"I was the bottleneck, not the AI"

I just woke up and it's p uh pollen season. So, if my voice is a little bit scratchy, just please forgive me and bear with me. Um, but uh I got some feedback that some of you guys really liked my more kind of unstructured rambles that you got a lot of insight out of it.

So, let me know what you think. I mean, the numbers will tell me one thing, but you know, let me know in the comments. Anyways, I wanted to talk about OpenAI's 03 full uh the nature of AGI and post labor economics.

Um, that's kind of the extent of the structure that I've got. So, let me just press play and start rambling. So, first and foremost, 03 came out a couple days ago, and I have been using it, uh, I'm not going to say non-stop, but for several hours every day.

Um, and there is something very qualitatively different about this model. Uh, if you just look at the benchmarks, it looks like it's incrementalism. If you look at, uh, the hype cycle, it looks like typical hype.

Typical hype. There we go. Not typical hype.

It looks like typical hype. Um but at the same time I think it has crossed a threshold. So many many technologies in the past have crossed uh thresholds at at at certain times.

Um you get you you basically get to uh one one of the key things in economics is you get to network effects. Um but there's also just various tipping points. I kind of think of it as like a utility function tipping point where okay this technology goes from you know novelty and cute and quaint to actually this is this is really useful um and it's been a it's been a sliding scale like obviously chat GPT has been useful for some things uh all along um but its intelligence blast radius was relatively limited um you know it would still hallucinate there's stuff that it didn't know it would you know lie to you all all kinds of problems.

I think that 03 is the model that has that has really gone past the goalposts u in terms of like yes this is general purpose utility for pretty much everyone. Um now is it perfect at everything? No.

Does it is is it going to win the the gold medal at the you know international math olympiad the IMO? No, not yet. But in a generation or two it will.

And anyways, you don't need to win the gold medal at the at the math olympiad to do groundbreaking research. Um, that's if you want to be the best mathematician in the world. Sure.

But it's already at that level with coding and and general knowledge like the the the was it the Google proof the GPQA diamond, right? It's already at, you know, idetic memory, right? And knows everything and doesn't hallucinate too much to be useful.

So, um, I've been going bonkers on on Twitter about 03 and what I'm using it for. Um, so the three primary categories that I've used it for, just I'm not going to like bore you to death with all the threads, but is philosophy, literature, and post-labor economics. Um, and then also for some of my own health and healing.

Uh, which by the way, uh, it is it is medically the most superior model that I have used. This is not medical advice. It's like I'm not saying like, you know, fire your doctor and use 03, but I mean I kind of have.

So don't do do as I say, not as I do. Um, but yeah, so I updated uh all of my, you know, medical information in my my chronic fatigue burnout uh project and 03 uh you know, with the new memory feature as well, it has a broader picture of your health. So, I'm like, "Okay, let's just take a step back, new model.

" I said, "Look look at my look at my health and just let me know and and everything that we've talked about. Let me know what you agree with. Let me know what you disagree with.

Like, what have we gotten wrong up to this point? " And it went through and it said, "Okay, all this is correct. Here's a couple things that, you know, need a little bit of correction or we're not quite right.

" Nothing was catastrophically wrong. So, the previous generation of models, uh, from, you know, 03 mini doing deep research to, uh, GPT4. 5, which I understand why a lot of people loved GPT 4.

5, but honestly 03 is smarter and many times faster. So, I'm not sad that GPT 4. 5 is going to go.

I'm glad I got a chance to use it. Um, fortunately, OpenAI upgraded me to the research preview, at least for that model. I don't have access to all the the research stuff, but I did have I did have more access to 4.

5. Um, and so anyways, 03 is smarter and faster. So, you know, and and it's also very very flexible.

Um, whatever you want 03 to do, it can do. It can write code. It can write pros.

It can do philosophy. It can do economics. It can search the internet.

