this post was submitted on 18 May 2026
161 points (98.2% liked)

Ask Lemmy

39643 readers
1659 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, toxicity and dog-whistling are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Imagine this scenario:

  • All companies start producing mostly using only AI and firing people, because people have no use anymore
  • Joe spend most of his income on digital video games products
  • Joe get fired because he got replaced by AI now, since AIs are taking over most jobs
  • Joe has no income anymore
  • Joe doesn't have any more money to spend on video games
  • Companies have no more profit, because people don't have income, so people can't spend on their AI produced products

In this scenario both lose, the company adopting AI and the worker. Am I missing something? Is there any possibility besides Universal Basic Income to keep the system running and not collapsing?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 6 points 1 hour ago

Joe doesn’t have any more money to spend on video games
Companies have no more profit, because people don’t have income, so people can’t spend on their AI produced products

Funny thing, a Scottish fellow named Adam Smith figured that an economy where people don't have money to spend ends up stagnated and/or fucked over. Somewhat ironically, that is the piece that is most often overlooked by today's liberal economists (the kinds that are in favor or less regulation and taxes)

Most rich assholes like the idea of lording over a bunch of dirty peasants, of feeling superior to the unwashed masses, having them offer themselves into slavery out of "free will"

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 9 points 2 hours ago

hint: they won’t. a flooded labor pool means the corps can pay as little as possible for the labor they do need humans for. it’s the whole point of capitalism. for a neat story about it, read “The Jungle” by Upton Sinclair.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 hours ago

I believe the French got there once and they managed to solve the issue

I really wouldn't want to get to that point and I honestly don't really understand why the rich class just continues this course because I do believe it's playing with fire at this point

[–] Triasha@lemmy.world 7 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The economy will shift to serve a smaller number of people.

The people who lose their income will fall into poverty, existing on charity, begging, or scrounging, or they will die. (They will nearly all die sooner than they would have if they had maintained their income)

The CEOS and shareholders might understand this, but none of them can solve it alone, and trying to do so puts them at a disadvantage vrs their competitors.

The productive capacity will go toward ever more elaborate and esoteric projects, like Bezos wedding, or sending Musk to Mars, or building the biggest superyact, again.

And the majority will suffer.

[–] ivanafterall@lemmy.world 1 points 29 minutes ago

I suspect you left out a step: many will start going after people who DO have money before just dying.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 hours ago

Ideal : Universal Basic Income where everybody receives a set amount to live on, and if you can find a job on top of that then good for you.

Probable : 2 tier society where the poors are left to fend for themselves in increasingly feral ghettos

Almost certain : WW3. Kill off lots and lots and lots of poors. You see how many people were killed at an industrial scale in WW2. That'll be nothing.

[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 1 points 2 hours ago

They actually want to depopulate the Earth, as we are a serious threat to them, both to the ecosystem that they need to survive, their own survival, and all the resources they want to drain dry. It will be just a few million or less elites, trading robot labor with each other.

[–] unknown@piefed.social 5 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think the ai and data centres are for us.

The billionaires who want to survive this upcoming apocalypse need ai to be functional in order to survive in their bunkers.

Everyone else till then is basically free labour, training material and collateral.

[–] mwproductions@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago (1 children)
[–] unknown@piefed.social 3 points 2 hours ago

ฅ^>⩊<^ฅ

[–] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 4 points 3 hours ago

It'll just be a corprate circle jerk of companies paying each other for "products and services". People will work for food an be shelter, provided by the company you work for. I believe the kids are calling it "techno-feudalism".

[–] thedormantotaku@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

No one knows. Not a single person kn Earth

[–] Kissaki@feddit.org 4 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

In the end, the owners have access to the resources, can get labor or whatever for cheap, and can live in control and luxury even without selling much or anything, while trading amongst themselves.

They don't have a need or use to produce for the parents anymore. It only makes sense for as long as they have gain.

Owners may incite conflict and war to gain more control. The peasants will join for a lack of better knowledge, access, or alternatives.

We're back in the middle ages.


People rise up and destroy or regulate the destructive forces, and establish a more sustainable system - maybe.

[–] Sharkticon@lemmy.zip 17 points 14 hours ago

K shaped economy. They don't care if we can afford anything. Its Versailles. The peasants starve while the aristocrats move the "economy".

[–] MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social 6 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Why would the owners need to keep the system running if they have all the resources and tools?

One need not worry about the game not being able to continue if one already won.

[–] 1D10@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

But they are not one, when all the resources and tools are owned by the big companies that is when they fight each other, and for that they need cheap expendable ground troops, so ask yourself "which company do I want to fight for?" The Gaggles of Google, how about Amazon's 6/7 mechanized infantry, or the SpaceX Xforx.

Oh it's gonna all be memes and violence from then on, you will get paid in company money and live in company community's, eventually the world will be devided into roughly country shaped chunks run exclusively by a single corporation or a consortium of smaller companies.

Gonna be just like the utopian sci-fi, you know Neromancer, Blade Runner, Cyberpunk, and my favorite Downbelow Station.

That's not what I meant by "one", but nvm.

Also, if we ever reach that point, I'm not fighting for any of them. And not just for moral reasons - it will be more profitable to steal from them, and since the social contract will be broken anyway...

But I'd rather fo my best now to make sure that doesn't happen to begin with, and I thankfully live somewhere where my effort might actually might make some impact (the European Union).

[–] bigbangdangler@reddthat.com 9 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

You've hit the nail on the head.

Companies pushing for AI are playing a short game, not a long game. They have not considered the consequences of this course after a short term return (which may not materialize anyway).

