In an unpredictable AI-driven job market, the most reliable path to financial security is not a specific skill but owning assets. This allows individuals to participate in the massive wealth generated by the technology itself, providing a hedge against inflation and potential job displacement, and avoiding a future of dependency on government assistance.
Decades of currency debasement through money printing have made asset ownership essential for wealth preservation. Since a house is the most intuitive asset for the average person, owning one transformed from a component of the American Dream into a compulsory defense against inflation.
New technologies perceived as job-destroying, like AI, face significant public and regulatory risk. A powerful defense is to make the general public owners of the technology. When people have a financial stake in a technology's success, they are far more likely to defend it than fight against it.
The narrative of AI destroying jobs misses a key point: AI allows companies to 'hire software for a dollar' for tasks that were never economical to assign to humans. This will unlock new services and expand the economy, creating demand in areas that previously didn't exist.
Instead of fearing job loss, focus on skills in industries with elastic demand. When AI makes workers 10x more productive in these fields (e.g., software), the market will demand 100x more output, increasing the need for skilled humans who can leverage AI.
Political demands that new technology must benefit the specific workers it replaces are fundamentally flawed. This logic ignores progress. The goal shouldn't be to preserve obsolete jobs but to ensure technology benefits civilization as a whole by creating abundance while managing the difficult labor transition.
Unlike past technological shifts where humans could learn new trades, AI is a "tractor for everything." It will automate a task and then move to automate the next available task faster than a human can reskill, making long-term job security increasingly precarious for cognitive labor.
Fears of AI-driven mass unemployment overlook basic capitalism. Any company that fires staff to boost margins will be out-competed by a rival that uses AI to empower its workforce for greater output and market share, ensuring AI augments jobs rather than eliminates them.
The enormous market caps of leading AI companies can only be justified by finding trillions of dollars in efficiencies. This translates directly into a required labor destruction of roughly 10 million jobs, or 12.5% of the vulnerable workforce, suggesting market turmoil or mass unemployment is inevitable.
The top 10% of US earners now drive nearly half of all consumer spending. This concentration suggests the macro-economy and stock market can remain strong even if AI causes significant unemployment for the other 90%, challenging the assumption that widespread job loss would automatically trigger an economic collapse.
The real inflection point for widespread job displacement will be when businesses decide to hire an AI agent over a human for a full-time role. Current job losses are from human efficiency gains, not agent-based replacement, which is a critical distinction for future workforce planning.