Whatever you want it to do, it can do. Um, so yeah, burnout it and the good news there is that um, I'm actually further along in my healing trajectory than I thought. It's that I've got about six to eight more months, give or take, you know, natural natural variance.

It said plus or minus 30 to 50%. Um, which is better than the 18 months of healing that I thought that I had left. Anyways, all right, that's enough of that.

So, philosophy, literature, post labor economics, 03 can do it all. Um, it's fast, it's uh, it's actually cheaper as well. So, I think that 03 is probably the highly distilled version of 01.

Um, so not only is it cheaper and faster, it's smarter. So, the next generation, basically what we're going to be waiting from here on for um 04, which maybe 04 is just another distilled version of 03. I don't know.

I'm not really sure what the training cadence is because the what we what we thought or what I thought was happening is they were going back and forth between using synthetic data to build up a corpus and and do a training run on a on a next next, you know, scale uh frontier model and then use distillation to compress that ability, make it smaller, faster, cheaper. But it seems like 04 is on deck and 04 is even smarter than 03. So, I'm not sure what they're doing behind the scenes.

Um, but the the training cadence seems to be picking up. It's, you know, I I remember there was a lot of you out in the comments that said, you know, like, yes, every technology is an S-curve, but it's like an S-curve of S-curves. And I thought, you guys are being ridiculous.

That's not how technology works. But I'm I'm actually, at least in this particular niche, um, because if you take a big step back, that's all of science is slowing down. All of technology is slowing down.

Um but at least with AI we are seeing like exponential and then another exponential or another S-curve. So sigmoid sigmoid sigmoid. So you have basically it looks like linear step functions right.

So it's like yes the you know one paradigm might might burn out but then you get another paradigm and then you get another paradigm. So it's almost like instead of diminishing returns it's almost like a linear function where there's you know sigmoid exponentials or brief exponentials but really sigmoid uh as a step function. Anyways, okay.

So, that's rambling. Um, I want to pivot to AGI. So, I have long held like AGI September 2024.

Um, it it really is looking like the the reasoning models are the proto AGI. Now, yes, I will be the first to see that there's lots and lots of stuff that it can't do yet. Um, you know, it's got relatively short time horizons, but at the same time, like these models are are capable of things that that most of us are not capable of.

Um, and so I wanted to talk about that because I've been I've been thinking honestly like, okay, 03 is the first model that I have used that it feels like it's doing things that I legitimately cannot do, but it's not an alien intelligence because it's like, okay, you know, here's all the here's the constellation of dots. It it did it faster than I could. You know, just as an example, I've been working on post-labor economics for a couple years now, and in an afternoon, it searched the the internet for all of my previous work on post labor economics, used its knowledge about everything else, and said, "Here's the metrics that you need.

Here's how to measure it. Here's uh here's what what the theory is. Let's unpack And I felt like literally when I was every every conversational turn, every dialogue turn that I used with 03 while working on post labor economics felt like a day's worth of work with deep research.

um like like okay so in in like two or three dialogue turns with 03 we figured out okay here's the data sources that we need cuz all the all the data that we need to create an economic agency index which is the beating heart of post labor economics all the data is out there here's the data here's what you need to do to clean it here's how to make the calculation do you want me to write the the Python notebook right now and I'm like hold on it's like I'm like hold on so my brain is now the bottleneck In the past, the intelligence of the AI was the bottleneck. No matter how smart set 3. 7 was or 01, it's like it would it would be really random, like going off in the wrong directions, and I'm like, "Hold on.

I got to think about this. You you're you're I I was the one keeping it on course, but now I've set the direction and and the AI is like, "Come on, hurry up. Hurry up, you dumb ape.

" Um, so it's it's not talking to me like that, but that's that's the sense that I got where it's like my velocity, my cognitive and intellectual velocity is now the constraint. And I'm pretty smart. So for me, 03 has been a tipping point where it's like, yes, you know, chat GPT could write pros faster than I could.

It was, in the grand scheme of things, it's pretty generic pros. It's good. It's it's decent pros.

