>But there has to be some change in things. There is no equilibrium possible in having the world produce the same amount of stuff but half the population has zero money or everyone has half as much— and can’t afford that stuff so then it just wouldn’t be produced, but that isn’t the way the economy has ever gone either.
How is AI different than the agricultural revolution, which allowed us to make the same amount of food for 95% less labor, or recent changes in automation, which drastically reduced the amount of labor needed for manufactured goods? The outcome for both is that people got displaced to the "service industry", which meant both desk jobs and jobs like nurses. I don't see how AI is going to be any different, except with desk jobs moving to other non-automatable service jobs like nurses, plumbers or whatever.
Sure: if there are enough service industry jobs, and I’m sure there will be lots of new ones to come, but this isn’t an a or b thing, over the centuries the overall move has been both away from less skilled work and reduction in time spend working. And so unless the demand for service workers skyrockets, or nurses or wherever there is a need for non automatable work skyrockets to require so many more people, the amount of time worked will need to be reduced.
How is AI different than the agricultural revolution, which allowed us to make the same amount of food for 95% less labor, or recent changes in automation, which drastically reduced the amount of labor needed for manufactured goods? The outcome for both is that people got displaced to the "service industry", which meant both desk jobs and jobs like nurses. I don't see how AI is going to be any different, except with desk jobs moving to other non-automatable service jobs like nurses, plumbers or whatever.