Yeah the only way I feel automation/AI is a success story is if we started a tally and said 50,000 jobs were replaced by robots because they are more efficient. So every person in the U.S. will be sent a check for $7. (Median wage x jobs replaced / population). So every job replaced built a universal base income.

Basically making it, if it is more productive for our society as a whole to automate this position, then the whole of society benefits as well as the company. Eventually when 100, 200, 300 million jobs have been replaced people would be getting a base income of $13,500/$27,000/$40,000 a year.

Sets the stage for the fact that if automation is more productive, then workers should only need to work less hours.

For example farm work has decreased from 40% of the work force to 1.3% of the workforce in the U.S. from 1900 to now. Assuming they got paid less the median farm worker is around $36,000 a year right now (it’s really higher, but I’m cutting out management positions and such). So if we just looked at farms alone. Every person in the U.S. should get an annual check for $13,932 every year to offset jobs lost.

Would we “advance” slower, maybe… maybe not. Someone having 30% of their time freed up may make some invent things faster, but really there isn’t anything we need to be making to advance right now. Slowing everything down and sending people outside to enjoy the world around them would likely make people care more about preserving the world around them. Want less plastic in the Ocean, preserve more Ocean bottoms/species even if it is so they can have more diverse food to eat later on.

One thing is for sure, stress would go down, happiness should go up as life wouldn’t be go go go. Vacations would be more common. More wanting to be able to walk/bike/hike/swim and places to hang out. More wants of entertainment really… Sorry for rambling