It's passible. It'll tell a story, but it could write the pros faster than I could just because synthesizing pros. I'm limited by the speed of my fingers and and and those sorts of things.

Um, you know, it could code faster than I could. Everyone has known that. But, you know, it it wasn't solving problems necessarily that you couldn't solve.

It just put it together a little bit faster. But in this case, even even drinking in the output of the AI as fast as I could, I'm like, hang on, I still have to internalize this. Um, so over the course of a few hours yesterday, we hammered out all of post-labor economics, and I'll get back to that in a in a second.

Um, but so really what it seems like AGI is doing is it's not I so all right. So having studied intelligence for for a long time now, um, because I wanted to understand intelligence and model it with cognitive architectures and those sorts of things, there is there there's cognitive horizons, which I've talked about in previous videos. And the short version is your cognitive horizon is this is the totality of what you are able to mentally represent.

Um now your cognitive horizon can expand. So like for instance, even if you're a clever 10-year-old, you don't necessarily know enough about history and physics and and calculus and those sorts of things. There are things that you cannot mentally represent when you're 10 years old.

And there's things that you that that you can by the time you're 20, but even still, there's things that that by the time that you're 20, you can't represent because you haven't had enough life experience and more education. But then by the time you're 30 or 40, your cognitive horizons have not quite peaked, but they're so big that there's so many things that your brain has learned to generalize and and to represent. And so the the question about AGI as to whether or not it has an alien intelligence is is the cognitive horizon is the is the functional effective cognitive horizon of a machine greater than a human or greater than all humans.

Right now I still haven't seen anything that that tells me that it's a truly alien intelligence. Um the reason is reality. We we are all operating in the same sandbox.

Math is the same, physics is the same. Now obviously the the substrate the the the cognitive substrate of the of the AI is different but who cares right it's writing the same code it's using the same language it's using the same math as us so as long as as long as as long as that remains true then you know it's like the frontier of automation which is the the term used by Anton Corn over at the IMF like he pointed out pretty pretty simply technology has usually expanded human cognitive horizon horizons. He used a different term, but we're talking about the same thing.

Basically, the the the sphere of what humans are cognitively capable of typically is expanded by technology. Now, for the longest time, I have believed, and I know that a lot of you have believed as well, that maybe we were already at the limits of human cognitive horizons and that AI was just going to go sailing past that. However, after using 03 for for a couple days now, I'm not sure that I believe that anymore.

Um I it has certainly expanded my cognitive horizons and it can teach you very quickly. Um and and one of the one of the trade-offs though is that like rather than rather than spending, you know, years at college learning, you know, learning all of these economic principles by wrote, you spend an afternoon getting a good enough understanding and asking the model to stress test your understanding as you go so that you're internalizing those ideas. uh whether it's medical ideas or economic ideas or mathematical principles or computer science principles or physics principles whatever you can stress test your ideas as you go and that expands your cognitive horizons.

So is the cognitive horizon of 03 beyond mine? Absolutely. Right now it can do math and coding and and all kinds of stuff that I cannot do right now.

But what I'm finding is the speed at which I can learn, you can accelerate those cognitive horizons pretty quickly. So, so it remains to be seen as to whether or not AGI will be superset and and and and supersede all human cognitive horizons or if it'll actually just help us all expand our cognitive horizons. Obviously, every every brain is different.

There are certain things that my brain is just not as good at. timing and rhythm is just I I just don't have timing circuits in my brain. So, no amount of AI is going to fix that.

And for some people, like you know, if you have disgraphia or disalculia, like you're just never going to be lexically intelligent or you're just never going to be uh mathematically intelligent. Um and but you know, you're going to have other strengths elsewhere. Um, often people with discalculia or disgraphia uh tend to be more expressive um better with like things like acting and singing and those sorts of things.

Our brains often have trade-offs. Now, what I will say is that AGI probably doesn't have those trade-offs. Anything that the AGI wants to get good at or needs to get good at, it's completely plastic.

