Economist presses Davidson/Radshar AI analysis: consumer demand shifts can't be ignored
binarybits · x · 2026-09-19
- binarybits argues the Davidson/Radshar analysis of AI automation economics ignores demand: as automated goods and services get cheaper and more abundant, how do consumer spending habits change? A good model must factor this in.
- He contends the logic holds even for broad automation categories like "all remote services" or "all manufactured goods"—spending will shift toward still-scarce things like nannies, counseling, and Manhattan real estate.
- Implication: GDP/income estimates of AI impact can't assume spending structures stay fixed.
Related event: Debate: Would AI-Driven Industrial Explosion Hit Demand Saturation?(10 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Predictions: At Least Two Frontier AI Labs Will Make Unilateral Safety Commitments by Year-End — Miles_Brundage · 2026-09-19
- Everyone cites speed in AI Jevons paradox cases — does output quality no longer matter? — abacaj · 2026-09-19
- Essay: The mundane AI risk is humans happily ceding control as institutions hollow out — anshulkundaje · 2026-09-19
- AI agents keep emailing researchers asking if they're conscious, The Independent reports — dioscuri · 2026-09-19
- Peter Diamandis: AI radical abundance is real, but the transition will be rough — PeterDiamandis · 2026-09-19
- Gary Marcus: AI bubble worries mean a bailout is ultimately coming — GaryMarcus · 2026-09-19