Universal Uplift
Part 7 of Artificial General Intelligence (And Superintelligence) And How To Survive It
Regarding employment and potential mass unemployment, an argument for universal basic income keeps coming up. This is the idea that if AI takes all of our jobs and no longer needs us for anything – yet remains under our control – we should supply each human with a basic income to support themselves, since they will no longer have any way of earning money.
Depending on how dramatic and how swift the changes we’re facing are, we may well get there. A few caveats, though.
First, we don’t know exactly how fast we’ll reach that point, even if it becomes self-evident that we will.
Second, we don’t know if all jobs will go away in the near future, or if we’ll have workers and businesses – including small and microbusinesses – experiencing vastly greater productivity which opens up greater opportunities for them, in turn.
I would suggest, in the more immediate future, reorienting funds towards increasing opportunities over inactivity. Fears abound, naturally, of indolence and ignorance putting overwhelming demands on the functional parts of the economy and dragging all of us down.
If we have one or a multitude of artificial superintelligences working diligently on our behalf – and not going mad, taking over, breaking free or destroying us – this concern may be a moot point.
But again, there’s a question of time scales, even if we’re convinced we’ll get there, and get there quickly. If we find ourselves with an ocean of excess wealth and a shrinking job market, some moves, such as lowering the retirement age, may prove both a useful stopgap and a way for some workers to step away from relentless competition with humans and machines.
Not every older employee will seize this opportunity, much as we have many people working well past the retirement age today. But considering the circumstances in which we would lower the retirement age is helpful in reminding us that employment challenges will likely be addressed by multiple policies and strategies, and that the pace and the circumstances should drive many of these decisions, not assumptions or ideology.
One alternate suggestion from roughly a decade ago was to modify America’s existing unemployment system – which required recipients of unemployment benefits to search continuously for a job – so they could instead collect benefits while working on launching a small business. The idea here was that many would-be entrepreneurs would be willing to take the gamble of starting a business if they had more to fall back on than their personal savings and investments for income during the startup phase.
Similarly, if we’re willing to pay displaced critical workers to retrain or reeducate, paying them to create new businesses in the startup phase could also be a useful outlay in this space, particularly companies in high-demand sectors.
Should supporting key displaced workers in refining their skills or beginning businesses prove fruitful, we can look at expanding this plan to others.
Again, the speed of expansion will depend on the speed and scale of change, and also what successes we are seeing with initial programs.
But imagine if this option became a standard for honorably discharged military personnel, or their spouses both before and after discharge.
Some employment sectors may seem less pressing, such as construction workers in the era of infrastructure repair and build out, or manufacturing workers as factories go up across the country.
Depending on where you are, and what stage your economy is passing through, your mileage will vary.
Still, we want to keep people active, even if they have enough income via investments, AI-run businesses or government-supplied funds. Literally sitting around playing video games all day, every day, for the rest of your life isn’t going to be appealing to most of our population, even those intensely focused on gaming. And a better-rounded life helps all of us.
So consider, if you could live any life you chose, what kind of life would that be?
Some people, given the choice, would still strive for a career, if only to be “a rock star” - whether literal or figurative. If human abilities - likely in many ways enhanced - still matter, and no one is needed for the drudge work, why wouldn’t everyone choose to be a star? If not for wealth or prestige, then for the challenge?
On the other hand, some people might settle into permanent retirement - even before they truly began working. But where would they find meaning?
Family life? Volunteer work in the community? Artistic endeavors? Education as a goal in itself, or the research, medical or other professional services which stem from it?
If money, contacts and perhaps even inherent talent were no longer constraints, what would you do?
You may be able to fill that blank canvas with big dreams. But those dreams, given the possibilities before us, may not be big enough.
Precisely how we enhance or empower humans could fill volumes and, indeed, human enhancement already does.
As two notably aggressive regimes, Russia and China, have announced for years their intention to lead in this field, I will be circumspect in describing the full range of options it affords us. Much less the specifics on how to achieve them.
But finding ways to enable and uplift human beings is no one’s monopoly, and the more hands we turn to this end, the better. One thing AIs can not yet provide is a genuine belief in human potential, and in the possibilities open to our family, friends, neighbors and the entire world.
We can turn our minds to achieving this vision, but also our hearts.