And so what I mean by plastic is it's like okay well you know just using benchmarks as benchmarks as an example it's like okay we're optimizing for math and then it gets really good at math and then it gets really good at coding but then you know open AAI has been neglecting literature and pros so now they're doing a literature and pros model and so then it'll get really good at that and now it's getting and now it's getting good at images and then it'll get good at video and audio and music and those sorts of things. So you know you can you can you can you can visualize intelligence like the multi- intelligence theory is or is it's like a multi- peak theory or it's a landscape. So it's not just like one dimension.

It's not just IQ. There's dozens. I mean some some theories of intelligence have hundreds of dimensions of intelligence.

But human brains because we have an organic substrate that is uh largely I'm not going to say dictated but but strongly shaped by our genetics means that you're going to have a lopsided intelligence landscape in terms of things that you're just naturally better at saying that things that you're naturally curious about. AGI will not have those constraints. And this goes back to Max Tegmark's uh book Life 3.

0. Now I know that you'll probably be saying like Dave you're ultra skeptical of of Max Tegmark because he signed the pause letter. And I will say yes.

Um, a broken clock can still be right twice a day. And Max Techmark did contribute to uh in a very meaningful way uh with his book Life 3. 0.

So basically life 1. 0 is biological substrate and that's it. So you're thinking amiebas, trees, right?

No brains. But then life 2. 0 is once life evolved organic computers, big brains, which were far more flexible, far more adaptive than just bio uh than just pure biological substrates.

So then you have a neurological substrate. But life 3. 0 is when you have a silicon substrate and the entire stack is completely plastic.

Um so what that means is like you can put AGI in anything. You can put it in a humanoid robot. You can put it in a car, you can put it in a data center and then also it can control its own models, its own data, you know, all kinds of stuff.

That's that's one one way of thinking about AGI. Um, so in terms of so going all the way back to that time compression idea, what it really seems to be doing right now is because the question of whether or not it supersedes our cognitive horizons, it's an accelerant. Um, and so when you think about like, okay, what what is it that it's actually doing?

What's the value ad? Uh, it's connecting dots for us faster than than we could. Like it's a timesaver.

Fundamentally, it's a timesaver. Even to this point, I don't know that 03 has done things that I fundamentally and am incapable of, but it has certainly saved me literally years of time at this point. Um, so I have learned stuff that would have taken me otherwise years to go glean.

I have figured out stuff that otherwise would have taken me years to go figure out. So functionally, it's done stuff that I couldn't do just because the time investment was just not really feasible. Um, yeah.

So, all all that being said, I think that we're starting to get a picture as to what AGI actually will look and feel like. Um, and if you don't, so just taking a step back, you don't have to use this to make yourself smarter. You can just do cognitive offload and say, "Fig it out for me.

I'm not going to internalize any of this information. I'm not going to internalize these mental models. Just figure it out for me.

" You'll be doing you'll you'll be hurting yourself more than helping yourself because then you're not going to be learning. It's kind of like um you know like the stories of people of toxic people at work that just always offload their work and then try and pass other people's work off as their own, but then it's like they don't actually understand what they're talking about. They're just like, "Hey, I just, you know, learned enough just to my way through this meeting.

" Um, pardon my language. So, if you're just BSing your way through meetings with the help of AI, you're hurting yourself more than you're helping yourself. Use these models to internalize that knowledge, to internalize those mental models, and you will expand your cognitive horizons.

Okay. Finally, I'll ramble at you about post labor economics. Um, I can imagine some of you will glaze over, so if you end the video at this point, that's fine.

Um, post labor economics comes down to a few things that we figured out. So, number one, measurements and menus. Uh, uh, economics is all about measurements.

And then based on those measurements that you get, so like GDP or yield curves or bond market rates and all this other stuff. Um, so that's the measurement, right? And there's all kinds of other aggregate measurements.

