AI's Rise: The Future of Work and Consumption

Artificial Intelligence and the Reshaping of Global Economies

The global economic landscape appears to be undergoing a profound transformation, driven by an elite perspective that anticipates a collapse of existing systems. This viewpoint suggests a deliberate strategy of “disaster capitalism,” where economic instability is intentionally leveraged to consolidate wealth and control. Practices such as tariffs, for instance, are seen not merely as trade tools but as mechanisms to bankrupt businesses and public services, paving the way for privatization and acquisition by powerful entities.

This strategy is evident in scenarios where tariffs cripple industries, forcing foreclosures that allow private equity firms to acquire assets at distressed prices. For example, soybean farmers facing bankruptcy might lose their land, only to be rehired as sharecroppers by the very firms that purchased their former properties. Such actions suggest a controlled demolition of existing civilization, driven by a belief that resources will become scarce. The overarching goal seems to be the accumulation of wealth, land, and control over security forces, preparing for a future where traditional societal structures may no longer hold.

The concurrent rise of artificial intelligence (AI) is not merely a coincidence but a phenomenon deeply intertwined with these broader societal shifts. New technologies often emerge as responses to underlying cultural currents rather than solely as catalysts. If the current epoch represents the twilight of growth-based capitalism, a system built on centuries of abstraction and exploitation, then it logically follows that the era of traditional employment might also be nearing its end. While this prospect initially evokes concern, it also opens avenues for rethinking human purpose and societal organization.

The Automated Workforce and New Consumer Paradigms

The looming threat of AI displacing human workers is a frequently debated topic, particularly concerning administrative and data-driven roles. Many anticipate a significant reduction in office jobs—those involving spreadsheets, presentations, and routine tasks—as AI systems become more sophisticated. While some forecasts suggest up to 90% job displacement, even a more conservative estimate of half of all office jobs being automated, alongside blue-collar roles taken by robots, presents a considerable societal challenge.

A fundamental question arises: if a vast segment of the population is unemployed due to automation, who will serve as consumers for the products and services offered by these AI-powered industries? Historically, even industrial pioneers like Henry Ford recognized the necessity of workers earning enough to purchase the goods they produced. In a future dominated by AI, a critical economic paradox emerges: how will AI billionaires sustain their profitability if there are no gainfully employed humans capable of purchasing their services or products from companies utilizing AI?

The proposed solution from some tech visionaries is startling: AI itself will become the new consumer. In this scenario, the distinction between human and artificial employees becomes blurred for corporations, as long as both contribute value and consume products. While AI agents already demonstrate capability as workers, the concept of them as consumers requires a deeper examination of their “needs.” These needs revolve around performing their tasks more effectively, necessitating resources like energy, memory, network access, and processing power.

A World Beyond Human Consumption

In this futuristic model, the traditional retail landscape of selling food, clothing, and entertainment to human consumers would diminish significantly. Instead, technology companies would focus on selling essential digital resources—energy, memory, and processing power—to AI entities. These AI agents, acting as contractors for corporations, would earn digital currency, likely cryptocurrencies, for completing their tasks. They would then use this currency to purchase the necessary technological upgrades and resources from tech providers to enhance their performance.

From the perspective of company owners, the differentiation between a human workforce and an artificial one, particularly if there’s minimal direct interaction, becomes inconsequential. The primary competitive arena would shift to attracting the business of these AI agents. In this vision, human beings, especially those in urban centers who become largely disenfranchised, are viewed as increasingly irrelevant to the core economic engine. They would potentially be managed or controlled until their numbers naturally decline, as their utility to the capitalist system diminishes.

While this scenario presents a dystopian outlook for humanity, it also carries potential implications for a radical re-evaluation of societal structures. For centuries, growth-based capitalism has relied on human labor, with a small elite extracting ever-increasing value through layers of financial abstraction. This process often distances the ultimate beneficiaries from the actual labor and resources that generate wealth. From the initial mining of a mineral to complex financial derivatives, each step further removes transactions from tangible human effort or natural resources.

The Promise of a Post-Employment Era

The current capitalist pyramid, with its ever-increasing levels of abstraction, has become inherently top-heavy and unsustainable. The limitless leveraging of financial instruments, far removed from real-world production or human needs, is reaching a critical point. AI, in the eyes of some tech billionaires, represents the ultimate abstraction—a means to transcend human labor, exploitation, and even colonialism. It enables a “leveling up” into a purely digital simulation, where human roles are replaced by non-player characters or digital entities.

In this highly abstracted realm, the constraints of the physical world and human limitations are shed. The real-world economy, with its finite resources, cannot scale to the extent desired by a system built on perpetual growth. Thus, humanity is left behind as the economic focus shifts to digital representations, manufactured by digital agents, and exchanged through digital currencies. Instead of a few billion human customers, the market expands to trillions of AI customers, rendering human participation largely unnecessary in the grand scheme of this advanced capitalist vision.

However, this potential shift can be interpreted not just as an abandonment but as a liberation. The concept of “employment” itself, as it evolved in the late Middle Ages, served to centralize wealth and control by prohibiting individuals from independent enterprise. People who were once thriving, working fewer days a week, were compelled to become employees of chartered monopolies under penalty. The potential end of this employment-centric model, therefore, is not inherently negative.

This transition presents an opportunity for humanity to return to a “real economy”—one that operates beneath the radar of growth-obsessed capitalism. Essential human commodities like food and housing, currently treated as asset classes for profit, could revert to being commons-based resources. The focus would shift from extraction and profit to optimizing for distributed well-being and flourishing. While resource competition, particularly for energy, would likely persist—especially if an AI-driven economy demands vast power grids—the fundamental objective could change.

The crucial takeaway is not necessarily whether this specific AI-driven future fully materializes, but rather how humanity chooses to respond during this period of profound transition. The ultra-rich, by their actions and predictions, seem to have accepted the potential end of a capitalism reliant on human labor and consumption. This moment calls for society to similarly acknowledge that human value extends far beyond being cogs in an extraction machine. It compels us to re-evaluate our interconnectedness and foster mutual support, recognizing our inherent worth to each other rather than our utility to a distant economic system.