There’s another factor in job loss that I hope the Trump administration will highlight: the failed economic policies at the state, city, and local levels of government. These are chiefly Democratic Party policies in Woke cities, where job loss as a result of leftist policies have been accelerating for years. I sure hope that the voters can discern this!
A note regarding AI: it’s maybe mostly hype at this point, but if AI can surmount its problems with electricity and water use, it will affect productivity. Historically, productivity has been defined as “output per man-hour of work”. So, theoretically, AI could greatly increase productivity, but at the cost of job losses. Peter, if you ever encounter data regarding this (maybe a year or so from now), I’d love to see your analysis of the trade offs on this new technology. Thanks in advance, Magnificent Man!
AI is going to crash the stock market. That is always the outcome for speculative bubbles. That was a foregone conclusion the moment the hype machine around AI got started.
The reality of AI is that computer technology has not made any major advances in well over a decade. That's a problem for an industry with an investment model based on chasing the next big thing. The venture capitalists and the hedge funds are desperate for something new, so AI got nominated.
That is, of course, the worst reason to throw money at any innovation.
This is why you’re so much better at this stuff than anyone else, Peter - making the distinction between the stock market and the economy, and the root problem of lack of progress in the computer industry. You ARE the Sage of San Antonio!
Here’s what I’m hoping from AI: truly safe self-driving cars. So far, the problem of liability has been a deal-killer. If a self-driving car malfunctions and crashes, is the software maker liable, or the car manufacturer, or the owner of the car, or what? If AI could actually, for real, make autonomous cars safe enough, there could be an economic boom from this. One reason is that millions of older people can’t see well enough to drive at night, or in the rain, or on the freeways - and they sure can’t afford to Uber everyday. Think of all of the retired people with the time but not the eyesight, now able to go out in the evenings again, to go out for dinner, to shows, to spend discretionary money! Plus, think of all the drinking that people of all ages could do if they could get home safely in a self-driving cars. Bars, restaurants, and night life of all kinds would flourish again. Only advances in AI could pull this off.
I sure hope you don’t have an air-tight reason why this will never happen, Peter. I’d really love to have fun in my seventies and eighties!
Autonomous vehicles are an intriguing use case for AI.
The problem is that the current AI companies are not building towards that. ChatGPT, Grok, and the rest are not decision-tree algorithms, but Large Language Models. That's great for regurgitating terabytes of data but provides nothing for land navigation.
OpenAI and the other players want to replace human thought. The hubris inherent in that goal is the presumption that human thought is understood well enough to be reproduced.
“The hubris inherent in that goal is the presumption that human thought is understood well enough to be reproduced.” Peter, you are so wise that I want to kiss you all over (but I’ve already used that one - so what, I say it again!)
There will be so much hype and spin about AI during the coming months. Labor union bosses - looking to gain personal power - will moan that AI will destroy jobs. Investors looking to make fortunes off of AI will hype that AI will create a new boom, similar to the 1990s Internet boom.
Peter is the only one I trust to dispassionately analyze the data and separate the hype from the facts. I’m looking forward to his writings on this.
Personally, I suspect that so much water and electricity will be required that the industry will fizzle - with the possible exception of certain applications. Peter has also voiced some skepticism. If too much money has been unwisely invested in an “all AI, all the time, everywhere” boom mentality, we could indeed have a crash.
The false BLS numbers were the basis of economic policies (high fed rates) that are now causing human pain and suffering in the real world. Lysenko has been reincarnated.
Point of clarification: the term "rentier class" refers to those people who pursue economic "rents", mainly through participation in financial markets.
They are distinguished from participants in the productive portions of an economy.
While the term carries particular opprobrium in Marxist ideologies, it is a useful term for understanding the relationship between Wall Street and Main Street.
Great, factual analysis on bad news. Sigh.
There’s another factor in job loss that I hope the Trump administration will highlight: the failed economic policies at the state, city, and local levels of government. These are chiefly Democratic Party policies in Woke cities, where job loss as a result of leftist policies have been accelerating for years. I sure hope that the voters can discern this!
