The 80/20 rule (or Perito Principle) applies to almost every aspect of human activity. Most of the work comes from the top quintile or so, most of the trouble comes from the bottom quintile or so. But that doesn't mean "fire 80 percent of your workforce."

Reward the top performers disproportionately and keep them happy. Constantly churn the bottom until you find moderate to top performers. Focus on the middle 60, that's where leadership matters the most because those people can learn from good influence and become better.

This is why Bill Parcells famously said to constantly rotate the bottom third of a football team to find people who transcend into the middle and top. He noticed and understood this.

The lady in the video…

People used to think that your office productivity fit a bell curve with a few high fliers, a few dullards, and most in the middle…

The reality is that productivity follows a power law function. Theres a small number of hyper performers and a looong tail of the average.

Rascal said:

---

Been a fun thread to read.

Many of the points I've seen posted underscore what I have found to be the biggest problem ultimately which is bad management, bad leadership, bad decisions all around.

Put another way, bad alignment or allocation of resources.

Truthfully, most companies should operate in a pure franchise model where smaller, more mobile, more agile business units are built and managed (and held individually accountable), but instead there is the "central command" effect or the cookie cutter approach. Some of that is good in terms of having a centralized place for acquiring and consolidating resources and operating tools, but when it comes to actual execution, you really should delegate to your smaller business units and let your smart people operate.

And, too many times the structure is way off and misaligned (top heavy) where you have way too many VP's and SVPs and not enough actual operators or front line folks to get the job done; too many cooks in the kitchen.

I've often likened this phenomenon to if a football team had 3 QB's, 5 WRs (no running backs) and only 3 offensive lineman out there running plays. It just functionally wouldn't work.

---

The VP thing happens because companies refuse to pay for technically competent workers in lower positions so the only way to get more money is to move up. The way to create more efficiency and correct these problems is to pay your technical experts a lot so they aren't constantly trying to move up such that you end up very too heavy.

I have never understood why companies don't do this. A technical expert is far more important to a company than some random VP yet the random VP is paid like 3x+ what the technical expert is paid.

torrid said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

ClickClack said:

---

I get there are jobs like that out there but this video is nonsense. The Reddit mob gets all up in arms acting like non hourly jobs are a cake walk. They create this alternate reality of how unfair the world is (because they all work these hourly jobs and then go post on r/antiwork).

All I know is I spend most of my days stressed out of my mind and never feel like I can get to everything I need to do.

---

People who get stressed out about work are funny to me. It's a job, who gives a ***** God, family, and my personal time are far more important.

Without these things I would just live in a shack and work a menial job. The only reason I continue to work my job is because I have things outside of work that I care about. My job itself is completely immaterial to me.

---

That's because well all have this fantasy of retiring some day and living a Golden Age of Leisure. No responsibilities, and all the time and resources you need to enjoy your hobbies, travel, etc.

I was in a discussion once with several people who had retired or were close to retirement. Almost every single one of them had to put that golden retirement on hold do deal with a family health crisis. Either their parents, their spouse, or they themselves had an age-related health issue that needed to be dealt with instead.

I think the message here is enjoy your life while you still did. The things you enjoy as a young or middle-aged adult you may not be able to continue doing.

---

I'll never be able to retire because the government will steal everything no nailed down. I have accepted it, which is why I don't care about work at all.

Cynic said:

---

jagvocate said:

---

The company I work at recently went through a few years of significant downsizing. I now do the job of two previous people, and if things get crazy or there's a project requiring special expertise, I have free reign to hire consultants. The savings across the company have been massive.

---

Consultants are way more expensive than employees

---

Not with benefits and everything else, its pretty close.

BluHorseShu said:

---

the reason many of these jobs exist in the first place is to give people like engineers or other technical experts time to focus on their craft.

---

I was going to make this very point.

It sounds great on a bulletin board to say that companies don't need support personnel. But when the 15th rolls around and nobody gets paid, or you sell a bunch of products but no one sends out invoices, or you want to host a customer event or employee function and there's no one there to plan and implement it, or some key person has an idea that's illegal, well ...

AirborneAg04 said:

---

The 80/20 rule (or Perito Principle) applies to almost every aspect of human activity. Most of the work comes from the top quintile or so, most of the trouble comes from the bottom quintile or so. But that doesn't mean "fire 80 percent of your workforce."

Reward the top performers disproportionately and keep them happy. Constantly churn the bottom until you find moderate to top performers. Focus on the middle 60, that's where leadership matters the most because those people can learn from good influence and become better.

This is why Bill Parcells famously said to constantly rotate the bottom third of a football team to find people who transcend into the middle and top. He noticed and understood this.