The whole AI debacle is a great example of why it's bad to have engineering developments without the philosophical conversations. We need the A in STEAM to tell the E's when they're opening Pandora's Box.

[–] Abyssian@lemmy.world 5 points 4 hours ago

Nah. Once Robotics catches up with AI and those who own everything can have whatever necessities and luxury goods they want produced without us, the bulk of humanity becomes redundant and unnecessary. They won't need us to buy or build or do anything. We'll just be cluttering up the scenery and competing for resources. It would be in their best interest for the majority of us to die off.

[–] UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 7 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

People will accept lower wages to compete with AI... Up to a point... My prediction is that it's going to make the wage gap deep enough that people will have to revolt. What frightens me is what comes after, it's going to get worse before it gets better. Especially given the fact that people don't vote because of "both sides fallacies".

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I disagree. I actually think that it's gonna get worse before it gets worse.

Seriously though, what comes after really depends on what faction within the revolt is more dominant and has more sway. It's anyone's guess.

[–] UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 3 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (1 children)

The Revolution eating its children is almost always messy historically. Violence as a means tends to put the wrong people in power.

[–] Quexotic@infosec.pub 1 points 2 hours ago

Well, let's not do that then!

It definitely didn't work out for the Weather Underground.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Right, all those Democrats fighting hard to protect your jobs and put limits on AI... The two bills they are working on definitely have teeth and do anything useful at all, it's a fallacy.

[–] UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

No, it's a fallacy that not voting is the right move because both sides.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Both sides are against me, I'm voting for a third almost always.

[–] UnrepententProcrastinator@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Which is basically the same as not voting in places like the US.

[–] 3abas@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Yeah, you're missing the point where both sides are against me and I'm not voting for the "lesser evil" for your comfort.

[–] regedit@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 day ago

I really want to be wrong but it seems a handful of humanity believes we're all doomed and none of this planet or society matters. Their greed and brazen disregard for the consequences of their actions is a result from the psychosis of greed and/or sociopathy, or they know something the rest of us don't and are trying to get theirs before the end. Like the movie Don't Look Up or Knowing.

[–] Strider@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

Oh no, don't think further or you might arrive at leftist / social conclusions 🤔.

(take with a grain of salt depending on location and understanding)

[–] Meat_Of_Nan@lemmy.world 118 points 1 day ago (6 children)

That's the thing. These companies are not thinking that far ahead and they don't care about the consequences even if it hurts them too.

The only thing matters to these people is making number go up. They want more money. They want it right now. They don't care what consequences it has for them or the world later so long as they get more money now.

There will never be a universal income. Countries will let their people starve before they give them money for nothing.

[–] FreshParsnip@lemmy.ca 7 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

It's like the ending of the Dinosaurs sitcom when everyone is going to die and Bob is talking to his boss on the phone. His boss is excited about all the money he's going to make. Bob points out they're all going to die and the boss says "well that's a fourth quarter problem"

[–] GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago

These companies are not thinking that far ahead and they don’t care about the consequences even if it hurts them too.

Yep. We've already see that with climate change so it's not a stretch to apply it to AI.

[–] ID10T@programming.dev 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The rich who benefit from this don’t care. They have enough wealth that it doesn’t matter. We could all be starving to death, fighting each other scraps of bread in the street, and they’d believe we deserve it.

If anything, that would drive prices down so they could build their next vacation home for pennies on the dollar.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That is the question. But you're missing one crucial element. How are the very companies employing the AI going to make money when there's no consumer to purchase their products?

[–] plz1@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm sure at least some are operating under the assumption that government bailouts will be on offer (too big to fail). The industries that have received bailouts in the past are also on the AI bandwagon.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

The whole system is predicated on people consuming. AI can't take over everything to the point where people can't buy stuff. Why would the government bailout a company that has no customers.

Bailouts help the company to become profitable so they can be repaid. Again, no customers no profit no bail out.

[–] plz1@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Eh, the US gov't has a pretty solid track record of "bailing out" with "loans" and then "forgiving" them, aka free money for the C-suite.

[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Yes, but historically companies that receive bailouts pay them back at a minimum in part. But very often they are completely repaid.

[–] P1k1e@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago

Can't be bailed out of noones got money for taxes

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The bourgeois will happily let the masses starve and die when unemployment soars. They don't give a fuck about us as long as their profits rise. (The great depression began in 1929 and it was almost a decade before the implementation of the new deal to provide economic relief to the masses.) They won't be bothered to give a fuck until the line stops going up. They will happily murder us if we dare strike for better working conditions

AI isn't increasing productivity, it's being used as a way to mask headcount reductions for the sake of short term profits, even though ROI is poor.

Furthermore, implementation of AI is increasing the intensity of the workload for people that survive headcount reductions.

Business is a big club, and you ain't in it.

[–] EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 3 points 15 hours ago

The bourgeois will happily let the masses starve and die when unemployment soars.

While simultaneously being a bunch of whiny fucking crybabies about falling fertility rates.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] discocactus@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Kill the poor, use all the products. They are intentionally collapsing the system. They have correctly realized that they can go back to feudal times without armies of peasants as the main military and economic engine.

[–] hayvan@piefed.world 38 points 1 day ago

This is not specific to AI. This has been slowly happening over decades, wealth is accumulating in smaller and smaller sets of people. Capitalism is cancer on humanity.

Those big bosses just want to take everything and give nothing, whatever that means. It doesn't matter if it kills them in the end too.

This is unsustainable, and it will get much worse before it can get better (if ever).

[–] zd9@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

That's the entire elephant in the room of the future economy. Just don't think about it, put your head down, don't question things, and consume more short form social media slop.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›