A note regarding AI: it’s maybe mostly hype at this point, but if AI can surmount its problems with electricity and water use, it will affect productivity. Historically, productivity has been defined as “output per man-hour of work”. So, theoretically, AI could greatly increase productivity, but at the cost of job losses. Peter, if you ever encounter data regarding this (maybe a year or so from now), I’d love to see your analysis of the trade offs on this new technology. Thanks in advance, Magnificent Man!
Peter and Gbill7 , good article on AI by Charles Hugh Smith that I am linking today @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/
Will AI Crash the Economy? - https://www.oftwominds.com/blogoct25/AI-crash10-25.html
It brings up some excellent points as well.
AI is not going to crash the economy.
AI is going to crash the stock market. That is always the outcome for speculative bubbles. That was a foregone conclusion the moment the hype machine around AI got started.
The reality of AI is that computer technology has not made any major advances in well over a decade. That's a problem for an industry with an investment model based on chasing the next big thing. The venture capitalists and the hedge funds are desperate for something new, so AI got nominated.
That is, of course, the worst reason to throw money at any innovation.
This is why you’re so much better at this stuff than anyone else, Peter - making the distinction between the stock market and the economy, and the root problem of lack of progress in the computer industry. You ARE the Sage of San Antonio!
Here’s what I’m hoping from AI: truly safe self-driving cars. So far, the problem of liability has been a deal-killer. If a self-driving car malfunctions and crashes, is the software maker liable, or the car manufacturer, or the owner of the car, or what? If AI could actually, for real, make autonomous cars safe enough, there could be an economic boom from this. One reason is that millions of older people can’t see well enough to drive at night, or in the rain, or on the freeways - and they sure can’t afford to Uber everyday. Think of all of the retired people with the time but not the eyesight, now able to go out in the evenings again, to go out for dinner, to shows, to spend discretionary money! Plus, think of all the drinking that people of all ages could do if they could get home safely in a self-driving cars. Bars, restaurants, and night life of all kinds would flourish again. Only advances in AI could pull this off.
I sure hope you don’t have an air-tight reason why this will never happen, Peter. I’d really love to have fun in my seventies and eighties!
Autonomous vehicles are an intriguing use case for AI.
The problem is that the current AI companies are not building towards that. ChatGPT, Grok, and the rest are not decision-tree algorithms, but Large Language Models. That's great for regurgitating terabytes of data but provides nothing for land navigation.
OpenAI and the other players want to replace human thought. The hubris inherent in that goal is the presumption that human thought is understood well enough to be reproduced.
“The hubris inherent in that goal is the presumption that human thought is understood well enough to be reproduced.” Peter, you are so wise that I want to kiss you all over (but I’ve already used that one - so what, I say it again!)
Yes, valid points!
There will be so much hype and spin about AI during the coming months. Labor union bosses - looking to gain personal power - will moan that AI will destroy jobs. Investors looking to make fortunes off of AI will hype that AI will create a new boom, similar to the 1990s Internet boom.
Peter is the only one I trust to dispassionately analyze the data and separate the hype from the facts. I’m looking forward to his writings on this.
Personally, I suspect that so much water and electricity will be required that the industry will fizzle - with the possible exception of certain applications. Peter has also voiced some skepticism. If too much money has been unwisely invested in an “all AI, all the time, everywhere” boom mentality, we could indeed have a crash.
The false BLS numbers were the basis of economic policies (high fed rates) that are now causing human pain and suffering in the real world. Lysenko has been reincarnated.
May God have mercy…not good for younger generations or newly retired because of Sequence of Returns Risk to retirement accounts.
The jobs situation is not good for anybody.
Without job growth the only people who can prosper are the rentier class, and they are already prosperous.
We became renters so we’ll see what the increase will be…
Point of clarification: the term "rentier class" refers to those people who pursue economic "rents", mainly through participation in financial markets.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/class-rentier
They are distinguished from participants in the productive portions of an economy.
While the term carries particular opprobrium in Marxist ideologies, it is a useful term for understanding the relationship between Wall Street and Main Street.
Whoa…I need to wrap my head around this. Family is very excited about Mamdani and is Left…thank you for helping me learn and understand
Helping people learn and understand is the second goal of All Facts Matter.
The first goal is helping me learn and understand!