As a layman, I am unsure how best to pose this question in the context of this informative and thought provoking article. But I’ll do my best.

The impact technology driven disruption is having on the world labour markets is a relatively new factor that doesn’t seem to be discussed often. As a retired technology management professional, I’ve watched and to some degree participated in the accelerating transformation of the economy driven by the exponential advancement predicted by “Moore’s Law”. The recent rapid iterative advancement in “Artificial Intelligence “ models that have exploded into the zeitgeist stirs a range of controversy touching a wide range of human endeavor.

For example, the uproar over the use of AI by students to write term papers, and the conflict leading to the precipice of the first Writers Guild strike in recent times largely have the same genesis. Technology enabled replacement of human effort by machine labour. As AI becomes more connected and ubiquitous the result that logically follows is accelerating decline of human labour as a factor in the production of goods and services.

The introductory Econ classes I took 50 years ago described a critical relationship between the supply/demand curve of labour (at the time human, of course), and overall economic stability. Producing goods and services directly provided income consumers used to fuel consumption.

But, for example, what happens when the writers for Saturday Night are rendered totally superfluous by ChatGPT five, six, or seven. They are eliminated in the composition of human labour supply/demand equilibrium.

This this is only one story of thousands unfolding at an accelerating pace . Yet they are being discussed each at a micro level. The proverbial rearrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic.

Courageous political leadership is needed. Visionary guidance and thoughtful discussion leading to reconsideration of economic policies that no longer can function effectively when human labour (and its resulting income) is a diminishing asset.

It seems to me that economists must first lead the way and admit that the principles of a free market system have to change to adapt to a world where the measure of human worth is no longer dependent on the ability to contribute solely to the production of goods and services.

It seems to me that we better figure out alternatives (UBI being one example) pretty damn quick. Otherwise we will no doubt grasp defeat from the jaws of victory and turn all the dystopian screenplays written before by all the newly out of work writers from fiction to fact.

What role should Economists have in leading the way?