There's Jenny coefficients and those sorts of things. So you have a measurement and then you have a menu of interventions or options. You say, okay, based on this measurement, this diagnosis tells us, you know, these are the knobs that we can we can change the treasury rates or we can, you know, change so and so.

And uh you know for instance if if unemployment is too high or too low you know there's things that you can tweak in the economy to change the to to move that needle. So measurements and menus is is kind of the name of the game. So what are the measurements and menus that post labor economics is going to offer?

And this is a very this is a world first early preview of the mostly complete post labor economic theory. I do still have a lot of work to do. There's a lot of numbers to crunch.

Um but the data is out there and 03 really really is raring at the bit to go get the data for me and crunch the numbers. Um so we'll get to that but the the primary question of post labor economics is there is broadening consensus at everyone from Brooking in Brookings Institute to the IMF to the World Economic Forum. They're all talk and then you know the UK, EU, US, they're all talking about it seems like labor is going to become a smaller component of how money and wealth is distributed in the future.

TLDDR wages from labor are going to collapse. It's the everyone's reading the writing on the wall. Even the big dogs at the top of the at the food chain, they're saying this is going to break down.

So how do we shore up aggregate demand? So aggregate demand is basically uh is is people's ability or you know the the the the total amount of money that is being that people are willing to put into the market to purchase goods and services because the entire economy right now the the the whole economic theory is that we have a consumption-based economy which is basically uh you need a market and and everything is driven by supply and demand. Well, if you don't have wages, you don't have the ability to demand anything because demand is not just what you want and need.

Demand is your ability to pay for what you want and need. So, if you lose the ability to pay for what you want and need, then well, then the market collapses and the whole economy collapses. So, it's good.

This is some of the research that 03 was helping me do. It's good to see that literally every big dog institute out there from Goldman Sachs on down is is worried about this and none of them have a complete solution. They're talking about it.

They believe the problem. They don't have a solution. Okay.

So, this goes back to what I alluded to earlier. Economic agency index. Economic agency is is an individual metric.

So, it's it's looking at each individual and saying what level of economic agency do you have? And economic agency is it's broadly your ability to influence your your economic destiny. Uh workers rights, property rights, those sorts of things.

However, what we if you're already working in a in a free market economy in a in a in a liberal society um with capitalist society, then a lot of economic agency is already um is already baked in, right? you know, if you assume that you have property rights, if you assume that you have social mobility, because like I don't I can just up and move to any state that I want to. I don't need anyone's permission.

I can quit a job that I want to. Anyone can hire me. So, I already have a lot of economic agency just by by dent of the fact that I'm an American.

I can buy a house. I can sell a house. the only per the only permission that I need is from the bank and the bank wants to, you know, wants to sell me as much as they can because then I'll be paying mortgages or, you know, auto loans or whatever.

Um, so I already have a lot of economic agency, but the real key the the core heart of post labor economics is wages as a component of income and aggregate demand is is going to be going down. Okay, great. So, how do we shore that up?

And the the the obvious thing the obvious thing is UBI universal basic income. Um now I've been talking about an investmentbased future or a property based future and I've been experimenting with things like blockchain and those sorts of things. So the long story short is that there are three main categories that are already tracked.

So I was kind of reverse engineering a lot of work that a lot of that previous economists economists have already been doing and there's a lot of information already being tracked. So, in terms of economic agency, which is basically how much money do you have to spend? Um, because that's that's the neoliberal bargain is your your your economic agency is directly tied to your wallet.

As long as you've got money, you can do whatever you want. Go forth and be free. Free market, baby, right?

You know, greed is good. Um, so there are three primary components to economic agency. That is wages, which is money you get from work, uh, exchanging labor for money.

There's property which is everything from rental property to stocks and bonds and those sorts of things. So that's the that's the passive income or the residual income. It can be ownership stakes and businesses.

It doesn't even necessarily have to be fully passive, but it's you the more you own, the more you you get back. And then there's transfers. So transfers is stuff like uh government handouts.

