Throughout the history of human society, the size and power of a population’s labor force has been the driving and limiting factor in the strength of a civilization. A labor force must be fed, administered, and kept safe to some extent, all efforts that require resources from the government.
It should come as no surprise, then, that throughout history, the proletarian classes of society have been consistently subjected to the lowest standard of living conditions available in that society. There has always existed a dichotomy with the working class: they must be kept fed and educated enough to work, but not so fed and so educated that they become capable of revolting. Just enough resources must be expended to keep the population alive while also maintaining their place at the bottom of the socio-economic hierarchy.
Image Credit: Belgian Labour Party
We should thus be wary of any technology that claims to be able to replace this labor force. While it may have tremendous potential to improve the lives of many people, it may also have the potential to render the majority of the human population useless to those in power.
During the commotion of 2024, between the elections and the wars, one could be forgiven for missing out on a subtle trend: humanoid robots. Over the course of the last year, company after company announced their working prototype of a human-shaped robot; a machine that walks and moves like a person and crucially, can perform any menial task that a human can.
The staggering number of these prototypes raises eyebrows, as just a few years ago there was a single industry leader in this field, namely Boston Dynamics, with its competitors miles behind. Today, it is unclear who will take the lead in this expanding new industry that has the potential to revolutionize human society.
Image Credit: Tesla
The question that follows is whether there is truly an economic value to these machines. Tesla, for example, plans to sell their Optimus robot for between $20,000 and $30,000. A factory worker in Mexico will typically cost from $4 to $10 per hour for their labor, meaning that, assuming a $7 average, and assuming that an Optimuswill be able to work for two thirds of every day with one third left to charge, a single robot would only have to work about 280 days without breaking down to make up its cost. This number can be reduced to 178 days if robots work 24 hours a day and charge throughout.
While this number will be higher in poorer countries where labor is cheaper, as the economies of scale drive the cost of humanoid robots down, more and more companies will be incentivised to automate their workforce.
The implications of this technology are numerous and hotly debated. Since the early 20th century, futurists have been debating how humanity would adapt to machines that could replace the majority of human workers. As with most new technologies, predictions range from utopian to dystopian, with reality often falling somewhere in the middle. That is not to say however, that profound changes are not ahead.
We may be witnessing the end of the low-experienced worker. This will put an increased pressure on youth to receive higher education and may in turn increase pressure on the state to make education more accessible. The changes this technology forces us to contemplate can be hard to imagine, but economic forces point to these changes being necessary. As the speed of technological change continues to accelerate, one must ask: how much farther can this go?