Resistance is Futile: Prepare for the Age of Entitlement

7 May 2015

In the United States, the Presidential Election Cycle for 2016 is beginning to ramp up. Individual Democratic and Republican contenders are launching their first rallying cries and beginning to set their respective campaigns into motion. Meanwhile, as they cast an eye past the primaries, the two parties themselves are busily girding for perhaps the greatest clash between Capitalism and Socialism that our nation has ever experienced — the first foray signaling the onset of a titanic struggle wherein the outcome carries tremendous implications.

Today, I’m going to illustrate the importance of the outcome of this particular election, as well as the congressional elections to follow, and lay out a pragmatic case for why a migration toward a more progressive domestic policy must begin — and must begin now. In doing so, I’m going to set aside the traditional arguments, because beyond the rhetoric of rising economic disparity, beyond civil rights issues concerning gays or surrounding endemic police brutality, and even beyond the deeply entrenched corruption that appears to pervade every echelon of our government, there exists another deeply ominous and bi-partisan concern on the periphery. Oft overlooked and undiscussed, this issue is nevertheless indisputable and presently finds itself hurtling toward us with exponentially increasing speed. The issue at hand at first appears like one from the wild reaches of Science Fiction, but don’t be taken by this false pretense — nothing could be further from the truth. This is an issue that has arrived at our doorstep. Simply put, the problem we’re facing is the automation and subsequent elimination of employment opportunities that will occur at a frighteningly rapid pace in the years to come. This is more than unfounded conjecture; this is happening. In the fall of 2013, the Oxford Martin School conducted a study on the topic, ultimately forecasting that nearly half of all US jobs may be lost to automation.

Traditionally, automation in the workplace has only affected blue collar labor. As mechanized replacements for easily-ousted workers have been gradually ushered onto factory floors, the workers themselves have responded by obtaining additional education, increasing their specialization, or seeking alternative career fields. In prior decades, this process has been facilitated rather than hampered by the explosion of technology. This is particularly true in the realm of computing which, subsequent to its development, created a wealth of entirely new vocational opportunities to choose from. As this process occurred, many displaced manual laborers turned toward more intellectual pursuits, and thus our service economy was born.

It would therefore be easy to assume the truth of the adage that technology creates jobs. In some sense, that assumption would be correct. New technologies will require new specializations to emerge. But that’s not a completely accurate picture. The larger truth is that we’ve never seen a change in the technological landscape of such a comprehensive, monumental scope as the one we’re about to experience in the coming decades and that change will eradicate far more jobs than it stands to create. We’ve never seen anything like this before.

As an example, autonomous vehicles are finally nearing the tipping point. Not only are these computer-piloted conveyances exceedingly capable, they’ve long been safer than their human counterparts. If you think that a long road full of legislative opposition stands in the way of deployment, you might be interested to know that just this month, the state of Nevada has approved Daimler’s autonomous freight trucks for use on their public roads. At present, Nevada will still require a person in the cab to supervise, and Daimler hasn’t stated whether they’re angling to reduce personnel costs, but it doesn’t take much effort to deduce the cost savings that would be inherent in such a move. In 2012, truck drivers alone represented 1.7 million jobs. The autonomous vehicle, poised for introduction, stands to eradicate every one of those positions, along with every bus, taxi, train, and subway operator in the country. We’re going to lose millions of jobs based on this one change alone. I, for one, fail to see how the introduction of this technology will spur the creation of new jobs in as-yet undiscovered sectors in anything approaching equivalent numbers.

In addition to the primary effects of this automotive revolution, some second-order effects might be reasonably postulated: once the ‘drivers’ are no longer required to supervise freight carriers, the automated trucks would have no reason be subject to the same limitations as a human driver. The tireless computer would be able to drive continuously rather than only eight hours at a stretch, and would only need to stop for fuel. Due to this dramatically increased transportation efficiency, along with the clear cost-savings that would result from such a move, it seems feasible to think that freight companies may substantially reduce the size of their fleets. This, in turn, affects employment at automotive plants, repair shops, and more. The drastically improved safety record of these ever-vigilant vehicles will pressure the insurance industry to adopt commensurate rates, forcing them to trim costs, and fewer accidents will mean that fewer auditors will be required. The list goes on.

Unfortunately, ‘simple’ tasks like driving aren’t the only things on the chopping block. Watson, IBM’s information-crunching powerhouse of a computer, headlined in 2011 by crushing Jeopardy’s then-reigning champion, Ken Jennings, at his own game in a brutally lop-sided fashion. Despite easy, repeated victories on the game show, Watson was not actually designed for that purpose. Instead, it was fashioned to correlate data and make hypotheses to be used in a wide variety of applications, particularly those which are medical in nature. Although at present it’s only used to provide treatment options rather than diagnoses, IBM says that when it comes to lung cancer treatment, Watson’s guidance is already followed by field nurses ninety percent of the time. It’s already good at what it does — and it’s getting better. It’s not hard to envision Watson ultimately being able to provide at home diagnoses much to the chagrin of family medical practices around the nation. Similar artificial intelligence is already in deployment stages within parts of the legal profession, and is currently in the process of replacing document reviewers.