The lady in the video…

---

you the man, just wanted to let you know it's Pareto in case you use it again, he was a cool guy.

Throughout my life, I've only worked full time (salaried) at 3 places. All three of those places, the people worked very hard, and we could have used more hands on deck throughout the year. While I realize places/cultures like this exist, it's not indicative of the entire US workforce.


This is my opinion, and the advice I'd give my boys....If you find yourself in one of these jobs, bust your butt. You obviously have very weak competition to move up and reap the rewards. Stop complaining and get to work. If you dont have opportunity to move up, change jobs.

I'm jealous of consultant/contractors. My company has hired a few too many at times.

You do a job for a few months, and just that job. No HR or corporate bull****, just a specific job to which you bill hours. You do it for a few months, and it may be good or bad. When the contract is up, you try to get another one or move on to something else.

I think I would have issues not having a steady, reliable paycheck though.

The Debt said:

---

10% do 90% of the work.

Learn that principle.

---

I think it's actually 20% that do about 80% - it's the Pareto Principle

ETA: Ignore me - someone else already referenced it

Nanomachines son said:

---

Rascal said:

---

Been a fun thread to read.

Many of the points I've seen posted underscore what I have found to be the biggest problem ultimately which is bad management, bad leadership, bad decisions all around.

Put another way, bad alignment or allocation of resources.

Truthfully, most companies should operate in a pure franchise model where smaller, more mobile, more agile business units are built and managed (and held individually accountable), but instead there is the "central command" effect or the cookie cutter approach. Some of that is good in terms of having a centralized place for acquiring and consolidating resources and operating tools, but when it comes to actual execution, you really should delegate to your smaller business units and let your smart people operate.

And, too many times the structure is way off and misaligned (top heavy) where you have way too many VP's and SVPs and not enough actual operators or front line folks to get the job done; too many cooks in the kitchen.

I've often likened this phenomenon to if a football team had 3 QB's, 5 WRs (no running backs) and only 3 offensive lineman out there running plays. It just functionally wouldn't work.

---

The VP thing happens because companies refuse to pay for technically competent workers in lower positions so the only way to get more money is to move up. The way to create more efficiency and correct these problems is to pay your technical experts a lot so they aren't constantly trying to move up such that you end up very too heavy.

I have never understood why companies don't do this. A technical expert is far more important to a company than some random VP yet the random VP is paid like 3x+ what the technical expert is paid.

---

Totally agree.

For example, I've been a top performer in sales/business development for years and where I have experienced discontent or friction is simply based on not getting the reasonable or marginal asks I made to keep me happy and not tied to asking to be promoted.

In other words, instead of maybe giving me the standard 2-4% annual merit increase, give me something more substantial or even a longer term employment contract that says I will get an annual increase of something closer to like 7%. I actually had one of those at one of my earlier jobs and it was great because I felt truly valued. I was innately going to highly perform anyway so there was no disincentive that I would just coast along and collect my paycheck- it was the opposite.

I'm not asking for my bosses job or giving the illusion that "I will be EVP or CEO one day". Just looking for something that beats annual inflation.

So instead of continuing to invest in me, a top performer, the companies risked losing me and having to replace me when all I was asking for was a marginal increase in pay in the grand scheme of things. I suspect a majority of other workers in all industries would feel similar.

Dies Irae said:

---

Computers, the internet and email made it to where no one really needs to work that hard at in an office setting. People are able to generate millions of dollars of revenue by attaching an engineering report to an email and sending it to the guy they play golf with every Friday who works for their customer.

I always joke that the oilfield is just one merry go round of field trips for adults masquerading as charitable events. Clay shoot this, golf scramble this, hospitality hour here, crawfish boil there; it's ridiculous.

The push to "work from home" just finally acknowledged this; "they're only going to work 25% of the time anyway, might as well save them the commute".

---

So I take it your in sales or a landman? They don't let the engineering staff go to those events. And even when I do go to the engineer-allowed events, no one gives a sheet because you don't have any purchasing authority.

I once went to OTC and a couple of companies were wooed by the corporate name on my name tag. Once they realized I couldn't cut the million dollar PO for whatever they were selling they'd just slowly walk off to go hunt other corporate names on name tags.

I'd love to see the reactions of many here who are under the impression that their company could lay off 80% of its workforce with productivity not being impacted. When the day came that the 80% were sent packing methinks some here might be shocked when HR knocks on their office door for a quick "conversation".

AI is coming to take those souls.

