I just finished Ryan Avent’s The Wealth of Humans: Work, Power, and Status in the Twenty-First Century.
Summary: Economic Disruptions Require New Social Contracts, which can be a Bloody Process
Ryan’s primary argument is as follows:
1. Periods of rapid technological innovation usually lead to increased prosperity, but the transition can be very disruptive to the existing social and economic order.
2. During these periods of disruption, workers, the economic elite, and those in governmental power have to create the social contract will be for the new order. This is a very difficult process that involves a lot of trial and error.
3. The last time this happened was after the industrial revolution, where numerous wars and revolutions eventually led to a few dominant orders: capitalism and the welfare state (in the West, South and Central America, and parts of the East), socialist dictatorship (in China), and resource based dictatorships (primarily in the Middle East). Of these different variations, capitalism + the welfare state have proven most successful.
4. The digital revolution, which is being driven by continuing gains in computing power, will requite a new social order, especially if this revolution leads to massive surpluses of labor.
5. Creating a new social contact for this age could be just as bloody – or bloodier – than the last go around (WWI, WWII, Mao, the Cold War, etc.).
Reflection #1: Time Between Disruptions is Decreasing, Power of Weapons is Increasing
I generally agree with Ryan’s argument. One additional issue to consider is that the time between economic singularities is decreasing. It took us a very, very longtime to get from hunter gathers to farmers, and a very longtime to get from farming to the industrial revolution.
It’s barely taken us a 150 year to get from the industrial revolution to the computing revolution.
And it’s likely that the computing revolution will seed another revolution (perhaps general artificial intelligence) in another 50-100 years – and who knows what next economic singularity will spring from superior artificial intelligence…
Additionally, technological advancement increases the power and scope of our weapons. We will likely continue to build new weapons that can wipe out humanity, such as synthetic viruses.
In short, the time between the rolls of the dice will decrease, while our odds of losing any given die roll may increase.
One way to reduce the odds of losing is to disperse ourselves and / or our decendents amongst the cosmos in order to decrease the fragility of single planet living.
Reflection #2: A Minor Guess of How to Ease Into the Next Social Order
The more I puzzle over the accelerating impacts of the digital revolution, the more I come back to wage subsidies as the best tool we have for stumbling our way into the next social order.
While universal basic incomes might at some time be warranted, this will be incredibly expensive (given current productivity) and we don’t yet know how to structure a modern society where many people simply don’t work.
Wage subsidies, on the other hand: (1) maintain the connection between work and income (2) lead to less economic distortion, especially compared to minimum wage raises (3) can be raised over time to maintain a sense of economic progress, and (4) help avoid an economy where purchasing power (and presumably social power) consolidates with the top 10%.
Reflection #3: What is Inflationary? What is Deflationary?
Over the past few decades, goods have faced deflationary pressures (most things you buy for day-to-day uses are cheaper now).
Education and healthcare, on the other hand, have been subject to inflationary pressures (they cost more than they used to).
From a pure material progress standpoint, a deflationary future means that wage subsidies might not be necessary to keep improving welfare.
However, if healthcare, housing, and education continue to eat up budgets, people will need higher wages to keep up, especially those that don’t receive government subsidies in these areas.
Lastly, it’s possible that even if purchasing power increases, if income inequality is still increasing, social unrest could still be a major issue.
All this is to say: it’s worth looking at both income and expense.
Reflection #4: Consider Yourself, Consider the Monkey, Consider the Dog
To the extent humans survive the new social order that comes after an artificial intelligence singularity, it’s worth considering what this existence might be like.
Dogs, for example, have done quite well during the era of human dominance. Specifically, they were bred to be happier.
Dogs have also been provided a universal basic income in the form of shelter, food, and treats.
I often struggle with the gap between what I believe to be the best version of myself and the actual reality of the current version of myself. I sometimes get depressed by the lack of progress I’m making.
The fact is that it’s incredibly difficult to become an even better person once you’ve eaten up the low-hanging fruit of adopting classical liberal beliefs and not murdering your fellow humans.
So it’s worth noting that humans (perhaps?) have created the best version of dogs.
Perhaps our descendants will do the same for us, especially if we are able to bring value to whatever is they are seeking in life. Interestingly enough, more intelligent primates have not faired as well as dogs and cats. So don’t assume being #2 on the intelligence pecking order means you’ll be ok.
This may all sound crazy, but it seems extremely unlikely that humans are the endpoint of evolution. So it’s worth considering – what comes next?