Anecdotally, Google Translate has substantially improved during the course of its short existence, and one day will undoubtedly replace the need for the human variety of translator. Efficient and affordable burger-flipping robots stand ready to displace fast-food workers and line cooks in the coming decades, devastating the entire food service industry. General purpose robots like Baxter, who can be taught arbitrary tasks, is human safe, and comes with a mere $25,000 price tag, will increasingly move into the remaining manufacturing occupations as well as a variety of others, displacing still more millions. Some journalists have already been replaced in favor of algorithms that can more rapidly and with a greater degree of accuracy produce factual articles based on things like quarterly earnings reports. I have to stress that these things are not from part of a far-removed, Star Trek vision of the future that still exists somewhere beyond the horizon. These are technologies that exist today and are either in the process of being adopted by business, or else need minor improvements or cost reductions to make them viable alternatives to human candidates.

Unbeknownst to many, we are truly witnessing the end times of a conventional human workplace. Yes, computer science, engineering, medicine, and others will remain viable career fields for some time. Yes, some of these technologies, like autonomous vehicles, may take twenty or thirty years to completely supplant the existing professions. And yes, there will be new jobs created as a result of these and other developments. But make no mistake — in absolute numbers, the opportunities for employment will dwindle to a mere fraction of what exists today. It’s time for the United States to start getting prepared for that eventuality.

What does it mean when large segments of the population are competing for a considerably reduced pool of jobs? As far as I can tell, it’s pretty simple: there’s going to be a large demographic that through no fault of their own, and despite high levels of competency and a phenomenal work ethic, simply cannot find gainful employment. We, as a society, need to establish a plan for what to do about this inevitable, sizable, and rapidly growing portion of the population.

When people become unemployable, the only way for them to survive will be through government-funded subsidies. For this unfortunate segment of the populace, it will be the approval and adoption of a universal basic income that saves them — or it will be a society that’s too afraid of ‘mandated charity’ that dooms them to a terrible fate.

The problem is that presently, too many Americans are terrified of words like ‘subsidies’, ‘entitlements’, and ‘Socialism’. After all, such words go against everything that we’ve used to self-identify as a culture. We’re capitalists, right? We abhor handouts, because nobody deserves something they didn’t earn. We crack innumerable jokes at the expense of welfare recipients. We know that we’ve worked hard and achieved success, therefore it must hold true that anyone who does the same can be sure to expect similar results. We ignore the fact that our GDP per capita is at best comparable to countries like Norway, Sweden, Finland and Switzerland while simultaneously those nations provide seemingly impossible benefits, such as free healthcare and low-cost higher education. Incidentally, their citizens are also happier in their lives than we are in ours. Their homicide rates are considerably lower. Their very lifespans are longer. Perhaps most importantly, they’re more socially prepared to take the next step when the robotic revolution finally obsoletes humanity in the workplace. When that time comes, we will either provide Socialist-inspired care to our population, or we will lose our status as a developed nation and instead sink to become a state of the uncompromising impoverished. As it stands, we’re already considerably behind in this race. We need to catch up.

Commonly, the winner of a presidential election enjoys eight years in the White House. If the wrong person sits in office and looks toward the past for solutions to problems of the future, our nation will be in grave danger. If we push aside any moves toward a more Socialist society for eight more years, then I fear that we will not be able to adapt our policies before we suffer disastrous consequences. As it is, if we start changing our cultural perspectives now, we’re still likely to endure considerable hardship along the way.

To be clear, this is not an issue of simple ideology. Personally, I support Bernie Sanders for a wide variety of reasons. I don’t think he’s a perfect candidate, but I think he’s the best chance we’ve got at moving the country in the proper direction. Regardless of my strong feelings in other areas, this particular issue transcends party affiliation. As a nation, we have no choice but to get used to the idea of handouts. As the standard of living rises and the relative cost of essentials declines, we need to expand our views of what constitutes basic rights and protections for our citizens. It doesn’t matter if you’re blue collar, white collar, or professional; your livelihood is at under attack, and soon -likely sooner than you expect — will become obsolete. Similarly, it doesn’t matter whether you identify as Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Communist. The automation of the workforce is coming. It’s time to understand the importance of expanded social services in the years to come, because no matter how hard you’re willing to work or how bright you are, the competition will be extraordinary and the next person that requires welfare to survive might very well be be you.