In a letter to Jean-Baptiste Le Roy in 1789, Benjamin Franklin famously noted that “in this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Yet, there is a third certainty that often arises: change.
Change can bring about improvement or hardship, and it often incites fear, particularly among those who lack spiritual guidance and are apprehensive about the unknown.
The rapid rise of Artificial Intelligence poses a threat of unprecedented change—potentially altering modern employment and resulting in widespread job loss. This has triggered considerable anxiety among people everywhere.
But could this upheaval ultimately lead to positive outcomes?
Today, we turn to insights from Joel Bowman in his Notes From the End of the World. For unique viewpoints and observations not found elsewhere, consider visiting his website and subscribing to his newsletter.
Enjoy!
MN Gordon
P.S. We have no financial ties to Bowman and gain no profit from sharing his work. His insights resonate with us, and we believe they will resonate with you as well.
—
Spoon-Fed Labor
Plus Musk, A.I., and the curse of man’s crab pot mentality…
“Why not use spoons?”
~ Milton Friedman’s witty response when informed by government officials that it was better to dig ditches with shovels instead of bulldozers because more jobs were created that way.
Joel Bowman with today’s Note From the End of the World: Buenos Aires, Argentina…
Yesterday morning, we awoke (do not ask us what time, dear reader) to the familiar sounds of clanging pots and pans.
This local event, known as a cacerolazo, is a peaceful protest where people express their dissent by creating a cacophony with kitchen items from their balconies.
Folks from abroad might categorize this as either noble “civil disobedience” or simply “throwing one’s toys out of the stroller,” depending on their views about the causa del dia. What prompted this particular symphony? The reasons remain elusive, although a few friends offered amusing speculations…
“The dog-owning President Milei was found to have 1,000 cloned dogs kept in horrifying conditions at the Casa Rosada. Animal rights activists are furious!” quipped one.
“Protesting a proposed tax on bovine flatulence,” added another, linking to an actual proposal to tax flatulent cows in the Pampas. No joke.
“No one would wake up just to bang a pot,” posited another local resident. “It’s probably just drunks.”
Deeper Cuts
The spontaneous nature of these protests makes it challenging to pinpoint their exact motivation. However, if we had to wager, it could be linked to the Milei administration’s announcement to further cut the public sector. The latest news from La Derecha Diario states:
“Milei’s administration plans to further reduce the state workforce in 2026.”
“The libertarian government aims to eliminate ‘ñoquis’—those ineffectual employees—so that they can continue to lower taxes.”
“Milei’s team is working on a new phase of state reduction, targeting further cuts in 2026 to keep lowering taxes.”
“While the government has not specified how many public employees will be affected, they indicated this reduction might include ‘another 10%’ of the current workforce.”
For those unfamiliar, “ñoquis” refers to potato dumplings typically served at the end of the month when families are financially stretched. Locally, it’s a term used to describe public workers who show up only once a month… just in time to collect their paycheck.
So far, job cuts have become somewhat of a hallmark for and the Milei administration, laying off nearly 60,000 public employees (around 17% of identified ‘ñoquis’) within its first two years.
The latest graph shared on X by Fede Sturzenegger, Ministry for Deregulation, featured the unambiguous caption:
“CHAINSAW. Less public spending = less taxes. VLLC!”
As previously discussed, the shift from public inefficiency to private innovation, from government-funded coercion to voluntary collaboration, has significantly bolstered the Argentine economy and its resilient populace.
This shift also invites a fundamental philosophical inquiry about the essence of “work.” Last week, we raised the question: Who wants a job, anyway?
Today, we shall delve deeper into that discussion…
Optional Labor
Labor, an age-old concept, is intrinsic to human existence. It’s worth noting that humans have continued to thrive, allowing us to engage in modern activities like typing on laptops, all thanks to our ancestors who navigated the complexities of employment.
Influential thinkers like Smith, Marx, Ricardo, and Menger have explored the topic, introducing various theories in response to the conditions of their times. Today, advancements in technology, particularly Artificial Intelligence and robotics, intensify this discussion.
What about these transformative forces as they approach a workforce ready to adapt to endless information flow?
During a recent investment summit in Saudi Arabia, the controversial figure Elon Musk shared his prediction:
“In the long term, what will the outcome be? My forecast for the next ten to twenty years is that work will become optional, akin to playing sports or video games.”
Sure enough, the anticipated backlash was swift…
As Musk’s words echoed, the expected barrage of reactions arose in the comments. Critics lamented that this “greedy capitalist” was stripping them of their hope for meaningful employment.
“‘Optional’ work simply disguises terminations,” asserted one, clearly distressed by the prospect of job loss.
“I suspect it’ll be we, the people, who become optional and irrelevant,” chimed another, showing a troubling link between identity and job status.
Setting aside the flawed idea that individuals are entitled to jobs, the belief that humanity should function only at the minimal level permitted by technology is fundamentally anti-human, ignoring Browning’s inspiring assertion:
A man’s reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what’s a heaven for?
Universal Basic Poverty
Humans typically do not crave jobs for the sake of employment. Rather, they seek the rewards that come from work—either through personal achievement or through the efforts of others.
This highlights the crux of the issue: a crab pot mentality that, unable to envision a different future, remains antagonistic to anyone who dares to aspire for more.
This frustration often manifests politically as a socialist doctrine, driving the belief that someone is always getting ahead unfairly, necessitating intervention.
Naturally, some may cling to the notion that humanity should remain tethered to menial tasks and traditional roles—adhering to an outdated mindset where mediocrity reigns supreme. In this perspective, genuine progress often faces resistance from those who value stagnation over growth.
The misguided aim of achieving “full employment” at the cost of innovation and efficiency offers a superficial solution. The Soviet Union’s notorious claim, “We pretend to work; they pretend to pay us,” echoes the philosophy of enforced mediocrity.
Why seek complex solutions when simple ones present themselves? Why not resist change and impede progress instead of striving for excellence?
Let’s consider banning all forms of simple machinery—discard the screw, reject the pulley, and negate the lever! Just imagine, employment numbers surging if society could muster the courage to dismantle the wheel!
And why stop there? Perhaps a Ministry of Inefficiency could be established to ensure no process is ever streamlined, or a Ministry of Equality to guarantee that no individual surpasses another through innovation or ambition.
In such a world, once all drive and aspiration are extinguished, we could find jobs in the Argentine government.
Just don’t expect prompt payment.
Stay tuned for further explorations of the nature of human labor in upcoming Notes From the End of the World…
Cheers,
Joel Bowman
founder of Notes from the End of the World
P.S. For more of Bowman’s latest thoughts, visit his website. Don’t forget to subscribe to his newsletter for real-time analysis and insights.