I certainly agree with some lines of work but I think the OP could have definitely been a little more specific. Especially with the claim that you could lose "80% of the office jobs and have everyone else not even notice".

torrid said:

---

I'm jealous of consultant/contractors. My company has hired a few too many at times.

You do a job for a few months, and just that job. No HR or corporate bull****, just a specific job to which you bill hours. You do it for a few months, and it may be good or bad. When the contract is up, you try to get another one or move on to something else.

I think I would have issues not having a steady, reliable paycheck though.

---

My husband has been a consultant for 25 years and has worked from home for 20 years. He had to go into the office from time to time, but that was because the execs wanted to see you. He works at a company Fortune 500 corps hire. Periodically, there would be some smaller company projects and he really likes those. He's never missed a paycheck and has plenty of work. He could get a different consulting job quickly if he wanted.

He loves the aspect of leaving a project after he's done. He traveled frequently pre covid and that has come to a grinding halt. He has had several offers from businesses over the years, but he makes more money working for his company. Plus, the flexibility can't be beat. Everyone works more than your standard 8-10 hour day. Periodically there's some bench time while waiting on a new project, but that is usually less than a month. It's your take a breath time.


He's one of the better ones and tends to have 2 projects at once. He just recently had one on the East coast and another on the West coast. That was hard because of the time changes. He had to get a project to a point so he could hand one off to someone who needed a project because of the time differences.

Still sounds terrible.

TAMU1990 said:

---

torrid said:

---

I'm jealous of consultant/contractors. My company has hired a few too many at times.

You do a job for a few months, and just that job. No HR or corporate bull****, just a specific job to which you bill hours. You do it for a few months, and it may be good or bad. When the contract is up, you try to get another one or move on to something else.

I think I would have issues not having a steady, reliable paycheck though.

---

My husband has been a consultant for 25 years and has worked from home for 20 years. He had to go into the office from time to time, but that was because the execs wanted to see you. He works at a company Fortune 500 corps hire. Periodically, there would be some smaller company projects and he really likes those. He's never missed a paycheck and has plenty of work. He could get a different consulting job quickly if he wanted.

He loves the aspect of leaving a project after he's done. He traveled frequently pre covid and that has come to a grinding halt. He has had several offers from businesses over the years, but he makes more money working for his company. Plus, the flexibility can't be beat. Everyone works more than your standard 8-10 hour day. Periodically there's some bench time while waiting on a new project, but that is usually less than a month. It's your take a breath time.


He's one of the better ones and tends to have 2 projects at once. He just recently had one on the East coast and another on the West coast. That was hard because of the time changes. He had to get a project to a point so he could hand one off to someone who needed a project because of the time differences.

---

So he's in a position to know contract work is available whenever he wants it. Some may work their way into a position like that naturally. Others may have a harder time building up a clientele and may face months of uncertainty. I definitely would fall into the latter group.

I think it comes down to experience, personality type, and tolerance for risk.

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

Yep. Anyone who can't see that these jobs will be eliminated by AI is delusional. If you aren't prepared to use it as a tool, then you're going to be left behind rapidly.

torrid said:

---

TAMU1990 said:

---

torrid said:

---

I'm jealous of consultant/contractors. My company has hired a few too many at times.

You do a job for a few months, and just that job. No HR or corporate bull****, just a specific job to which you bill hours. You do it for a few months, and it may be good or bad. When the contract is up, you try to get another one or move on to something else.

I think I would have issues not having a steady, reliable paycheck though.

---

My husband has been a consultant for 25 years and has worked from home for 20 years. He had to go into the office from time to time, but that was because the execs wanted to see you. He works at a company Fortune 500 corps hire. Periodically, there would be some smaller company projects and he really likes those. He's never missed a paycheck and has plenty of work. He could get a different consulting job quickly if he wanted.

He loves the aspect of leaving a project after he's done. He traveled frequently pre covid and that has come to a grinding halt. He has had several offers from businesses over the years, but he makes more money working for his company. Plus, the flexibility can't be beat. Everyone works more than your standard 8-10 hour day. Periodically there's some bench time while waiting on a new project, but that is usually less than a month. It's your take a breath time.


He's one of the better ones and tends to have 2 projects at once. He just recently had one on the East coast and another on the West coast. That was hard because of the time changes. He had to get a project to a point so he could hand one off to someone who needed a project because of the time differences.

---

So he's in a position to know contract work is available whenever he wants it. Some may work their way into a position like that naturally. Others may have a harder time building up a clientele and may face months of uncertainty. I definitely would fall into the latter group.

I think it comes down to experience, personality type, and tolerance for risk.

