AI & the Future of Work | The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart

DARON ACEMOGLU: But you also put your finger, in passing, on something that's very important, and--. JON STEWART: OK. DARON ACEMOGLU: You might want to have Michael Sandel. on the show to talk about this, sort. of this ideology of meritocracy, that somehow all of those who are so successful. are well deserving and virtuous, and all of those who have lost out of globalization, of technological change, of social change, are losers that deserve their fate. I think that's been very, very pernicious. I think you cannot understand the rise of Trump,

the rise of anger in this country without that. full meritocracy ideology. And he's been the most eloquent describer of this. And I think it's a very, very important thing. you put your finger on it. DAVID AUTOR: Not Trump. Michael Sandel has been the most--. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Who would have thought there's. so much fun to be had at MIT? [LAUGHTER]. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. JON STEWART: Oh! Ladies and gentlemen, welcome.

My name is Jon Stewart. It's another Weekly Show podcast on this Earth Day Eve. Is that-- do you celebrate? I love Earth. I can't wait, the pitter patter of little feet at 6 o'clock. in morning, running downstairs to open. up their Earth Day presents. And as this glorious Earth is being celebrated. while simultaneously being destroyed on the back end. of it, I thought it would be appropriate not to worry. about Iran, not to worry about climate change, but to worry about a third existential threat, which. is AI!

Artificial intelligence. It is happening, people. And it's about time that we had a sober. conversation about its deleterious effects. but also its opportunities. And so we're going to go straight to the source. We're going to go to two brilliant, brilliant MIT. economists who are going to talk to us a little bit. about the possibilities of AI, the collateral damage of AI,

and the various ways we might be able to mitigate that. So we're just going to get right into it with those cats. right now. Here they are. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. Folks, we're going to break it down today, in terms of the AI. revolution and what will be the repercussions. for the American people, the American worker, the world writ large. Who do you go to for this kind of thing? You go to the experts. You go to the brilliant people. You go to Daron Acemoglu, Nobel laureate--.

I don't throw that around--. Nobel laureate in economics, MIT Institute. professor, and David Autor, Rubinfeld. Professor of Economics at MIT. Guys, thank you so much for joining us today. DAVID AUTOR: Thanks for having us on. DARON ACEMOGLU: Oh, our pleasure. Absolutely. JON STEWART: David and Daron, I am beginning. to get increasingly discomfited by the speed at which AI seems. to be infiltrating into not just. the popular consensus and culture, but the workforce.

So I want to ask you guys, what is our time frame, as this technology is-- when are. we going to really feel the full effect. of this new technology? DARON ACEMOGLU: Just beginning to get worried about it now, Jon? JON STEWART: [LAUGHS]. Don't-- you know me. You know me. DARON ACEMOGLU: [LAUGHS]. JON STEWART: We know each-- no! I've been-- I'm worried about everything. DARON ACEMOGLU: So am I, and I'm very worried about. this, too.

JON STEWART: Yeah. DARON ACEMOGLU: Not about the timeline because the timeline. is so uncertain. It's hard for me to worry about something that's so uncertain. But with all of the consequences, I think we are definitely not ready for AI. The workforce isn't ready for AI. We don't know what it's going to do. I think the people who are really not ready for AI are. the students whose learning is going to be affected. in so many different ways. And we don't know-- we have no guardrails, no ways of ensuring. that students are actually learning how to learn,

and they can actually become experts in anything. in the age of AI, when they can get a lot of answers from AI. So there's just so many things to be concerned with. JON STEWART: Now, David, will they need to learn anything? Because-- DAVID AUTOR: Yes--. JON STEWART: Well, AI--. what will they need to learn? DAVID AUTOR: If they don't need to learn anything, then they're just not needed as workers. And we don't want to be in that scenario. So we do need people to have expertise and mastery. And I do think AI has both potential and risk. And I think Daron will talk more about the risk.

So I'll probably talk more about the potential. JON STEWART: OK. DAVID AUTOR: Let me point out that, although I do not have. a Nobel Prize, around here at MIT, it's more distinguished to not have one than to have one. DARON ACEMOGLU: [LAUGHS]. JON STEWART: David, can I tell you? I love how you've set yourself apart from your colleagues--. DAVID AUTOR: Exactly. JON STEWART: --by not getting a Nobel Prize. I think that's--. DAVID AUTOR: Someone's got to stand out. JON STEWART: You know what? The idea that you have that rebellious spirit at MIT, to go against the grain--. DAVID AUTOR: Exactly. JON STEWART: --and not get a Nobel Prize. Well then, let's start with that.

David, the real concern is--. look. And let's step back for a moment. We talk about disruptions for workers. over time, the Industrial Revolution, globalization. Those were the dynamics that really impacted workers. But those took place over time. So David, you're going to talk more about the potential. Talk us through the previous disruptions.

and how AI fits into those paradigms. DAVID AUTOR: Sure. So let me first say, just to bring it to the present first, what we should be concerned about. is not running out of jobs per se. but having jobs where expert labor is not needed. So a future in which everyone is like carrying the box. from the UPS truck to the front door. is very different from a future in which everyone. is doing medical care. So it's not the quantity per se but. whether specialized human labor is still needed. I think it will be, but it really.

matters whether we are replaceable, whether we are all kind of redundant versions of one. another or whether we have real added value in this economy. Now, we've been through lots of technological transitions. Some have been much more traumatic than others. The Industrial Revolution was very much so. There's a 60 year period that people refer. to as Engels' pause in the early first Industrial. Revolution, where productivity was rising rapidly. And yet, working class wages were not. And artisanal labor, these people.

who had spent their lives developing. expertise in weaving and so on, they were just wiped out. And it took decades before there was actually need. for specialized labor again. A lot of what-- who worked in those dark, satanic mills? It was basically unmarried women. and indentured children doing dirty, dangerous, unskilled work. And it took decades, really until the late 1700s--. sorry, excuse me-- late 1800s. I'm sorry-- until we started--. JON STEWART: See, this is why you don't have the Nobel. DAVID AUTOR: I know. It's what hold me back.

JON STEWART: You got to know the right century. DAVID AUTOR: That's right-- until we actually started. to use specialized skills again, where people needed. to follow rules, they needed to master tools, and their expertise was really needed. And so that was a very traumatic. technological transition. And eventually we came through it OK. But the people who were there at the outset did not. And a lot of these transitions, they--. young people adapt to them usually more successfully. by choosing different careers. People don't make big career transitions in mid-adulthood.

They don't go from being a steelworker to a doctor. or a programmer to a nurse. Those transitions are kind of generational. And so when it moves really fast, as it did in the era of the China trade shock, for example, people just get left behind. Places eventually recover, but individuals much less so. JON STEWART: And you talk about-- it's very interesting. And, Daron, maybe we'll ask you. We're talking about specialized labor, and David is talking about the craftspeople who. knew weaving and those things. And they're replaced by automation.

and these kinds of things. Manufacturing jobs that were replaced in the China shock. maybe weren't considered as specialized but still. blue collar. Is AI going to bring about those same disruptions. but in what you would call, I guess, white collar labor. or less specialized knowledge and more. administrative knowledge? DARON ACEMOGLU: I think it certainly will. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: The time frame is unclear.

