Take care of 2 and 1 will take care of itself. The reason people fear unemployment is because they fear poverty. If the economy is producing incredible amounts of wealth, and there are robust distributive policies allowing everyone access to that wealth, I would expect people to be much happier than they are today. If people have the positive liberty to hang out with their friends, travel, learn new skills, go to restaurants, etc. theyâll do it. There are a myriad of ways that people will find to be âusefulâ and âvaluedâ outside of the workplace. They can derive meaning from their relationships or their creative pursuits.
First, it doesnât look politically feasible to me to âtake careâ of redistribution in the global context, without also tackling all the other aspects that Acemoglu mentions, and more aspects that I mention. Redistribution among Americans only (cf. Sam Altmanâs proposal) will make another kind of two-tiered society: Americans and everyone else.
Second, I see the major issue in that people are too culturally conditioned (and to some degree hard-wired) at the moment to play the social status game, cf. Girardian mimetic theory. If we imagine a world where everyone is as serene, all-loving, and non-competitive as Mahatma Gandhi, of course job displacement would go fine. But what we actually have is people competing for zero-sum status: in politics, business, and media. Some âlosersâ in this game do fine (learn new skills and go to restaurants), but a huge portion of them are depressed, cannot have success in personal life, abuse substances and food, etc.
A large scale rewiring of society towards non-competition should be possible, but it should be accompanied exactly by the economic measures and business model innovation (cf. Maven social networkâwithout likes and followers) that I discuss. Because psychological and social engineering wonât be successful outside of the economic context.
Take care of 2 and 1 will take care of itself. The reason people fear unemployment is because they fear poverty. If the economy is producing incredible amounts of wealth, and there are robust distributive policies allowing everyone access to that wealth, I would expect people to be much happier than they are today. If people have the positive liberty to hang out with their friends, travel, learn new skills, go to restaurants, etc. theyâll do it. There are a myriad of ways that people will find to be âusefulâ and âvaluedâ outside of the workplace. They can derive meaning from their relationships or their creative pursuits.
First, it doesnât look politically feasible to me to âtake careâ of redistribution in the global context, without also tackling all the other aspects that Acemoglu mentions, and more aspects that I mention. Redistribution among Americans only (cf. Sam Altmanâs proposal) will make another kind of two-tiered society: Americans and everyone else.
Second, I see the major issue in that people are too culturally conditioned (and to some degree hard-wired) at the moment to play the social status game, cf. Girardian mimetic theory. If we imagine a world where everyone is as serene, all-loving, and non-competitive as Mahatma Gandhi, of course job displacement would go fine. But what we actually have is people competing for zero-sum status: in politics, business, and media. Some âlosersâ in this game do fine (learn new skills and go to restaurants), but a huge portion of them are depressed, cannot have success in personal life, abuse substances and food, etc.
A large scale rewiring of society towards non-competition should be possible, but it should be accompanied exactly by the economic measures and business model innovation (cf. Maven social networkâwithout likes and followers) that I discuss. Because psychological and social engineering wonât be successful outside of the economic context.