---

He does no contract work - he is a W2 employee. He has never been a contract worker. He's thought about it before, but when you are raising a family it's more of a risk. You can make a lot more money though doing contract.

I like to tell myself I get paid for what's in my head and not the work I do. So when a research project or business development proposal comes up I can serve as the expert in my field.

Today isn't a hard day. Few emails. Checking weather forecasts for research projects and some collaboration time on the phone.

But it's the off-season in Ag. I can't imagine having a job like this all year.

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

Nanomachines son said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

engineers and business development

---

Wow, lol.
I don't know where you or she work, however I have worked for Fortune 500 companies and small companies and, while there are some jobs that are filled with idle time, the vast majority are not and people need to work to meet their metrics. You and she are in need of better management.

---

I've worked a few jobs in corporate and they are all the same. Most people don't do ***** If you're not an engineer, part of Operations, in IT, or part of business development, your job mostly isn't needed. The other groups are why companies are moving back to the office. They figured out these people did nothing at home and now managers are trying to justify their jobs again.

---

To be fair, maybe you haven't worked across numerous industries? Maybe they're not all the same? I know in my industry that is not the case. Do people surf the internet in between tasks and on slow days? Absolutely. But I don't know anyone who gets away with doing even close to nothing or almost nothing.

There are slower times of the year for us (Dec/Jan), but then there are busy periods that more than make up for it. But it is never "dead" to where anyone could get away with doing nothing.

Also, I am not sure that lady would get hired in our group, much less make it half a year if she did. She does not seem very stable, professional or friendly. I get her frustration...but to act like all office jobs are like that, or just pull random %'s from our but like "90% of office jobs are nothing" is absurd imo. At least for the two different industries I have worked in.

EclipseAg said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

the reason many of these jobs exist in the first place is to give people like engineers or other technical experts time to focus on their craft.

---

I was going to make this very point.

It sounds great on a bulletin board to say that companies don't need support personnel. But when the 15th rolls around and nobody gets paid, or you sell a bunch of products but no one sends out invoices, or you want to host a customer event or employee function and there's no one there to plan and implement it, or some key person has an idea that's illegal, well ...

---

After reading your post all I thought about was this clip from Office Space

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

Nanomachines son said:

---

When you get your first fake email job but think people there actually work. pic.twitter.com/3Sbp1F5gyf

— Adrian Georges (@BasedMaterialsm) March 8, 2023

---

Also… wood btw.

riverrataggie said:

---

Nanomachines son said:

---

When you get your first fake email job but think people there actually work. pic.twitter.com/3Sbp1F5gyf

— Adrian Georges (@BasedMaterialsm) March 8, 2023

---

Also… wood btw.

---

Just don't give her any real information about yourself. Certainly not your full name. She is a complete psycho. Since we're making up percentages...95% chance any fling with her would end up like this...

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

White collar jobs will be obliterated by AI. If you don't have any skills beyond sitting in front of a computer doing spreadsheets, you're going to be replaced. I include myself here as well. My job is going to get hammered by it.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

---

All part of the population reduction plan. Of course stopping progress is virtually impossible.

You'll notice it slowly at work as companies downsize and they begin automating more tasks. Eventually one day you'll notice you and maybe one other person are all that was left of a group that used to be 20 people and AI is doing most of the work. Your job shifted from labor to managing the AI. At some point someone decides AI can QAQC better than humans (they're right) and you get laid off too.

It will happen slow enough that you won't realize it until it's too late.

the irony of this thread being that this forum is most active during working hours

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

---

While I hope we can avoid the future you describe I'm not sure its possible. As smart as humans are we are also incredibly bullheaded. We know there is a looming danger with AI/automation but we won't actually accept this reality until its too late and the world around us is looking pretty pathetic.

Some on the left will argue that this type scenario is why we need a universal income. OK, lets say we do that and by the year 2100 half the population is unemployed (not out of laziness but out of the fact there are simply no jobs to be had) and living on a universal income that will be, at best, one step above poverty. How long do those on the left believe a fairly pathetic monthly universal income check is going to keep the masses placated? That will get really ugly and I'm glad I won't be around to see it.

We need to slow our population growth and discuss methods in how to do just that. And given our current political/social climate there is a 0% chance that we pull off such a discussion.

Nanomachines son said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

White collar jobs will be obliterated by AI. If you don't have any skills beyond sitting in front of a computer doing spreadsheets, you're going to be replaced. I include myself here as well. My job is going to get hammered by it.

---

My husband is a pilot for one of the major carriers and was in the military as a pilot before that. Thus, we have dozens for friends that are pilots.