Just to add to what David said, this kind of experience. is not a distant one. As David's own work shows, the China shock, when it led to cheap imports coming. and destroying parts of manufacturing. had the same effect. JON STEWART: You're talking about in the 2000s, when China was admitted to the WTO and then--. DARON ACEMOGLU: Yeah, starting in 1990s, but especially. accelerating in 2000. DAVID AUTOR: But really after 2000. JON STEWART: OK. DARON ACEMOGLU: And robots, at a much smaller scale,

had exactly the same effects, huge increase in productivity. for steel, electronics, cars. But blue collar workers lost their jobs. Many communities, just like with the Chinese imports shock, were thrown into recession. And the same thing can happen if there. is very rapid displacement of white collar jobs. Now, the timing is very unclear. There is a lot of hype and a lot.

of reality to the capabilities of AI models. So far, we're not seeing mass layoffs. We may be seeing some slowdown in hiring. It's unclear. And white collar jobs are less concentrated geographically. compared to, say, textiles or toys, the things that were affected by Chinese imports, or cars, definitely, or steel. But the numbers of jobs in white collar occupations.

is high. So there could be a lot of people who lose their jobs. Now, the thing is that, despite the tremendous advances in AI. over the last eight months or so, these models are not yet able to do. the whole occupation for many of the white collar jobs. Yet. That may to come-- that may be to come. Or it may take a while. That's why there is so much uncertainty. But uncertainty is a very bad reason to be complacent.

JON STEWART: David, you know, and--. the story that those that are behind AI tell us. is very different. When the people that are creating these AI models talk, they talk in utopian terms. We will be freed from the burden of the toil. We will paint and write poetry--. even though AI is probably going to do that as well. But when they talk to their investors, they speak very differently.

And I want to ask you about a quote that I heard. There was a gentleman who was talking to his investors about. AI, and he said, "it will allow you. the benefit of productivity without. the tax of human labor.". He referred to human labor, us, as a tax, as something that a company wants to avoid. paying to retain productivity. That's what worries me is that-- we talk. a lot about this, and it's always framed.

in terms of productivity. DARON ACEMOGLU: So wouldn't you like to be freed. from your podcasting job, Jon? [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Listen, man, I've been toiling. in the podcast mines for--. I'm getting podcast lung. It's a terrible-- it is a terrible, crippling addiction. DAVID AUTOR: Yeah. So most of us are both workers and consumers, and we're not going to be able to consume. if we're not working. But of course, from the perspective of a firm-- right? They want their customers. They'd rather not have their workers.

Economists will tell you this. Labor demand is derived demand. Right? It's not that firms want labor. JON STEWART: Explain that. Derived demand, what is that? DAVID AUTOR: Yeah. They want to make stuff. Right? And usually, making stuff requires. space and people and electricity and stuff, and people. But if they could make it without the people, they would be just as happy. It's like Spinal Tap. If they had the sex and the drugs, they could do without the rock and roll. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: But of course, people. have always been necessary.

So although firms have always had this fantasy. that they could fully automate, they've. never been able to do so. And often, it's kind of turned out not how they expected. So during the era of numerically controlled. machines, they thought they would. deskill and replace workers. Actually, they turned manufacturing workers. into programmers. So it doesn't always work out the way that firms expect. it to, but it may this time. There are certainly many, many more things. that are subject to AI automation. than were subject to the previous era, because AI has a whole new set of capabilities.

Previous computers could do routine tasks. They could follow rules, rules specified so tightly. that a non-sentient, non-improvisational, non-problem solving, non-creative machine. could just carry it out without having. to understand what it's doing. That really limited the set of activities. that we could subject to computer programming. But now, AI learns inductively. It learns from unstructured information. It infers rules. It solves problems without even understanding. how it's solving them. That allows it to enter many, many new realms.

Now, to make this very concrete, it's useful, I think, to contrast two occupations, one that people. talk about all the time, and one. they should be talking about. JON STEWART: OK. DAVID AUTOR: So the one they talk about all the time. is long haul truck drivers. And there are about 3.5 million of them in the United States. And they say, they're going to be replaced. by autonomous vehicles. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: That is a problem we can handle because it's. going to go very slowly. The day that-- let's say, Elon Musk announces tomorrow he. has a self-driving truck, and let's. just pretend we believe him. And--. JON STEWART: [LAUGHS] That's how. I've been operating for years. DAVID AUTOR: And so it totally works.

We're not going to throw all our trucks. into the Atlantic Ocean and buy new ones tomorrow. It's going to take decades to replace all of that capital. and all the infrastructure. So that's going to be a slow transition. And labor markets can deal with transitions that happen. at a couple of percentage points a year. because people retire, new people don't enter. That's manageable. JON STEWART: You're saying, if it takes. place over a generation--. DAVID AUTOR: Absolutely. JON STEWART: Then that's something. that, even though it will be disruptive, it won't be catastrophic. DAVID AUTOR: Exactly. JON STEWART: OK. DAVID AUTOR: Now, let's think of call center workers. There are about as many of them in the United States. as there are long haul truckers.

They're paid less. They're primarily women, but there are just as many. Those jobs can go very, very quickly. Because those can be the-- automation. can encroach rapidly. I don't think they'll all go. The ones that remain will actually be more specialized. They'll be at the top of the queue. When the AI says, I give up, you. will be handed over to the last 20 people standing. JON STEWART: So rather than 20 people, five people will handle what's left of the human tasks. that need to be handled.

DAVID AUTOR: And let's just say, that's a mixed bag. Right? Those will be better jobs, they'll be higher paid. They'll be more expertise intensive, but there'll be fewer of them. And we'll see this in language translation. We'll see this in call centers. We may see this in software as well. Software will bifurcate. We'll have a small number of people who build AI models, who. run data centers, who run enterprise software, and they'll be highly paid and highly specialized. And then we'll have infinity vibe coders, and they'll be like Uber drivers. You'll call them up to write an app for you. They won't be paid nothing. There'll be a lot of them that won't be highly paid.

So we're going to see a variety of impacts. But the ones-- work that is just. that is fully cognitive work is much, much more vulnerable. It can change much more quickly. Eventually robotics will also, more and more, enter the physical realm. But that's still some ways off. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. JON STEWART: Ground News, it's this website and app designed. to give readers a better way, an easier. way, to navigate the news.

If you go on the algorithmic, the Twitters. and the things and--. or the weaponized news organizations or the websites, you don't even understand how they're manipulating. your worldview and how they're getting past the reptilian. barriers that you have towards polarization and all. those different things. Ground News gives you the information you need. to be able to battle that.

It pulls together every article about the same news story. from all outlets all over the world. and puts them in one place and not--. not incentivize for like the worst, most. hostile, most partisan take. It tells you where it's coming from. They show you how reliable the source is and who's funding it. Who's funding it? Follow the money. Know who's behind the headline.

I'm telling you, man. The Nobel Peace Center's even mentioned. that Ground News is an excellent way to stay informed. Nobel Peace Center. That's, I think, the one that Trump started. I think it 3D prints Nobel Peace prizes. and just hands them out. The platform's independently operated, supported by its subscribers. So they stay independent, and they stay mission driven. They don't get sucked into this slop. If you want to see the full picture, go to Ground News. They can help you, through the noise,

get to the heart of the news. Go to groundnews.com/stewart. Subscribe for 40% off the unlimited access. Vantage subscription. Discount available only for a limited time. This brings the price down to, like, $5 a month. That's groundnews.com/stewart or scan. the QR code on the screen. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. Let's talk about that, Daron. When we talk about these two areas of work, which.

is the human expertise that needs to be done. and then physical work, where robotics do, everything is moving in that direction. AI feels like it's strip mined the entirety. of human accomplishment. The 10,000 years that we have spent developing these areas. of expertise, these areas of knowledge, the kinds of things that made us feel relevant. to the progress of the human condition,

AI comes in, and six months later, goes, OK, what else you got? What else are you going to feed me? And then it starts to move forward. So what David's talking about is already a reduction. of the human workforce. Is that the thing that you are most concerned about? DARON ACEMOGLU: Absolutely. JON STEWART: Or is it the eradication? DARON ACEMOGLU: Yeah. Reduction is first, and eradication is later. And in the process, wages be stagnating or even declining.

