity, and worker output,⁵ there may be a ‘third way’ if you will. Though itwould require restructuring in how we think about the human condition as it isunder the neo-liberal policy.Currently, I will argue that under such an economic system, we asindividuals have been turned into purely economic creatures, or to borrow JohnStewert Mills's term “The Economic Man”. Such a man in the modern world isvalued only on his/her ability to be a viable economic creature, thus almost all ofour decisions have to be framed under the guise of economic viability. From whatwe eat, to what we study, to how we spend our time. This arguably, was the mostefficient mode of progress, rewarding those who can generate revenue becausethose who can afford to buy the products will purchase them, allowing them toimprove their lives, and in exchange, those involved in the process get a cut of theprofits. However, If indeed AI creates such a level of worker displacement thatwould require public funding, wouldn't it be best to implement some sort of “LostHuman Operator Tax”? That way, the required funding of public services necessaryto re-equip workers, prepare hospitals, and build more diverse education would putless of a strain on the already likely “economically insecure worker”, and insteadon the companies that displaced him/her. One might argue that this tax would stifleinnovation by de-incentivizing research into AI and automatization. Though, this isnothing more than an application of antiquated thinking to modern problems. Iargue that if one is able to succeed in striking the balance of a “Lost HumanOperator Tax” and innovation, we could create a system of both increased publicservices, as well as potential UBI. Thus allowing for innovation that may not havebeen “Economically Viable” but is still globally beneficial.For how this may look we can look at the modern Republican Tradition,pioneered by thinkers such as Philip Petit, Quintin Skinner, and Hannah Arendt,who understand the Aristotelian notion that philosophizing and cultural growth canonly occur when The People have time to do so. For example, as our democraciesstruggle with populist rhetoric through the weaponization of politics of passion,perhaps the republican ideal of civic participation would provide an outlet for suchfeelings of disenfranchisement. As such, large-scale participation required for, vitaactiva is impossible in a world where all members of society are required to spendone-third of their life working, and thus have to hand over the reins of PoliticalFreedom to representatives. In a world where AI may be able to provide enoughmaterial for people to spend less time working, it may be possible to hand thereigns of political freedom back over to the people. With large-scale assemblies ofindividuals taking place and a public forum revitalized. As we have known for along time, the growth of the human condition happens only when we have beenallowed leisure.Though as it stands, it seems those who are able to invest in thesetechnologies will be able to slash their costs in terms of human capital, work as weknow it will transition into labor, and as the wealth compounds away from us, ourparticipation in politics and how we are governed will continue to be hijacked, allthe while watching ourselves become increasingly tired and apathetic as all of ourworkdays will end in sweat and blood once again.BibliographyForty years of inequality in Europe: Evidence from distributional national accounts.(2019, April 22). CEPR.https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/forty-years-inequality-europe-evidence-distributional-national-accountsGlobal GDP 1985-2027 | Statista. (2023, February 16). Statista.https://www.statista.com/statistics/268750/global-gross-domestic-product-gdp/Ortiz-Ospina, E. (2020, November 29). Time Use. Our World in Data.https://ourworldindata.org/time-useFig 3: Evolution of the proportion of wages in GDP (adjusted wage. . . (n.d.).ResearchGate.https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Evolution-of-the-proportion-of-wages-in-GDP-adjusted-wage-share-Source-IMF-World_fig3_281044099Briggs, J. B., Kodnani, D. K., & Pierdomenico, G. (2023). The Potentially Large Effects ofArtificial Intelligence on Economic Growth (Briggs/Kodnani). Economies Research.https://www.key4biz.it/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/Global-Economics-Analyst_-The-Potentially-Large-Effects-of-Artificial-Intelligence-on-Economic-Growth-Briggs_Kodnani.pdfTrzmiel, T., Pieczyńska, A., Zasadzka, E., & Pawlaczyk, M. (2021). The Impact ofLifetime Work and Non-work Physical Activity on Physical Fitness AmongWhite – and Blue–Collar Retirees: A Cross-Sectional Study. Frontiers inMedicine, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2021.745929A term used often in contrast to “Vita contemplativa”(Contemplative life) in Hannah Arendt’s On the Human Condition
Comments