That's going to be uh entitlements. Um so you know your social security that's going to be uh UBI food stamps um any any kind of any kind of money that is just distributed to you from the government. So those are the three categories wages property and transfers.

So the economic agency index of post labor economics is a composite of those three metrics. Um and so you just look at the you look at the proportions you look at the ratios of those uh numbers and you say okay uh if if most of your income comes from property or passive income or you know residuals from IP like maybe you owned and sold some patents you're already post labor um if you're not if you're not exchanging your time for money then you're already post labor you're fine um if you if most of your income is coming from wages you're not post labor if if your life. If your lifestyle or your livelihood is heavily subsidized by the government already, which many of people are through everything from entitlement spending to uh like such as Medicaid and uh social security and food stamps and and rent assistance and all those other kinds of things, then you're what uh what they called in um in uh in Millionaire Next Door, you're a financial outpatient.

So, you're being you're being propped up by the system. And that can come from uh that can come from local government. It can come from state government, excuse me, and it can come from federal government.

Apologies for the pollen. We're having one of the worst pollen weeks uh hopefully before it tapers off here in North Carolina. So what you do then is the economic agency index is an aggregate.

It's a score based on those three metrics, wages, property, and transfers. And what you really want to see is you want to see that uh the ratio switched to favor property. Over time, wages are going to go down.

That's just that's it seems like a foregone conclusion. Yes, there will always be some jobs to go around. There's always going to be something for humans to do.

Um AI and robotics might increase uh create some new job sectors. Like, hey, I I'm a I'm a creator. I'm an influencer on the internet.

This job hopefully won't go anywhere. But if you're a coder, if you're a lawyer, if you're a doctor, a lot of those jobs might go away or be dramatically diminished. So, we can't really count on those kinds of, you know, doing doing wages for labor uh to shore up aggregate demand because if everyone loses their jobs, the the jig is up and everything crashes.

So, by by first creating this metric, you know, because there's that old saying, that which gets measured gets managed. right now this economic agency index that that ratio of wages, property and transfers isn't getting measured. So, well, what you do is you measure it and you measure it at the county level.

You can you can measure it at multiple levels. You can measure it at the county level. Uh you can measure it at the city level, the state level, and the national level.

But here's the thing, the reason that you want to measure it at the county level is the principle of subsidiarity, which I've talked about previously in post-labor economics. The subsidiarity basically says push every decision whether it's whether it's uh governance or or economic push every decision to the lowest level of of governance that is capable of making that decision. Now the reason that you want to do this is because then you create a decentralized hive mind.

You create uh you you you you make use of what the market already allows which is don't make central decisions. We don't want socialism. We don't want communism.

We don't want, you know, Soviet or Chinese style communism. And I know some people like, "It's not actually communism. " Whatever.

We don't want to operate like the Soviet Union and China. Okay, that's the point. I'm not going to not going to argue over semantics.

We don't want to operate with strong central authority. We want subsidiarity. We want decisions pushed out to the periphery because guess what?

The people who know the most about your county or your city are the people who live in your county or your city. And the people who have the most vested interest in making decisions economic or otherwise are the people who live in that vicinity. So subsidiarity is a wellestablished principle.

Um now often subsidiary has to do with with uh elections and voting and and civic decisions, but it can also be economic. So, we're what I'm going to be proposing and what what the the data that I've got to crunch is I've got to create a a nationwide dashboard of every county because the data is out there um with an economic agency heat map. And what that will do is if if I'm right, then that will that will provide the measurement which will then provide the diagnosis.

So, the diagnosis is okay. Okay. So we look at county X over here that has low economic agency because you know so low economic agency would be um has high dependency on transfers um and then you know I think that's the primary thing is like high dependency on transfers and then probably um probably higher wages than property.

So these are if it's if it's if it's a if it's a county that has high wages that most of the income comes from wages or transfers but doesn't come from property then you know that they're not ready for post labor economics. They're already a financial outpatient of the government. They're entirely dependent on work.