And David, you know-- everything. David said I agree with. But there's one other thing to add. Again, it's a wildcard, because we don't know how quickly. these AI capabilities will develop. and how quickly they will be adopted. But all of our earlier examples of displacement, which, as I said and David said, haven't been so good for workers, such as during the first 80 years. or so of the British Industrial Revolution. or during China and robot shocks,

they were confined to a few occupations. Even then, it was very hard for people. to relocate and get jobs and newcomers to find jobs. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: But weavers, during the British Industrial. Revolution, once power looms came in, they lost. about 2/3 of their earnings. But they could then become unskilled factory operators. Blue collar workers went to construction or other things, or some of them withdrew from the labor force.

If Dario Amodei or some of the other people. who are most vocal about the capabilities of these models. and what they will do to the workforce are correct, there are going to be many sectors. at the same time being hit. So yes, if the rest of the economy was booming, and 3.5 million customer service representatives were. laid off, we could find other jobs for them, perhaps. with somewhat lower pay.

But what if all occupations are going in the same direction? That is Armageddon. Now, I don't think that's going to happen anytime soon. JON STEWART: Oh. Now, I-- David just sighed. You said, "Armageddon," and David sighed. DARON ACEMOGLU: No, no. I will let David--. I mean, that's not going to happen anytime soon. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: But I think we have to be prepared for it, because some people are saying, that's going. to happen in the next two, three, four, five years. Either those plans are leading trillions of dollars.

of investment, which are going to come to nothing, or there is going to be a grain of truth in some aspect of it. But either way, we have to be prepared for that. Now, displacement is real. JON STEWART: So you're talking about either. this is a financial bubble where an incredible amount. of capital is being poured into a technology that, ultimately, will be a bubble that resolves nothing and is not.

worth the investment, which causes a kind. of financial catastrophe. Or it's real, and it causes a personal human labor. catastrophe. Is that--. DARON ACEMOGLU: I would say, I'm somewhere in between. I think-- JON STEWART: OK. DARON ACEMOGLU: --the speed of which will be much slower, which will then lead to a lot of money. being lost, because the investments need. to be monetized. And they need to be monetized soon if these investments.

are going to pay off. So I am in the middle. I think that these capabilities will come, at some point, but not as soon as these investments. are being motivated by. But I am uncertain enough that either all of it. being a bubble or all of it happening. within the next five years. Can I say with good conscience that's. a zero probability event? I cannot. I mean, so many technologists are saying, look, in our model-- in our labs, we have these even more amazing models.

I mean, I don't believe it. I don't believe it, but I can't say, oh, necessarily it's wrong. JON STEWART: How do you means test these hypotheses? How do you-- DARON ACEMOGLU: I cannot. We cannot. Nobody can. Because they're all based on what's going to come next year, and we don't have access to it. JON STEWART: So everything we're doing. is we're looking backwards--. DARON ACEMOGLU: We're looking backwards. JON STEWART: --but not forward. David, you were going to say something. DAVID AUTOR: OK. So firstly, I don't think that the success of AI companies. and the value of their investments. entirely depends on them displacing labor. If we just got much more productive,

that would also pay off. Right? So if we got more efficient in health care, if we got better at transportation, if we did. education better-- so it doesn't all. have to come from just throwing people out of work. And it's also important to remember. that, although these transitions have been. wrenching, we're infinitely more wealthy. than we were 200 years ago. We are much better off. None of us wants to live--. JON STEWART: On the main. But obviously, if you look in--. I don't think the Rust Belt would. say, yeah, that was-- globalization was great for us. DAVID AUTOR: No, no.

They're not starving. Right? JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: They-- we're not-- JON STEWART: Well--. DAVID AUTOR: In general, they're not starving. They have access-- look, I don't mean to be unsympathetic, but the standard of living in almost anywhere in America, including in the least privileged places, people have indoor plumbing. They are not food deprived, by and large. They have some access to education. They have some safety. It's much better than conditions. in preindustrial England, you know, 250 years ago. So I don't think that-- so although there's always costs--.

and I don't mean to minimize them. I think they're real, and the transitional costs. are enormous. And the beneficiaries are not the same. as those who were harmed. So it's not like they just make these--. but I think we should recognize there's. enormous upside potential here as well. We shouldn't only be sentimental about what. will be lost. We should also recognize the opportunity. to accelerate science, to improve our adaptation. to climate change and energy generation, to improve medicine, to do education better.

We might do it worse. We could do it better--. and distribute more of the world's wealth. to more of the people in the world. I actually think artificial intelligence, like mobile telephony, can be potentially. beneficial to the developing world in a way, by increasing self-sufficiency, by giving access. to expertise and engineering, in medicine, that is not readily available. DARON ACEMOGLU: So can I just jump in there? JON STEWART: Please. DARON ACEMOGLU: Because I mean, David and I. have been studying these things together and separately.

for the last 30 years. And almost everything you'll hear from David I agree with, and most things you hear from me, well, David probably would disagree with them, but anyway. JON STEWART: [LAUGHS]. DARON ACEMOGLU: But there is one place. of disagreement between me and David, and David put his finger on it. So let me expand, because I think this just, again, underscores the uncertainty. JON STEWART: OK. DARON ACEMOGLU: So David and I completely agree. that there is a potential to use AI in what we. call a pro-worker way, meaning you. make workers more productive.

They become better at their jobs. They gain additional expertise. They start performing new and more important and interesting. problem solving tasks. The place of disagreement between me and David. is that I think that direction requires a complete change. in the focus of the industry, and we won't. get it on their current path. The current path is very automation focused. Whereas I think David thinks, well, whatever the companies do, somehow. better things might come out.

DAVID AUTOR: I'm not sure I agree with that. DARON ACEMOGLU: So I think he's more. optimistic about those productivity gains that could. then create meaningful jobs. I think we really are squandering that opportunity. That opportunity is there, but we're squandering. And that's the most important reason. why I love being in shows like yours that people listen to as. opposed to what I say, because I think we need. to change the conversation. The conversation shouldn't just be about the doom and the gloom. or the amazing promise of AI.

It should be about, are we actually using. these models, these capabilities. for the right thing or the wrong thing? That's the main conversation. JON STEWART: Well, let me mediate the dispute between you. and David, before-- DARON ACEMOGLU: We tried. Everybody-- many people have tried. No, OK. Yeah. JON STEWART: --before it turns physical. I don't want to-- I don't want to get there. I don't know how close you are to each other's squares. DAVID AUTOR: Right. No, there's-- I know--. I've seen a lot of fistfights on this podcast. JON STEWART: That's exactly right. And things do get out of control. DAVID AUTOR: Yeah. JON STEWART: And if we need to take it to the octagon, we'll take it to the octagon. I don't have a problem--. I don't have a problem with any of that.

But I think what we're talking about are two separate things. So I want to see if we can tease those out a little bit. You said a phrase, Daron, that I think is interesting, which is you want to make it, you said, worker--. DARON ACEMOGLU: Pro-worker. Pro-worker. JON STEWART: Pro-- you said, "pro-worker.". What David is talking about, I think, is the patina over society that these advances. allow us to fight diseases that we didn't have to do. DARON ACEMOGLU: Sure, and I agree with that. I agree with that. JON STEWART: But it's pro-human to a certain extent,

but not necessarily pro-worker. So I guess, David, what I would say to you is, generally, those that are deploying these new things. are not concerned about being pro-worker in any way. Now, the increase in productivity may have it. They always say, a rising tide lifts all boats. And I always say, unless you don't have a boat. DAVID AUTOR: Right. JON STEWART: And then--. DARON ACEMOGLU: [LAUGHS]. JON STEWART: --really, you're just-- then it's just water, and you're treading it.

