This is a follow-up to my prior post: “AI is the future of accessibility“. There are market changes that will be materializing in the coming years that will be hugely impactful for all white collar jobs. Some say that time period is 3-5 years, others say it is more like a decade. Regardless of timeline, these changes are coming and we need to start thinking ahead.
Throughout the history of AI, there have been about 3 periods of time called “AI Winters”. These were periods of time that were all preceded by “hype cycles”, where some sort of seemingly massive breakthroughs occurred that failed to live up to their promise. Industry and scientific communities saw through the hype, realized that the new technologies wouldn’t live up to their purported promise, and interest cooled off.
We are not going to experience another AI winter. Yes, there’s a lot of hype around AI, but large portions of that hype are driven by marketing & publicity, which are fields that specialize in exaggeration. AI systems have proven commercially viable, as evidenced by many of the products and systems generating headlines today. AI is woven into our technology infrastructure now and has reached a state of irreversible commercialization. AI has reached the highest levels of interest and funding in its history in the 2020s by every possible measure, including: academic publications, patent applications, total investment and job openings.
While we may still be decades away from true artificial general intelligence (AGI), the practical reality is that it won’t matter. So much specialized AI – called Weak AI/ Narrow AI, or Vertical AI – will exist that it will have a devastating effect on jobs.
Just like the industrial revolution, we’re in a new evolution where the job market is undergoing a massive upheaval. Just as manufacturing jobs in the US went to China, and customer service jobs went to India, we’re going to see more and more jobs being replaced by AI and/ or positions being eliminated because less people are needed to do some work because the added efficiency of AI means less humans are needed. The work demand will still exist but humans will be using AI to increase efficiency to a degree that eliminates the need for so many humans to do it.
The problem this will create is, over time, the complete elimination of BILLIONS of jobs worldwide. Not just accessibility jobs. The first jobs that will feel this will be software development, then white collar jobs of any kind as well as most retail, then unskilled labor (once robots are added to the mix). The initial response that some may have to this is to attempt a “pivot” to jobs that AI cannot do effectively, such as skilled trades or other highly specialized work. The problem, again, is that more people will be competing for these jobs, too. Wages will face incredible downward pressure as more and more people are competing for fewer and fewer jobs or jobs with more available workers than demand.
This means we need Universal Basic Income (UBI).
Worldwide, there is strong pressure from right wing forces to undo progressive policies and to end social benefits (or privatize them). They’re doing this to enrich themselves and they’re succeeding by keeping the rest of us too busy fighting silly culture wars. The right wing has latched onto xenophobia as the tool to solidify the support of their base who then allow their party oligarchs do anything they want.
American “Progressives” aren’t much better. The only real, tangible difference between the right and left is that at least those on the left aren’t xenophobic racists, waving Nazi flags at rallies. Even in cases where the Democrats controlled the Presidency and both houses of legislature, they’ve somehow been unable to pass universal healthcare, pass the Green New Deal, pass a federal law on a woman’s right to choose, raise the Federal Minimum Wage, or make any real progress on immigration.
The Democratic Party is not a progressive party. In fact, its political stances are roughly in line with Germany’s CDU – the Christian Democratic Union – which is seen as a conservative party. The Democrats in the USA have been all-too-happy to kick the can on truly progressive policies.
In the coming years we will need to do two important things:
- Elect candidates willing to fight for social progress
- Fight for them. Stand by them. Encourage them. Donate money to them.
Few Democrats are willing to fight for things like Universal Basic Income because, like I said, most establishment Democrats are OK with the status quo. Right now, basically it is “The Squad”: Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Cori Bush, Pramila Jayapal, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Others who’ve indicated support for UBI include Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna, Ayanna Pressley, and Ed Markey. Andrew Yang, former candidate for President has been the most vocal of all. Some other names that may surprise you are Mitt Romney, Josh Hawley, and Tulsi Gabbard – all of whom have supported UBI-like payments.
Opposition to Universal Basic Income typically revolves around the typical claims that it’ll make people lazy, not want to work, not want to better themselves, and spend it all on vices like booze, gambling, and drugs. These kinds of statements – often also carrying racial undertones – are demonstrably false. The outcomes of UBI pilot programs worldwide are surprisingly consistent, even though the details of the programs (amount, duration, location, population) differ.
Studies prove UBI’s effectiveness
Meta-analyses of studies into UBI find no strong evidence that UBI or unconditional cash transfers (UCTs) cause people to quit work. If anything, some pilots (e.g., Stockton SEED, Manitoba’s MINCOME) showed slight increases in full-time employment. Where work hours dropped (slightly), it was often because people chose education, caregiving, or starting small businesses.
Participants often felt more empowered and secure, which had long-term positive spillovers (better family relationships, higher self-confidence). Youths stayed in school longer and adults sought out vocational training, certifications, or higher education. Educational gains were especially strong when cash transfers were predictable and long-term.
These same studies have shown that spending on alcohol, drugs, gambling spending did not increase with UBI or cash grants. In many cases, spending on these items slightly dropped. It was also found that UBI creates carry-on benefits to local economies. Cash recipients spent locally, helping their communities, and small-scale UBI programs in poor communities had a multiplier effect (every $1 in cash created up to $2.50 in local economic activity).
Universal or unconditional cash transfers work reliably to:
- Reduce poverty
- Improve mental and physical health
- Encourage education and entrepreneurship
- Stimulate local economies
But we need to start these conversations now. The timeline of a change like this one will be long and, with the right wing influences happening worldwide, the battle will be hard. Like climate change, this is something society should have addressed long ago and we need to get the political work started now.