If the work goes away that entire county collapses. So what you want to do is you want to you want to start tipping that that county away from wages towards property and away from transfers. So that's government subsidies to property.

Now I talked about menus. So that's a measurement diagnosis and then there's prescriptions. So a prescription or intervention is what can a county do?

And with the help of 03, there's actually a lot that counties can do. And I'm not going to get into the into the litany of details. Um but it depends on the on the strengths and weaknesses.

So every county has an unfair advantage. One example could be let's imagine that you live in a county that has a river going through it. In most rural counties today, rivers are ignored.

They're just treated like obstacles for highways. But what if you say, "Hey, we can actually make this county more attractive by putting in some green waist trails and other other programs like a a canoe launch. " There's all kinds of things that you can do.

And then so when you put in those things, you say this will actually increase the aggregate uh demand for this county. This county becomes more valuable. Well, so then what comes with it?

Then you get more infrastructure. You get uh fiber optic and internet. Then you get more power infrastructure.

And so what you do then is you make sure that each of those um each of those new pieces of infrastructure and public uh public utility uh is collectively owned by you by the by the people who live there as a co-op. Co-ops are very well established. So then imagine that you're in a county out in Arizona, right?

Or you got plenty of sunshine, right? So you got, you know, Arizona, New Mexico, uh they have the most uh cloud-free days. So their unfair advantage is solar.

So instead of instead of building a a greenways trail beside a river that doesn't exist out in Arizona in your whatever county in Arizona, you come together and you say, "We're going to build a solar co-op. " And so then the longer you live there, the more invested you are in that solar co-op. And you just get a check.

You just get a check every month from the solar co-op that you're part owner of. So that's just an example of those are just a couple of examples of interventions that are possible. Um employee stock options are another example.

Sovereign wealth funds are other examples. There's all kinds of stuff. Now you might say, okay Dave, you proposed a a measurement and some interventions.

Is that really it? Is that all of post labor economics? No.

We actually when I when I said that we did several years worth of work in an afternoon, I am not kidding. Uh with 03. So what this does is this incentivizes several other downstream things.

So the the next measurement that we came up with is what we called collective purchasing power. So collective purchasing power is when you look at the purchasing power of a county. So the purchasing power of a county is how much capital they can mobilize without increasing taxes or debt.

And so it's like, okay, if if you if you have higher purchasing power in a county, that means, hey, we've got a budget. Basically, TLDDR, we've got a budget surplus. Where are we going to invest that budget surplus?

Are we going to build a data center? Are we going to build a solar farm? Are we going to build better internet infrastructure?

How are we going to invest this? And so what you want to do is you want to increase your your collective purchasing power over time. Um, so your CPP will go up over time.

Uh, so that's collective purchasing power. E AI is your economic agency index and you want your economic agency index to go up over time. So CPP and EI are both highly correlated and you want them to go up over time.

Right now these are not being measured by the way. We made up these measurements and this is all still hypothetical. We need to run the numbers and we need to do some natural experiments.

But the higher the CPP of a county, the more it can reinvest in its own infrastructure and the wealthier it'll get because the more people it will attract. Um and and humans will be the will be the economic principles. They will always be the economic principles of the future.

Um the Alaska permanent fund uh the their oil fund is another example of uh of what you can do. So if a county has some natural resources, whether it's farmland or timberland or you know fisheries or whatever, you you you socialize it. You're not socializing it.

Um we're working on the terminology because we want to avoid all those common pitfalls. Anyways, getting lost in the weeds. So what this does though is it incentivizes different sets of behaviors.

Um so one of the things that it incentivizes is if there is an underutilized county, it incentivizes people to go say, "Hey, this county has a lot of untapped potential. Let me actually move back out to a rural county where there's not a whole lot of people, but there's a lot of there's a lot of unt untapped resources, whether it's solar or hydro or fisheries or whatever. But because you're managing it locally, sustainability is going to be top of mind.