But the people that run-- it's sort of like globalization. What they learned was capital travels and labor doesn't. So if I can find ways to pay workers less. or to give them less safe working condition--. so globalization was by no means pro-worker. for workers that were accustomed to more. first world conditions. But if you were a worker in the Global South,

those investments were wildly pro-worker. Because your conditions-- so how do. we tease out what we mean by pro-worker. and the standards of society that we're. talking about raising? DAVID AUTOR: So Daron and I, along with our colleague. Simon Johnson, also Nobel Laureate, further increasing my distinction. from not having one--. JON STEWART: [LAUGHS]. DAVID AUTOR: --just wrote a paper on pro-worker AI. And what we mean is tools that extend the usefulness of human.

expertise and the range, the things that we can do, give people new things to do, things that. they didn't-- and let me say, what do. we mean by new things to do? I don't mean sort blocks, but like, there are a quarter million data scientists in the United. States right now. They earn about $120,000 a year at the median. Like, those didn't exist 20 years ago. JON STEWART: Now, what does a data scientist do? Give me--. DAVID AUTOR: A data scientist is. someone who basically deals with-- we. have enormous amounts of data. We have enormous amounts of computing power. How do we process that?

How do we organize that and make it accessible? The data that we have on the internet is so complex. It's video. It's text. It's images. And data science is all about how. you use that constructively. We had no tools. We had statistics. We had computer science. We had no tools for doing anything like that. And now there's tons of expert work. And a lot of new work-- a lot of where. the value of human work comes from. is demand for new forms of expertise. Like, so we've had electricians and plumbers for a while. Now we have solar electricians and solar plumbers.

They're people who do those fields, but they're specialized even further. Much of our medical work, we didn't. have pediatric oncologists 50 years ago. Or even people who do--. someone who's a fitness coach, that's also a new form of work. And often, that creates demand. It creates specialization. People earn a premium for that. It needs to keep moving. And so expertise is always being actually devalued. by automation and then reinstated. by new ideas, new creativity, and new opportunity. And so both of those things happen,

but we have much less control and predictability. about the new work. It's easy to predict what will be automated. It's hard to predict what will be-- how much new work it'll be. and where it will occur, and most important, who will do it. Most of the new work of the last 40 years. has been for people with high levels of education. And the majority of American adults. do not have a college degree. It's only about 40%. College graduates have done fine for the last 40 years. It's the majority of people who are. not college graduates that we should be concerned about. And so in our view, pro-worker AI in particular.

is AI that enables people without as much. elite credentials to do more valuable medical care, to do. more programming, to do more legal services, to do contracting, skilled repair. And we think there's opportunity there. But I agree with Daron. There's no guarantee that that's where we're. going, where tech firms-- or even. where the market is pointing. Now, I'll say, I don't think--. with some exceptions that I won't name--. I don't think most of the tech bros are evil. I don't think they mean to do harm.

JON STEWART: [LAUGHS] All right. Now you and I are going to have a problem. DAVID AUTOR: Right. But I don't think they-- they don't really. know how to control this. They don't-- if you told them, if you said, Dario, this is how you make pro-worker AI, I think he would. be very interested in that. DARON ACEMOGLU: I thought we said that. DAVID AUTOR: I don't think he knows. what that means precisely. I think there-- he is raising the alarm--. JON STEWART: But are they even interested in that? DARON ACEMOGLU: No, they're not interested, Jon. They're not interested. They're not interested because they've. been locked into this AGI, Artificial. General Intelligence, craze.

And your chops in this industry are measured. by how close you can argue or you really. go towards this sort of AGI. And AGI, if you take it seriously-- hopefully, I don't think we have to take it seriously anytime soon--. but if you do take it seriously, it means that these models can do. everything, everything better than the very, very. best experts. And then once combined with advanced robotics. that are flexible enough, then they. can do all the works better. So a lot of economic intuitions are.

based on what David Ricardo introduced, which. is comparative advantage. If you have an advantage in winemaking, fine, you'll make the wine, and I'll do the podcasting. You won't do both podcasting and winemaking, because you. have a limited amount of time. Now, if indeed we get to AGI, that framework. is out of the window. Because these models can operate very cheaply. and they'll have an advantage over all human work. I don't believe we're getting there any time soon, but that is the agenda. And that's the agenda that's driving the industry.

That's the problem. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. JON STEWART: So the avocado is one of nature's mysteries. as far as I'm concerned. I find it to be a very vexing--. it's not-- I want to say, vegetable, but I think it's a fruit. Right? You know what? Whatever. You'll Google it. You probably don't even have to Google it. You probably know it. You probably learned it from a Snapple cap fact. Avocado Green Mattress, they sell mattresses,

pillows, solid wood furniture. What more do you need? And no pits. It's all made from materials designed to support healthier. living and more restorative sleep, made. without the harmful chemicals. Can actual avocados say that? Probably not. They only use certified organic, nontoxic materials. Their products are designed to support deep, restorative. sleep, so your body can properly. recover, reset, and wake up, and take on the day. Avocado products are made, not manufactured, and thoughtfully.

crafted with real materials to deliver. lasting comfort and support. Go to avocadogreenmattress.com/tws. to check out their mattress and furniture sale. Avocadogreenmattress.com/tws. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. Is the agenda AGI in the industry, or is the agenda to own the operating. system of our society? DARON ACEMOGLU: Both. Both! JON STEWART: That's where I'm more concerned.

We're bringing up where it may go, but some of it. does have to do with those that are the owners, Palantir, OpenAI, the owners of these new technologies. and how exploitative they want to be for workers. And also, ideologically, what are they going. to do if they own-- when the companies were laying fiber. optic cables or the companies were laying electricity.

or any of those kinds of things, there was not an ideological a component. But when you listen to the guys that. are laying the new pipelines for whatever. this society is going to be, they are ideological. DARON ACEMOGLU: 100%, Jon. You nailed it. You nailed it. I think there is an ideology of AI. AGI is part of it. JON STEWART: It's very different. DARON ACEMOGLU: But let me just try to illustrate that going. back to what David said, which again, that part was based on our joint work.

So I agree, sort of, mostly. DAVID AUTOR: You're required to agree. JON STEWART: You're disavowing your own work! DAVID AUTOR: Your name's on it, buddy. DARON ACEMOGLU: So the capability. of using AI with non-expert workers. to increase their expertise, to allow them to do new things, it's definitely there. And I think it's the most exciting part. But fighting against that is the ideology and the practice. of centralizing all information in the hands of a few companies.

and a few people. JON STEWART: Yes. DARON ACEMOGLU: And if they control that information, and if they want to use it in the way. of not make the novices more expert but get rid. of the novices, get rid of the experts, then you have a very different world. And that's the agenda. Now, can they achieve that agenda? Not necessarily true because there. are technical barriers to it, but that's. what they're trying to do. Yes, you're absolutely right. JON STEWART: David? DAVID AUTOR: OK. So I would make three points. First, I think you shouldn't take Daron.

and me too seriously about telling. you about the future of AI. We're not experts in this. I don't think you should take Dario. Amodei very seriously about projecting. the future of the economy. He means well, but he's not-- it's not-- it's like, people. have been telling us forever we'll. run out of work because we're automating stuff. That hasn't happened so far. Doesn't mean it can't happen, but it just. means thinking about it mechanically. is not the right way to think about it. Second of all, I don't even think, when there's AGI, that that will actually put all humans out of work. Many, many problems are not computational problems.

They're political and interpersonal problems. about who has control. Who has ownership rights? Who has the information? If I say today, here's a better way to reorganize MIT, I've got it. I've calculated-- you know, I did it with my AGI. MIT will not be reorganized tomorrow. It's a political problem. DARON ACEMOGLU: Depends on whether you have. dictatorial powers or not. If they also have the dictatorial powers, then it will be reorganized. DAVID AUTOR: OK. Well, I mean, if we also throw democracy. out, then more trouble. JON STEWART: But David, so this is-- let me talk about it. in kind of-- you made some really good points.

about the historical precursors of the Industrial. Revolution and globalization. I just want to make a little bit. of a point about human nature. When new technologies come along that. are truly transformative--. I'm thinking of splitting the atom. Right? So you have brilliant people working on splitting the atom, and if you split it one way, you. can use it to power the world. And if you split it another way, you can blow the world up. Which one did we try first? So when we talk about AI and we're.

talking about the technology, it doesn't necessarily. have to be transformative in the way. that we're talking theoretically. We can talk about how powerful it is for the general tools. that humans use to rule over other humans. And I'll give you an example. Palantir comes across with this incredibly. powerful AI generated systems. And what do they do? They suck information out of the system,

and then they funnel the information about people. who are undocumented. And the government then uses that information. It's not just about what it might do. It's about how governments or individuals will use. these new powers to game the system. and gain advantage over their competitors. Isn't that a more realistic conversation? DARON ACEMOGLU: Oh, you nailed it.

