Some technobros claim AI will produce such abundance that even those without jobs will thrive.

This isn’t economics. It’s fantasy.

Worse—it’s propaganda.

The ones peddling this myth aren’t trained in economic theory.

They’re lucky coders who rode a wave of easy money, mistook luck for brilliance, and now believe they can predict the fate of civilization.

These are the same people who now kneel—literally—to populist strongmen like Trump, while spinning myths about "abundance" and "post-scarcity economies."

They aren’t just misguided. They’re reckless.

Technological progress does not guarantee shared prosperity.

Innovation amplifies inequality unless guided by intentional, inclusive policy.

Productivity can soar.

GDP can jump.

But if the spoils go to capital owners while workers get left behind—through stagnant wages, regressive taxation, or gutted public goods—the majority doesn’t benefit.

They don’t just miss out. They get pushed out.

We won’t live in a universal AI utopia or dystopia.

We’ll live in both, at the same time.

There is no AI dividend without AI redistribution.

Technobros speak like economists. But quoting a single Milton Friedman line doesn’t make you Hayek.

Most have never read a page of labor economics, don’t grasp marginal utility, and ignore how institutions shape outcomes.

Their faith in AI's rising tide "lifting all boats" ignores the fundamental mechanics of value distribution: without intervention, gains flow upward. Always have.

History confirms this.

The Industrial Revolution produced both elite fortunes and mass suffering.

Only with unions, progressive taxation, and the welfare state did that system become even moderately fair.

AI is no different.

Except now, the disruption is exponential—and our safety nets are in tatters.

We don’t need better models.

We need better economics.

A renewed moral framework.

It's naive to think abundance alone ensures justice.

History proves the opposite.

The race ahead won’t be won by all.

But we can—and must—ensure more people get to start from the same line, and make it to the end without being trampled by those further ahead.

Optimism is hard to come by.

Not because AI might destroy humanity.

But because, left unchecked, the Hobbesian instincts of humans will do it first.