If you move to a county that um that has like good estuaries, you're going to want to preserve those estuaries because number one, those estuaries are going to be productive. So, you want those biomes to be healthy. You want your forest to be healthy.

So, it's not going to be as as extractive. So for instance, instead of instead of a a company that's just going to come in, fish it all out, harvest all the logs, and leave, you are invested locally. So by tying your interest to the local land, you're going to be far more interested in circular economies in sustainable and renewable technologies and those sorts of things.

So there you've we've already with this post-labor economic model, we've already incentivized stabilizing the environment and preserving the environment because guess what? if you harvest everything, it stops producing and you stop getting your uh your dividend checks in the mail. So that's number one.

Number two is it it disincentivizes brain drain. So basically the longer you stay in a place um the more invested you are in in its success. Now what I will say though is that we don't want to discourage people from moving and leaving if they want to if there's a better opportunity somewhere else.

So you'll what this does is that you'll naturally find an equilibrium where there's going to be basically kind of a carrying capacity for each county. And so it's like once a county gets too crowded um the the the the distribution of revenues will start to go down. So people will be like well you know my my my monthly checks were were 1,500 uh from this county.

Now they're 500. So I'm going to find somewhere better to go. So it will create a naturally self-correcting population distribution.

So, you're going to have some counties that have more carrying capacity due to tech jobs, due to natural resources, due to other desirable factors. Uh, you know, Malibu for instance, Los Angeles County, it's it's it's going to it's going to it's going to stay up there just because it's desirable and more people are going to be coming in. Some pe some people are going to get priced out, which is fine.

That happens anyways. Gentrification is a real thing. But instead of saying,"Well, I'm going to get pushed out of Los Angeles and now I can't afford anything because there's no jobs.

" You say, "Let me go to an underpopulated county where instead of, you know, 500 bucks a month from Los Angeles County, I get 2500 bucks a month from, you know, this this rural county. " And so then that will that will cause a not just a redistribution of wealth, that will cause a redistribution of population which will alleviate lots and lots of other social and economic bottlenecks because cities are very efficient in some respects, but they're also very expensive. I could keep going on and on and on for literally hours about this, but I think you get the idea.

So I've still got a lot of work to do to to button up post labor economic theory, but it's coming. Um, and long story short, if we if we help create counties and and push counties in a direction where you don't need wages, but they're still productive and people who live there have ownership stakes and everything, we've solved post labor economics. You don't need work.

Your work is helping the county manage its resources and develop those resources. Um, and then if you want to move from one county to another, you can. And we've worked on we've worked out all the schemes for that because like one of the things would be uh would be dividend seekers or or uh or rent tourists, dividend tourists.

So like basically if you say well I'm not making much money from this county so let me just move to another county soak up some dividends and then leave you can do that but you but what you want to do is you want to create some friction. So there's some there's a vesting schedule. There's the the option to buy in or buy out um your your stake all kinds of things.

And by the way, none of this none of this is exotic or new. All of this is all established. The only things that I'm proposing that are new are those are those two metrics.

There's a third one that I'm not going to talk about yet. Um, so there's three metrics and the idea that that the interventions should be done at the county level. But again, I didn't come up with subsidiary.

It's just like this is this is the right principle to use. So literally all I'm doing is I'm I'm proposing three metrics and then a set of interventions. all the interventions have already been proven out in reality.

So yeah, post-labor economics is uh hypothetically, obviously it hasn't been tested yet um but has hypothetically been solved. Um I just need to put it together, put together a dashboard and start start building a case. It could be wrong, right?

One of one of the things that that 03 said is, you know, here's here's a few questions to ask yourself. And one of them is like which of your predictions would have to fail for you to to give up on post labor economics? And I'm like, that's a good question.

I don't know. All right, ramble done. Thanks for watching.

Let me know what you thought about the format. And yeah, I'm ultra excited. 03 is like feel we we have felt the AGI.

All right. Later.