You nailed it exactly, Jon. So I think for the next version of our paper. with Simon Johnson-- JON STEWART: Daron! When are we writing a paper together, Daron? DARON ACEMOGLU: Exactly. I was just going to say, you have to become a co-author. JON STEWART: I want my Nobel! Where's my Nobel? [LAUGHTER]. DARON ACEMOGLU: Yeah, the direction of technology. is highly malleable, and there is always a worse direction. than the one you fear. And sometimes we find it the more. dictatorial, authoritarian. Less democratic we are, the more likely we.

are to find that direction. Nuclear weapons are much more likely under times of war. or times of authoritarian control, and nuclear energy becomes much more. reasonable if it's subject to democratic oversight. Exactly the centralization of information, the ideology of AGI, and the meetings. of the mind around the surveillance state. and the technology are very worrying, precisely because they open those bad doors for us.

And anyway, many of the people in the industry. would have no problem walking through those doors headfirst. JON STEWART: And, David, I want to ask you. about that, because you're making really good points. about the ways that these new technologies can. be used to uplift. But in my mind, I'm thinking atomic. It's splitting the atom. And are you concerned? Because I think you're-- DAVID AUTOR: Oh, yeah. JON STEWART: --you're more optimistic about where. this thing is going, about what I'm raising here.

DAVID AUTOR: Oh, absolutely. I'm very concerned. And I think AI is God's gift to authoritarians. Right? JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: It's great for centralizing control. It's great for monitoring. It is-- yeah, and I think it's going to-- we already see. If we want to see mass surveillance. and censorship at scale, go to China, and they're exporting that model. And we've privatized a lot of it. We're still doing it. I'm very concerned about that. So I'm trying to emphasize that there is opportunity, not that we're on a-- JON STEWART: No question. DAVID AUTOR: --we're destined to get there. I think we're destined to have a range of outcomes, some.

of them quite terrible, some of them. quite good, and very unevenly shared. And the balance may be towards the bad. It may be towards the good. But I think we have to-- if we don't bear in mind that we have. an opportunity, we certainly won't-- we'll certainly. squander it. JON STEWART: Understood. DAVID AUTOR: Yeah. DARON ACEMOGLU: Absolutely. But I think we also need to--. and this is the first, most important observation. that David made-- but we also need. to have the public conversation that those opportunities exist. and we're not currently targeting them.

JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: We're currently targeting. something very different. Mass automation, surveillance state, a new sort of merger between the security apparatus and tech. companies, those are the things we are contemplating. or practicing right now. DAVID AUTOR: There's another conversation we're not having. I just want to loop back to a point you made, Jon, a little while ago about all the stuff on the internet. now kind of being monetized. There's a really fascinating book. by Max Kasy, who's an economist at Oxford, called The Means of Prediction.

Right? So play on the Marxian phrase, the means of production. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: And he makes, I think, what is a brilliant analogy. He says, look, the enclosure movement in medieval Europe. was when all the common land, all of a sudden the Lord said, hey, we own that and we're just going to farm that ourselves. And it may have been actually a more efficient way of farming, but the commoners were just wiped out by this. Well, you could say that AI is, in some sense, enclosing the internet. It's taking all this common property and monetizing it. All of the stuff we put out there, all our photos and all of our writing and all of our movies--.

JON STEWART: Yes. DAVID AUTOR: And you say, oh, well, they're not enclosing it. I mean, it's still there, just where you left it. But of course, you never thought your artwork. was going to compete with you. Right? You never thought the story you wrote. would be regurgitated and sold and you couldn't. sell your work anymore. So I do think this unilateral transfer of property rights. is a huge thing that is under-recognized, under-discussed. JON STEWART: Man! DARON ACEMOGLU: Oh yeah. That's so important. But can I add one thing? JON STEWART: Yes! DARON ACEMOGLU: 100% agree with David, but it has an additional really bad effect, which is that--. JON STEWART: He always wants to be the--.

DAVID AUTOR: All right, man. JON STEWART: He wants to be the black swan. Daron always wants to walk in and go--. DARON ACEMOGLU: Really dark soul, black swan, yes, exactly. JON STEWART: Yes, exactly. DAVID AUTOR: Go for it. DARON ACEMOGLU: But the useful things that David and I. are mentioning that you can do pro-worker. AI, that really requires very high quality data. It requires-- if you're going to build. a tool for electricians that makes novice electricians. perform the expert tasks that solar electricians and the best. seasoned ones can do, you require the data.

from those electricians dealing with the hardest problems. That data will not be produced unless there is property rights. over data, and there are data markets. in which people can get the returns for the data. that they create. But this enclosure thing that David described. is a data extraction economy. So it's creating the opposite. JON STEWART: Guys, this is blowing my mind.

It's something that I had not thought of at all. But I think that's-- what you're bringing. up is so interesting. So as AI strip mines the totality. of human expertise and experience--. so let's look at it in terms of music. You get royalties. If you write a song and somebody uses that song, they pay you a royalty. If somebody plagiarizes your lyrics. or finds a way to take your melody. and put it into their song, you're. going to be paid for that.

AI is a human expertise laundering machine. It's basically taking everything. that we've gotten training itself, in some ways replacing us, but without that royalty payment. Where the royalty payment goes is. to OpenAI or to Palantir or to any of these other places. And if you ask them what they're doing with it, they'll say, that's proprietary. DAVID AUTOR: Right. Yeah.

We're in the Napster era of AI. Remember Napster? JON STEWART: Yes. DAVID AUTOR: Just everybody's music. and just burn it, rip it, and share it. That was not viable. We wouldn't have a music industry if we hadn't gotten. control of that, with Spotify, with Apple Music, where we pay. royalties when we listen to those songs, small royalties, but we do pay them. DARON ACEMOGLU: But the difference. is that, in the Napster, it was the consumers who. were doing that replication. Now, it's the most powerful corporations humanity. has seen who's doing it. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: But this is a failure of property rights, a failure of legislation. And people say, oh, no, fair use allows that.

Well, fair use never envisioned this. Right? JON STEWART: No. DAVID AUTOR: And so who cares what the law said? It's not applicable. We should have been-- we should be changing it. People should be compensated and not just once. They should be compensated as their information is reused. And that's actually a manageable problem. I've talked to people at Google who've worked on this. They say, yeah, we know how to do that. We don't have an incentive to do it, but we know how to do it. And if the laws, we would support it. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: So I think that, and by not recognizing. that this enclosure is going on, that this sort of property rights.

are being reallocated-- right? JON STEWART: Yes! DAVID AUTOR: Economics doesn't deal with that. Economics is--. JON STEWART: It's reverse socialism. DAVID AUTOR: Exactly. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: They're taking from the workers, and they're funneling up to these five individuals. And it comes back to--. to torture this atomic analogy, you got the sense. that people like Oppenheimer or Einstein. were aware of the gravity--. DAVID AUTOR: Oh yeah. JON STEWART: --of what was happening, and through the crucible of war, maybe,

made some decisions they might not have made otherwise. In this environment, I don't think Altman, Karp, Thiel--. Thiel was asked, should human being--. should the human race flourish and continue to exist? And he took like a five-second pause, like, yeah. Let me think about that for a second. DAVID AUTOR: That's a tough one there. Yeah. JON STEWART: So the nuance of what. you're both bringing to the discussion. seems utterly absent.

