I came across an interesting article in the Globe and Mail called: “The World’s Losing its Workers?”). It talks about the consequences of world aging will be on jobs. There’s a few conclusions that look probable, and have interesting conclusions for the post-scarcity. Overall, what we see is that there will higher healthcare costs due to the aging, less people of working age, and they predict that low-paid jobs won’t exist. The first two I can agree with, but the last strikes me as wrong however - I’ll get to that later. For the first two though, what this really means is that we need to get much higher productivity in healthcare especially, but really across the board - else we’re have declining living standards. I feel like this plays very well into the ideas of achieving the post-scarcity, and in fact might make the central doctrines therein highly applicable to the general populous - easing adoption. Look at the situation right now, and how new economics could help us: Unions: They want to keep their low-productivity jobs, and not have to train for new industries. Perhaps workers will become sellers market is more than just select jobs. For structurally unemployed workers, if there really are needs for people with high-productive skills - it may lead to educational system reform, more private sector investment in training, etc. Low-Wages: We’ve got a lot of jobs that could be fully automated, but people are actually still cheaper than the robots. The falling action of course is there’s mass automation of jobs - not necessarily the easy / lowest paid ones. We talked before about how specialist doctors and accountants are probably on the chopping block next. Structural Unemployment: We currently have a ton of people that are poorly trained, and a lot of programming jobs for instance. If it were bad enough, perhaps we’d wake up and get a better education system to try to rescue any people we could. Interesting incentive alignment that’d be. Diminishing Capitalist Returns: We’re seeing the capitalist system reaching it’s logical ends. We’ve got market-socialism / state-capitalism coming from Europe and China respectively, but these seem like stop gaps of their regions more than a true 3rd way system. This next system will have to reconcile the trends that are currently plaguing our current one. All of these point to the trends in the future being more applicable for automation technology and a type of economics that has some type of distributive force (whether consumptive or productive resources) - else people will be dying in the streets. Not everything is rosy though - let’s get to the high-wages part. They predict higher wages, while this may be true in unadjusted figures, the real income for the lowest paid jobs will probably still assume a low level as people, adjusting for the short-term needs to survive, accept lower and lower pay that eventually stops at a floor made of the lowest costs of living. Moreover, if more education is needed, this will have to be priced into an updated market basket - therefore real incomes are still flat. I’m not quite sure about this though, it may be that in times of high job openings the real wages to go up, but this it probably only temporary I’d assume. Also, as we know about the post-scarcity, they won’t just compete with other workers, but with robotic systems as well - as they already do, but far fiercer. It is possible then that the system that comes is actually ushered in by such aging, society adapts to this new norm, then further evolves into a post-scarcity structure. Could that be a way of easing us into it?