Policies to Implement in the age of AI/AGI

In the era of advanced artificial general intelligence, governments have introduced regulations permitting companies that have invested in AI technology to reduce their workforce by up to 5%. This policy primarily affects employees engaged in monotonous tasks easily replaced by AI, as well as individuals over the age of 50. Those under 50 are eligible for a Universal Basic Income (UBI) scheme, while those 50 and older are offered an early retirement plan, both initiatives resulting from collaborations between the government and the private sector. Additionally, the adoption of a 4-3 day work week and the option for remote work have become widespread, allowing individuals more time to spend with their families, pursue personal interests, and contribute to a burgeoning entertainment industry.

1 Like

How easy do we think it’ll be to convince employers to pay their workers the same for less time spent ? I’m betting on a little bit difficult myself :wink:

4 Likes

Can you provide a link to a reference describing the government regulations you are referring to?

I’m interested in this topic; but, haven’t seen anything in the mainstream business press here in the US on the topic.

1 Like

It’s not impossible, I was able to convince mine. I think it’s important to understand that different companies have different intentions and goals.

Firing staff that is no longer needed due to AI could potentially have really bad repercussions for a company, if they were to speak up about it. On the other hand, continuing to hire staff that basically does not work for you anymore at some point does not hurt you. You just can’t save more money. But if the same or more work is done by the same spendings, that’s not necessarily bad. A price worth paying to keep everyone happy, I guess?

We came up with a stop on our hiring process and rather develop and enable the people that have lost their work, while keeping them employed and finding a new field for them to get accustomed to. It’s a great concept simply because they can use AI to get into their new role pretty quickly, while already knowing our company (which is pretty complex, talking about 4000 employees)

I can totally see that others will not care and rather kick people on the street to save money. That’s reality, after all. We shall see.

1 Like

I agree with you that it wouldn’t be easy to convince employers to pay the same amount of money for less hours or labor, but my hypothesis is that employers will end up reducing their staff because they now have AI technology that improves productivity and efficiency. The employees that are kept in the company are the ones I argue will be able to work 3-4 days a week after working alongside AI, but these are employees that have acquired new skills to supervise and manage AI.

I also assume these employers are saving money in salaries (after staff reductions) to be able to even pay more for the new and higher skill jobs.

The regulations I’m discussing have not passed, but they are being discussed. Just 2 weeks ago, Bernie Sanders led a panel discussion in the senate, where he proposed a 32 hour work week with same pay. This was very interesting to watch as he and others argue that AI will enable this to happen; but of course, there is side against that regulation as well. Link to the YouTube video below.

The rest of the regulations I discussed are just my predictions of what will happen after significant job losses occur as a consequence of AI. If you look at the World Economic Forum latest job report and predictions, they predict 89 million jobs displaced, 69 million new jobs created worldwide and 14 million net job losses, and this is just through 2027, just 3 years away. These predictions are significant and if the trend continues to grow and unemployment rate increases, people will start protesting, forcing the government to start passing regulations in this area. That’s when I see some sort of UBI implemented, at least for a group of people that will find it hard to find jobs in such era.

Bernie Sanders 32 hour work week:

You bring up a very important topic, which is current employees upskill in order to accommodate them into a new role within the same company. That is what I think is the best case scenario, but like you said, not all companies care enough to do it this way.

Also, there are companies that will try to do that for a certain percentage of jobs that are being displaced, but not for all. If most companies start laying off people and that leads to a high unemployment rate, the government will have to intervene at this point, and something will have to be worked out between private entities and the government to prevent mass layoffs. This is how I see some sort UBI being implemented, at least for people who are not able to easily find work.

In terms of productivity and efficiency, people that have acquired new skills and can work along AI will help companies achieve greater productivity and revenue. Work from home and 32 hour work week may be possible at this time for more people.

I’m fascinated by this topic and I like to think how we can have a healthy society and economy even after the AI revolution. One thing is for sure, we’ll have to adapt to the changes.

1 Like

It’s also worth noting, that this is not possible in many companies. I can’t just upskill a 1st level supporter that is near retirement or lacks a lot of deeper knowledge to a dev or 2nd level supporter. It’s a fact that some people not only can’t be upskilled but straight up don’t want to be, hey? Doesn’t give us the right to kick them out, just because we’ve taken their work from them. But that’s obviously not preventing companies from doing so. Some might even be forced to do so, due to other companies dropping their prices based on reliance on AI. Competition will make sure of that!

People in such a position will be facing the choice to either upskill / reskill or find work in a rapidly shrinking job market, if none of those are valid options for them, eventually facing unemployment. At that point, we need to ensure that they have no reason to pick up their pitchforks and torches. Obviously, as you mentioned, governments will have to face this head on, but rather unpopular opinion: We all have to. We should all take the time to reflect, what would we do if we lost our job? And couldn’t find a new one? Were forced to do or learn to do something, that we don’t want to do? What would we need to not start rioting against a system, that ditched us? Especially if the people around us are facing the same issue!

2 Likes

It’s quite possible that the means of mass population control through technology arrive just in time for a relatively small number of elite to be able to avoid being torched or pitchforked.

If robotics advances at the pace we’ve been seeing in the last few months, replacement labor for companies might be available such that striking could prove ineffective as a way to revolt. Security robots/drones could also guard against violent uprisings.

At the other end, UBI based on a centrally controlled digital currency, and on global digital IDs could pretty quickly be “adjusted” to keep people just under the threshold of revolt. There can be rewards for good behavior, or turning off your account(s) (permanently or temporarily) to nudge you into being a good citizen.

IMO, under the pressure of looming AI job losses, people could be pretty quickly incentivized to adopt the convenience of UBI so everything is in line to dovetail into a great and happy short term future!

Especially difficult with businesses from other countries that don’t have these policies. - governments will have to add import tax