DARON ACEMOGLU: And you nailed it again, the war conditions. Einstein, who was very pacifist, because he was worried about Germany, Third Reich--. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: --supported the atomic weapons. and several other-- and you know what? Silicon Valley is also creating war conditions. The framing of AGI is either China gets there first. and we become their vassal state, or we have to go first. And that's creating this warlike condition.

You have to allow us to do anything we want, even the worst things, because otherwise, China is going to do them. So that's creating the equivalent of the 21st. century war condition. DAVID AUTOR: And Oppenheimer, by the way, spent the rest of his career opposing the H-bomb. and eventually was stripped of his security clearance. and went to-- died a broken man, effectively, because he. was persecuted for trying to control. the invention that he was so instrumental in creating. But, I mean, maybe it makes sense. to talk a little bit about, what are some policies. that we could have? JON STEWART: Yeah, please do. DAVID AUTOR: OK. So I mean, I would put them in three buckets.

But let me start with one that people call wage insurance. And wage insurance, an idea that actually was experimented. with during the presidential administration that. reigned from 2008 to 2016--. I'm not going to say what the president's-- but you. can guess. JON STEWART: I don't recall it, but I think. I remember him in a tan suit. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. DARON ACEMOGLU: [LAUGHS]. DAVID AUTOR: Handsome guy. JON STEWART: Very handsome guy, tan suit. DAVID AUTOR: Very handsome guy. Anyway, that's all I remember. But it was-- the idea was, look, you. lose a job in manufacturing. Let's say you're making $50,000 a year, $25 an hour, and you can find another job.

But it's going to be like at $15 hour. Right? And it's not only is that low wage, but you're like, hey, that's beneath my dignity. Like, I'm not going to take that job. So wage insurance says, hey, look, we get that. We're going to make up half the difference for up to like, say, $8,000 up to two years. Just take the $20-- take the $15 an hour job. You'll make $20. Right? And then you can look for something better. And it gives people-- it gets people back into the workforce. more quickly. It's like an earned income tax credit for returning workers. This program was so effective, in terms of saving unemployment. insurance money and generating additional payroll revenue,

that it paid for itself. JON STEWART: How is that different, David, than unemployment insurance? DAVID AUTOR: Unemployment insurance, you get. it while you're not working. This, you get it if you return to work. Right? JON STEWART: I see. OK. DAVID AUTOR: And now, this needs to be scaled. JON STEWART: And it makes up-- so I get what you're saying. It makes up, in some ways, the difference that you would have. gotten from a job that was paying. a little bit more to what's-- OK. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. JON STEWART: That makes sense. DAVID AUTOR: And I think, by the way, this is very politically viable. Right? In America, we're not very friendly towards people. who aren't working.

If you're working, that's OK with us. And so an incentive to work rather than an incentive. or something that's subsidizing work, rather than subsidizing leisure, is something that many people can get behind, especially. if it's pretty cost effective. Now, we need a bigger demonstration. Right? What was done-- and people like Brian Kovak at Carnegie Mellon. University is trying to stand up a multi-state demonstration. of this. I've been trying, speaking with funders, trying to get it going. So that's like one really actionable policy. And let me say, this is a no regrets policy. JON STEWART: I'm in. DAVID AUTOR: It's not--. JON STEWART: I'm in. I like it. DAVID AUTOR: It's not like, if the Armageddon doesn't come.

to pass, we'll go, oh, damn. Why did we do wage insurance after all? This is just a good idea. It's a good-- it was a good idea 10 years ago. It's a good idea now. So let me pause there and turn it over. to Daron for the next idea. JON STEWART: Yeah, yeah. DARON ACEMOGLU: Well, that's a great policy. I am fully behind it. But let me say, before I talk about the next policies, I think the most important step, even before the policies, is actually this conversation, this conversation. that needs to just take place much more.

widely, that there are many different things we. can do with AI. And it's a choice what we do with AI. That's what's lost in the current media environment. For about 10 years, the entire mainstream media. was so excited about the tech barons. that they couldn't do anything wrong. Now, they're talking about killer robots and doom. OK? That's a useful corrective, but we're actually missing the most. important conversation. The most important conversation, AI.

is not one thing. AI is a whole spectrum. And at the one end of the spectrum, as we've been emphasizing, there are some terrible things. And at the other end of the spectrum, we may-- there are feasible things that we. can do that are much better. Who's going to decide that? Who's going to empower to make those civilization. changing decisions? Dario Amodei? Sam Altman? Peter Thiel? No. I think it should be-- the Democratic process should. have part on it, and people should. become more informed about it. I think that conversation is first,

and then all the policies have to come on top of that. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. JON STEWART: Folks, I don't know if you. can hear it in my voice. I'm tired! Didn't sleep well last night. I need a good night's sleep. I always need a good night's sleep. And you know what I could do? I could buy a new mattress, little, maybe a princess bed, maybe get a little four poster thing, throw some mosquito netting on there, spend a ton of money.

Or I could do the only thing that. matters, get some nice sheets, some nice, clean, freshly done, comfortable sheets. That's what you need, the Boll & Branch way. Boll & Branch? It's the best way to get a better. night's sleep is the bedding. Get the nice bedding. You don't want the chafing bedding. You don't want--. I sleep in corduroy. Who would do that? Makes no sense. But I really feel like you should just get some new sheets.

at Boll & Branch. You can upgrade your sleep with Boll & Branch. and get 15% off your first order, plus free shipping. Bollandbranch.com/tws, with code TWS, Boll & Branch. B-O-L-L-A-N-D Branch.com/tws, code TWS to unlock 15% off. Exclusions apply. [SMOOTH MUSIC].

DARON ACEMOGLU: And then there are many policies. that we can worry about. Like, for example, in the United States, we tax labor heavily. We subsidize capital. JON STEWART: It's been that way for 50 years. DARON ACEMOGLU: It's been-- well, it's gotten much worse over the last 25 years, and much, much worse with the Trump administration. And how do you think that changes firms'. and technologists' decisions? It makes them more leaning towards automation, because automation is being subsidized. JON STEWART: That's right. DARON ACEMOGLU: So let's change that tax,

and we can raise more taxes also, because we're just giving. a pass to all capital income. JON STEWART: But it's kind of a perpetual motion machine. Because what happens is, when these new technologies. come along, capital flows towards it. in such massive ways. This giant trillions and trillions. of dollars that flow in, in building data centers. and sucking up water and electricity and money. And then what they do with the profits is they. reinvest, not just in their technologies,

but in their political power. DARON ACEMOGLU: Oh, 100%. JON STEWART: So they take their money, and they bring it to bear on Washington. It was a shocking moment to me, at the inauguration. of an American president, to see in the front row in a room. of the swearing in, not the people, but the tech. companies that had the closest proximity. and access to the president. DARON ACEMOGLU: And you know what's worse? We don't even know who owned who, whether they own the government or Trump owned them.

JON STEWART: We don't know-- we don't know which is what. David, you were going to say something, though, to that. DAVID AUTOR: Well, I just want to talk about another policy. JON STEWART: Oh, oh! OK, great. I like Daron's though, the changing of the tax. incentives that can even out-- to talk. about pro-worker, that makes--. we value capital over labor. And I think the pendulum needs to swing back. So I think that was a really important point. DAVID AUTOR: But let me suggest another policy related to--. JON STEWART: Yeah, please do. DAVID AUTOR: --which is what people call. universal basic capital, so not universal basic income,

which is like writing people check every month. But the notion that, when people are born, we give them an endowment of capital, with voting rights, like shares. And what does this do? Well, one, it diversifies it. Most people's-- their entire income is bound. up in their human capital. Your income comes from your ability. to produce valuable labor. Well, that's a pretty risky bet. Right? For anyone. Because value of labor changes over time. Specialized skills become-- sometimes. they become more valuable. Sometimes they become worthless. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: So we distribute-- and by the way, you can call this Trump accounts if you want. They're already being done.

