The AI paradigm in the job markets has fundamentally disrupted the labor environment going forward. Whether implemented or not, every employer and every worker is now thinking in the back of their head, "How would AI do this and what does it mean for me?" The further implication of the same logic also then brings into question what jobs would still be valuable versus those that would be replaced by automated systems.

I was reading one article recently, summarizing the complaints from folks being laid off in the tech world or unable to find entry jobs into it. The labor expert interviewed was stating folks needed to rethink their job purpose and find roles that had value in the new paradigm. One of those, for example, was being an electrician who can handle data center needs. The demand was off the scales. While this is true (and also very easy to say), it left out the part of what it takes to become a master electrician. At least in my own state, it takes 4 to 6 years to become a fully licensed electrician to handle residential work. That includes training, apprenticeship time and journeyman status. Then, it takes another two years to make master electrician, the level needed for commercial-grade work. In short, highly-skilled job capability doesn't immediately happen. The truth, however, is that electrician role is valuable, even in the new paradigm. And a whole lot of other job types are now, by default, useless. 

The Economic Mechanics of Disruption

This is not a new condition. Wagon-makers and horse providers were made obsolete once cars became more and more widespread. Not everyone flipped, but from the 1890s to the 1930s, basically 40 or 50 years, the world changed and horses were relegated to farming and the pasture, literally. Typewriter manufacturers generally disappeared once the computer and keyboard became commonplace and functional with a printer. And guess what, the world survived and kept going. The difference now is that the AI paradigm is spread wider across far more industries at once, and the shift seems faster, compressed to months versus years or decades. That creates anxiety and fear in more people at once. 

Generally, jobs that are redundant or less efficient than what AI can perform are now "useless," regardless of how people feel about it. The best strategy is to shift, just like our predecessors, to those areas that are useful. That includes anything that AI cannot do and is still needed. Just like the electrician, those jobs that can't be automated but remain critical become the key for the labor market.

Mathematically, however, each new development in how labor is made more efficient means less need for lots of people working. This latest round will have a significant hit, especially given population growth over the last two decades and the number of jobs no longer being needed. It's also exacerbated by the capitalism model on steroids, over-driven to maximize profits without concern for long-term sustainability. Instant riches on an exponential scale is prioritized over long-term viability. This is the driving reason why the futurists and even the most callous CEOs are pretty much in agreement - the idea of work for the majority will no longer exist. Most automated-replacing jobs will remove humans. Even something as extreme as the battlefield is already seeing the shift; drones are all the rage, especially when they are easily constructed and put into operation by the thousands. 

Stop Focusing on "Me," Start Looking at Tomorrow

The question people really should be asking is, what comes next when the useless jobs are erased? Folks shouldn't be distracted by a me vs. them view. Expensive mutual fund managers, programmers, doctors and data entry specialists all share the same fate with automation; their value can be replaced by an evolving program. The scale of replacement is extremely broad, far more than people think. It has the potential to change lives like a Spanish Flu, just a technological impact versus a viral one.

Some are throwing around the idea of universal income. No one's coming up with exactly how that would work, especially given since in runs counter to a capitalist system that wants to collect wealth, not share it. However, even capatalists need buyers. When they run out, capitalism dies. So, even the the most jaded capitalist has to accept survival in an AI world means changing with the paradigm or becoming extinct. Personally, I think it will be something different and more than just handing people a survival paycheck every month.

So What Does Happen?

I think what could happen is a series of shock waves. At first the powers that be won't want to accept what they've created. Many will be harmed, and it will trigger disorder on a wide scale. A French Revolution scenario is highly possible, with the government clamping down brutally to regain order and ultimately pissing everyone off so much they overwhelm the few with the guns.

Then comes the redesign and realization. AI won't go away, even with a momentary riot. Instead, it will create a new normal, and the rules will change from a capitalist environment to a structured value system. Today, many would try to label it communism, but in fact it's much more. The replacement system will be one where everyone has to find a role in which to be useful in the new paradigm. It will involve re-education for some, acceptance for others, and retraction for more. However, those who are most flexible and willing to adjust will find it advantageous. Younger generations will grow into the system because they know nothing different. We older folks will have a hard time of it. Our own egos will be our biggest challenge to the change. We have to move beyond being angry at being "useless."