While not a universal belief amongst them there is a general consensus that "pilots" as we currently see the position are dinosaurs that won't be around much longer. Simply put a computer can, or at least will, fly a plane better than a human. It will take a while before people are comfortable with such a thing.....but its definitely coming.

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

---

While I hope we can avoid the future you describe I'm not sure its possible. As smart as humans are we are also incredibly bullheaded. We know there is a looming danger with AI/automation but we won't actually accept this reality until its too late and the world around us is looking pretty pathetic.

Some on the left will argue that this type scenario is why we need a universal income. OK, lets say we do that and by the year 2100 half the population is unemployed (not out of laziness but out of the fact there are simply no jobs to be had) and living on a universal income that will be, at best, one step above poverty. How long do those on the left believe a fairly pathetic monthly universal income check is going to keep the masses placated? That will get really ugly and I'm glad I won't be around to see it.

We need to slow our population growth and discuss methods in how to do just that. And given our current political/social climate there is a 0% chance that we pull off such a discussion.

---

Since everything, aside from us just being completely destroyed as humans by an AI world, is a pipe dream...While we're dreaming, I think the right answer would be to wage war on those creating and developing AI. If we are honest with ourselves, quality of life was much better for most in the 80's and 90's, pre-internet. I would argue that the internet and social media might be the worst thing to ever happen to mankind. The benefits do not come close to outweighing the costs and damage imo. Life was just much better for pretty much everyone and we weren't nearly as divided in the 80's and 90's.

And AI presents a much greater and more direct threat than that.

If we do not stop it soon, and start prosecuting those who create it and sell it, humanity will be destroyed. And I know that will never happen

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

---

While I hope we can avoid the future you describe I'm not sure its possible. As smart as humans are we are also incredibly bullheaded. We know there is a looming danger with AI/automation but we won't actually accept this reality until its too late and the world around us is looking pretty pathetic.

Some on the left will argue that this type scenario is why we need a universal income. OK, lets say we do that and by the year 2100 half the population is unemployed (not out of laziness but out of the fact there are simply no jobs to be had) and living on a universal income that will be, at best, one step above poverty. How long do those on the left believe a fairly pathetic monthly universal income check is going to keep the masses placated? That will get really ugly and I'm glad I won't be around to see it.

We need to slow our population growth and discuss methods in how to do just that. And given our current political/social climate there is a 0% chance that we pull off such a discussion.

---

Curious what you mean by this? To me, this isn't something that is 40-50-60+ years away. I am thinking more like 10 years or so.

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

BG Knocc Out said:

---

PanzerAggie06 said:

---

AxelFoley85 said:

---

AI is coming to take those souls.

---

AI is coming for everyone. People who think that they are safe from the impact of AI because their industry is so unique and that their position is to intricate......... haha, fools.

---

I do not see how this doesn't eventually turn violent and catastrophic. Millions of people with families to provide for being replaced by programmed code...what could go wrong? Will we eventually have former accountants and engineers resorting to dope dealing and theft? There will be almost zero charity in that world and tax revenue will be almost zilch. I just don't see how this ends well.

Seems like the only safe jobs (at least until we have full on AI robots) will be service industry, manual labor and real estate broker type positions.

---

While I hope we can avoid the future you describe I'm not sure its possible. As smart as humans are we are also incredibly bullheaded. We know there is a looming danger with AI/automation but we won't actually accept this reality until its too late and the world around us is looking pretty pathetic.

Some on the left will argue that this type scenario is why we need a universal income. OK, lets say we do that and by the year 2100 half the population is unemployed (not out of laziness but out of the fact there are simply no jobs to be had) and living on a universal income that will be, at best, one step above poverty. How long do those on the left believe a fairly pathetic monthly universal income check is going to keep the masses placated? That will get really ugly and I'm glad I won't be around to see it.

We need to slow our population growth and discuss methods in how to do just that. And given our current political/social climate there is a 0% chance that we pull off such a discussion.

---

Curious what you mean by this? To me, this isn't something that is 40-50-60+ years away. I am thinking more like 10 years or so.

---

We are seeing it now and in reality its been incrementally impacting our lives for quite a while. I live in Denver and there are 2 or 3 McDonald's here that are basically 95% automated. They have a handful of employees to do various tasks but its a much much smaller crew.

Having said that while I see AI/automation as growing quickly there are certain limitations currently that will slow its growth. These being centered on the cost and the societal hesitation to automate. However, as it gets cheaper and people grow more comfortable with the idea I'd expect to see it begin to expand more rapidly. As to the length of time I suggested.......pure conjecture as predicting timelines is, at best, problematic.