JON STEWART: I think we're calling it Trump everything. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. JON STEWART: I think--. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. JON STEWART: This is actually the Weekly Show Trump podcast. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. JON STEWART: We just add the word Trump to everything. DAVID AUTOR: And Daron has the Trump Prize in Economics. JON STEWART: That's right. DAVID AUTOR: But yeah, just to return to our main theme. but-- so what does this do? One, it gives people a more diversified portfolio. It's something they can invest in. Right? They can't spend it until they're 18. Second, it gives them ownership rights. JON STEWART: What are they--. DAVID AUTOR: Basically you get-- it's just like getting. a bond when you're born. JON STEWART: OK.

DARON ACEMOGLU: Like the Alaska Fund for everybody. JON STEWART: OK. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. But what-- it gives people a diversified income. portfolio, somewhat. It also redistributes voting rights. They have voting rights over capital. And you could even set it up so, even if you sell your stocks, you maintain the voting rights. JON STEWART: But what is the voting right? Is it a-- so the way that I would think. about it is it's reverse-- it's Benjamin. Button Social Security. So rather than-- it's a large fund. And then when you're born--. DAVID AUTOR: That's why you're the comedian. That's good. JON STEWART: --you're given-- well,

I just watch a lot of movies. So when you're born, you are invested. into this larger fund that has been-- now, then the questions come up. Well, what is that fund invested in? And how does it grow? DAVID AUTOR: No, it's invented--. it owns shares of these tech firms, for example. It owns a piece of the economy. JON STEWART: OK. I get it. DAVID AUTOR: And so then we all have some voting rights. And that's really important, because if labor-- there's. certainly a risk that labor will become less valuable. and capital more so. And if so, we want more people to have ownership stakes.

Part of the brilliance of the labor market. is that, in a country without slavery. and without labor coercion, everyone owns, at most, one worker. Themselves, right? So it's intrinsically relatively equal. But capital is not like that. So we would like--. JON STEWART: The reason why I'm slightly dubious about that. is-- and I'll tell you why. DAVID AUTOR: Yeah. JON STEWART: Companies won't even do. that for their own employees. DAVID AUTOR: No, the government has to do it. It has to be done publicly. JON STEWART: Publicly, but the government. is going to give away shares of privately owned companies?

DAVID AUTOR: Or buy them, that's fine. JON STEWART: Or buy them? OK. DAVID AUTOR: Sure. Yeah. JON STEWART: All right. Now, I'm feeling a little better. I'm feeling a little better. DARON ACEMOGLU: But here is the problem. Here is the problem. I completely agree with David's-- you know, that would be a nice addition to a functioning labor market. JON STEWART: Yes. DARON ACEMOGLU: But here is what I want to put a pin on, which is that the tech solution to these problems. of universal basic income--. DAVID AUTOR: I didn't say, I hate U-- a UBI, sorry. DARON ACEMOGLU: Exactly. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: So but yeah, just I. want to just underscore that, or other schemes where.

people are somehow given a handout so. that they can just not work. I think there are many problems with that. First of all, I think we don't know what to do with millions. of people who don't work. That would be highly bad for their mental health, for social peace. But even worse, I think if you create any system like that, based on dividends, based on income, based on other things, as long as society knows, oh, these are the creators, Peter.

Thiel, Elon Musk, et cetera, and the rest living off. the income that they've created, that would create a horrible two tier society, where there are those with very, very high. status and then all the rest. JON STEWART: But Daron, we have a horrible-- we have. a horrible two tiered society. DARON ACEMOGLU: I know, but it will get even worse. JON STEWART: As it exists now. DARON ACEMOGLU: I know. DAVID AUTOR: I mean, look at-- in Norway, right? They have a sovereign wealth fund that's worth two GDP, and it's coming from oil. But people are public owners of that. Right? JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: And they're doing OK. DARON ACEMOGLU: And they're working.

And they're working in Norway. JON STEWART: And I like that. DAVID AUTOR: And I'm in favor of work. JON STEWART: But I want to push back on just a couple. of things within that. So the system that's already been designed. is a two tiered system. And there's already that sort of Randian philosophy. that there are makers and takers. DAVID AUTOR: Exactly. JON STEWART: But when you have an economic system that. requires labor at its cheapest level. and you have outside pressure of globalization that continues. to drive those wages down and conditions down,

well, we've created the conditions. for that permanent underclass. And then we blame those people as. though their poverty is a function of vice, is a function of a lack of virtue. And that's what I want to push back on. I don't view money that goes into those communities. as handouts. I view them as investments. DAVID AUTOR: Sure. JON STEWART: And we have to find a way within this. I love the idea of giving people.

some ownership over the industries. that drive the country. I think, for too long, we have allowed these companies. the providence of the stability of this country, the subsidies. of this country, the investments of this country. and asked for no vig. And I do think the house should always win, and the house should be the American people. And there should be a rate. DARON ACEMOGLU: 100%. DAVID AUTOR: Now you nailed it. DARON ACEMOGLU: Yeah, 100%, Jon.

Now you're definitely a co-author. JON STEWART: Give me my prize! DAVID AUTOR: [LAUGHS]. DARON ACEMOGLU: But you also put. your finger, in passing, on something. that's very important. And you might want to have Michael Sandel on the show. to talk about this, sort of this ideology of meritocracy, that somehow all of those who are so successful. are well deserving and virtuous, and all of those who have lost out of globalization, of technological change, of social change, are losers that deserve their fate.

I think that's been very, very pernicious. I think you cannot understand the rise of Trump, the rise of anger in this country without that. full meritocracy ideology. And he's been the most eloquent describer of this, and I think it's a very, very important thing. you put your finger on it. DAVID AUTOR: Not Trump. Michael Sandel has been the most--. [LAUGHTER]. JON STEWART: Who would have thought there's. so much fun to be had at MIT? [LAUGHTER]. DARON ACEMOGLU: Please don't have Trump on your show, Jon.

[SMOOTH MUSIC]. JON STEWART: Folks, I'm going to be honest with you. A lot of times, I'll be pitching you products. Am I crazy about them? I don't know. Maybe I'll muster some enthusiasm. But then, every now and again, a product comes along, and I'm like, oh, I actually use that. [LAUGHTER]. I actually wear those. Those are-- they're super comfortable. And that's what we got now. Folks, Bombas is in the house. Bombas, baby! That's the alliteration I'm looking for.

Bombas-- I can't even tell you how excited. I am that we got Bombas. Bombas is-- first of all, I don't know about you, but I'm a sock man. Like, I like a nice, comfortable sock. If you give me a sock-- every other part of my body. is immune to discomfort but my feet. You throw on a nice pair of socks, man, and you can have yourself a fine day. And Bombas' is the most comfortable socks in the world.

Man, just get rid of all your old socks. You know what happened to me recently? I had some socks in my drawer, and I put them on, and it was as though the fabric had expired. Like, when you pulled it on, it made a noise like the universe. was coming apart. Like, it went like [GROWL]. Like, almost crackling, it was--. needless to say, I didn't have a good day that day. Here's even the best part about Bombas.

For every item you purchase, an essential clothing item. is donated to someone facing housing insecurity, a one-for-one model with over 200 million donations. and counting. Head over to bombas.com/weekly and use code weekly for 20%. off your first purchase. That's B-O-M-B-A-S.com/weekly, code Weekly at checkout. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. These are really interesting, and I really do like them.

And what I love about it the most. is these are actionable, specific ideas. What so frustrates me about our political process. in this moment, we have this incredibly powerful technology. that sits just on the horizon. But we have a political system that. is unable to articulate mostly anything but platitudes. We have to start talking about kitchen table issues. Working families must get the thing.

DARON ACEMOGLU: So you think, like, creating American AI dominion and cryptocurrency. are not actionable issues? JON STEWART: Well, let me tell you something. As a proud owner of Melania coin, I can tell you--. [LAUGHTER]. --that my future is set. But we are in this position. What's so-- I don't even want to say, ironic, about it is we could probably plug these questions. into AI and come up with more specific.

and actionable and interesting solutions. than what are being offered by our political system. DAVID AUTOR: Right. JON STEWART: And that's the part. I can't wrap my head around. Where do you guys see-- why is that the case? DAVID AUTOR: Well, I actually think. that-- so the idea of wage insurance is in currency. It's being discussed. I've discussed it with people in the Trump administration. I've discussed it with people in the Democratic leadership. I think there's enthusiasm for that or at least--. there's also, I should say, there's.

new efforts around doing modernizing training. in a way where we can measure it and monetize. it and return the revenues. And Raj Chetty and the group at Opportunity Insights. at Harvard, they're working on this. in a really innovative way. JON STEWART: Harvard! Safety school. DARON ACEMOGLU: [LAUGHS]. JON STEWART: Talking MIT, baby! DAVID AUTOR: Yeah, exactly. So I do think there are a set of policies that, again, I. would call no regrets policy. We won't be sorry we did them, even. if the worst doesn't come to pass,

and we know how to do them well. They're not totally out of reach. So I'm absolutely with Daron. We need to shape the conversation. We need to deploy the technology constructively. But we also-- we've got to recognize, we are in for a rough ride. Even if it goes well, we're in for a rough ride, because the transition is going to be so fast. So we should have policies that support people, support. their income, support job transitions, and give them also an ownership stake, so that they're on some of the upside of this, not just the downside. And that's-- distributing capital more broadly. would have that effect. JON STEWART: David, I can't tell you how much I love that.

and how much I think that, in some ways, over the last 50 years, I think that's what's gone wrong. with the economic condition in this country, is that labor has never been offered. an ownership stake in the value of their productivity. And, Daron, I want to ask you about that. And I've so appreciated this conversation, but--. DAVID AUTOR: Great. JON STEWART: --when we talk about productivity gains, because that's always how it's framed, it always outstrips wage.

Always. And maybe that's just the way that the system is--. DAVID AUTOR: No, it's not how it was. until the late-- mid-1970s. Yeah. JON STEWART: But I'm saying, since the 19--. DAVID AUTOR: Yeah, for 50 years. Absolutely. JON STEWART: Since the Reagan revolution, but--. DAVID AUTOR: That's right. DARON ACEMOGLU: But like people say that about like, oh, the capitalist system. Well, it was a capitalist system in Europe, in the United States, from 1940s to the mid-1970s, where wages grew faster than productivity. Workers with less than a college degree. had faster wage gains than managers.

That was feasible. There's nothing in the laws of economics. or in the laws of democracy against that. We just chose a different path since 1980. JON STEWART: And do you think, at this point, those powerful corporations have-- there's almost a--. that they kind of have us at an extortion point, where they say, oh, if you try and do. anything to regulate us or you try and do anything to tax us, we'll leave.

DARON ACEMOGLU: Well, look, this. is such an important point. This is such an important point, Jon. First of all, these corporations. are absolutely enormous. I mean, it's not a fair comparison, but I just did the calculation last week. Each one of the largest seven tech companies has annual. revenues, in current dollars, twice as large. as the entire British empire's GDP in the middle. of the 19th century. These are enormous, enormous corporations. JON STEWART: Right. DARON ACEMOGLU: They need to be regulated. But the rhetoric that they cannot be regulated, AI cannot.

be regulated, that's false. China proves it. OK, I don't approve of what China does. I don't approve what they intend to do. But they show very clearly AI can be regulated, tech companies. Alibaba is now completely subservient to the interests of. the Communist Party in China. We could also make Google and OpenAI and Anthropic. be much more in line with the Democratic priorities. in the United States. There is nothing in the laws of economics, in the laws of physics, that says these.

companies cannot be regulated. DAVID AUTOR: They're not delicate flowers. When Sam Altman says--. [LAUGHTER]. --when Sam Altman says, oh, if you charge us for intellectual. capital, property, we'll be put out of business, that's-- not only is this not true, it's kind of pathetic. Because they say, we don't produce anything of value. If you actually make us pay for our inputs, no one would buy it? That's crazy. And it's not true. JON STEWART: Right. DAVID AUTOR: So I mean, look, I think, yeah, there's. constructive ways to steer. We don't need to shut it down. We don't need to regulate it to death so it can't move. The US is innovative, and that's great. We have a lot to be proud of, in that.

we have led this technology. We're building it out quickly. It's valuable. But we need to-- it's an opportunity, and we could squander it. We need to steer it. DARON ACEMOGLU: 100%. DAVID AUTOR: It will-- just left to its own, it's going to do--. it's not going to be pro-worker. DARON ACEMOGLU: Like, what you're. hearing, both from me and David, is that AI is a very promising technology. But that's precisely the reason why we've. got to put the care to make sure that we. use it for the right thing. JON STEWART: Gentlemen, you have done the impossible. You have done the impossible, which is you have somehow, not.

allayed my fears, but you've given. me hope that the future is actually not yet been written. And what it does is it creates opportunity. And when you have those opportunities to write it. in the proper way-- but I think what you've done really well. today is you've given specifics, that none of this. is platitude. This is all the specificity of here's what it could do.

Here's the damage it's going to do. Here's a way to mitigate it, and here are some ways to give. us a shared prosperity for it. And I think that's--. truly, I think that's the conversation. that the two of you-- have you thought about having a podcast? [LAUGHTER]. DARON ACEMOGLU: We were hoping we would join you after this. JON STEWART: What? Oh, yes! Unfortunately, what I've done is. I had my data scientist-- they've been strip.

mining this conversation. I don't need you. I've--. DAVID AUTOR: We're done. JON STEWART: I've created AI avatars of the two of you. And now we're done. DAVID AUTOR: Fantastic. JON STEWART: But, guys--. DAVID AUTOR: That frees some time. JON STEWART: Man, thank you so much for this conversation. I truly appreciate it. Daron Acemoglu, Nobel Laureate in economics at MIT Institute, Professor David Autor, Rubinfeld. Professor of Economics at MIT. Guys, fantastic and really appreciate it. And I hope to continue the conversation with both of you.

DARON ACEMOGLU: This was fantastic. Yes, a lot of fun. Thanks, Jon. DAVID AUTOR: Thank you so much for having us on. JON STEWART: Very cool, guys. DAVID AUTOR: This is superb, and we love what you're doing, and it's great to have this conversation. JON STEWART: Oh, thanks, man. All right. Take care. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. Holy smokes. I'm feeling some-- are you feeling something at home? You listening to this, are you feeling something? I'm feeling the possibility of futures unwritten. The opportunity that it gives us to correct our path, to put.

us on a righteous path towards a more. positive, productive, equal future. My God. And I apologize, we don't have our normal staff chat today, because as you can see, I'm on the road. And so we weren't able to accomplish that. But man, I so appreciated what those gentlemen were saying. and the specificity of it. And I hope you did too.

And it's put me in something that I've. needed for a little bit, which is a better mood! I am in--. I am now-- and by the way, maybe. I'm drinking the Kool-Aid too. But I am in a slightly better mood. than I was at the beginning of this whole schmegegge. But man, that was--. I enjoyed that conversation tremendously. And thanks, as always, to our fantastic team, lead producer. Lauren Walker, producer Brittany Mehmedovic, producer.

Gillian Spear, video editor and engineer Rob Vitolo, who he. and Nicole Boyce, our audio engineer, they had to work today. Today was a day when I couldn't figure. out how to log into Riverside. They had to do a little extra work today. And as always, our executive producers, Chris McShane and Caity Gray. Very nice, and we shall see you next week. [SMOOTH MUSIC]. The Weekly Show with Jon Stewart. is a Comedy Central podcast.

It's produced by Paramount Audio and Busboy Productions. [SMOOTH MUSIC].