This blog post was sparked by one of my more popular Bluesky posts, which read:
“The rapid replacement of entry-level jobs by AI and automation, combined with concentrated wealth and tech leaders building family dynasties, points to a future where power and opportunity are inherited, not earned.
Most of us are not part of that plan.
UBI may be the only safety net left.”
It resonated because I think many of us are quietly seeing the same signs. We feel the floor shifting. The dream of earning your way to success is becoming increasingly hollow. Certainly, when I think of the road ahead for my child. We are entering an age where AI is replacing jobs faster than policies can adapt, and the concentration of wealth is now generational—hereditary even. It’s not just a labour issue. It’s a democracy issue. It’s a future-of-society issue.
The Data Behind the Feeling
It’s not just vibes—there’s real data behind the unease.
A 2023 Goldman Sachs report estimated that 300 million jobs worldwide could be affected by generative AI, with two-thirds of jobs in Europe and the U.S. exposed to some degree of automation. The OECD similarly found that 14% of global jobs are at high risk of automation, with another 32% likely to be significantly affected.
In Ireland, a 2024 report by the ESRI (Economic and Social Research Institute) warned that almost 20% of Irish jobs are at high risk of automation, with an additional 30% moderately at risk—higher than the EU average. This includes roles in sectors like administration, accounting, retail, transport logistics, and even legal and finance work.
Yet Ireland’s current unemployment rate sits at a relatively healthy 4.2% (as of mid-2025). Most economists view 4–5% as a “natural” or frictional rate of unemployment in capitalist economies—enough to account for job transitions without causing inflation or social disruption. But what happens when potentially 1 in 5 jobs could vanish in a few years?
And critically, the hardest-hit workers are likely to be white-collar, not blue-collar. AI tools like ChatGPT, Claude, or Copilot are already taking aim at marketing, HR, customer service, data entry, legal research, and even junior software development. Manual labour and hands-on service roles—like trades, care work, and hospitality—will likely be safer for longer, ironically because they’re harder to automate.
This inversion of threat—where middle-class jobs are more at risk than traditionally precarious ones—suggests that the pain could hit right at the heart of society’s economic engine: college-educated, mid-career workers with mortgages and kids. That’s a political time bomb.
And here’s the deeper contradiction: if white-collar jobs vanish en masse, demand collapses too. After all, who’ll be able to afford the services of the blue-collar workers when the white-collar workers are unemployed?
This Is Already Corporate Policy
This isn’t just hypothetical. Some of the world’s largest employers are already actively shrinking their workforces using AI:
- IBM announced in 2023 that it would pause hiring for 7,800 roles that it believes could soon be done by AI.
- BT Group in the UK plans to cut 55,000 jobs by 2030–10,000 of which will be replaced by AI.
- Duolingo, the language app, quietly laid off large parts of its contract translator workforce, replacing them with generative AI.
- Chegg, an education tech company, lost half its stock value in one day after revealing that students were turning to ChatGPT over their platform—then began pivoting to AI-led services.
This isn’t just about improving efficiency. It’s now corporate strategy.
The Rise of the Inherited Class
At the other end of the spectrum, something else is happening. As entry points to career paths disappear for the many, dynasties are forming at the top. The people reaping the benefits of automation are consolidating their gains—not just in financial terms, but through legacy.
- Elon Musk has fathered at least 11 children, many with names like X Æ A-12 and Techno Mechanicus. He has openly described his motivation as wanting to “counter the population collapse” and has spoken about leaving his companies to his children.
- Pavel Durov, the billionaire behind Telegram, is rumoured to be raising his children in isolation, with full control over their education and environment.
- Tech billionaires like Peter Thiel and Marc Andreessen are investing heavily in private islands, biotech longevity, and elite schools for their offspring.
Add in the Gateses, Waltons, Mars heirs—and you’ve got an accelerating pattern: ownership of automation platforms today means scripting your descendants into tomorrow’s boardrooms.
This isn’t just about privilege. It’s about concentrating opportunity so tightly that it becomes inaccessible to the rest of us. And with automation gutting the lower and middle rungs of the career ladder, the distance to the top becomes unbridgeable.
What Happens to Leadership?
If we only promote from within an elite circle—children of founders, kids raised in legacy wealth and exclusive bubbles—then we also face a leadership drought. Critical thinking, problem-solving, collaboration—these skills are developed through life and work experience, not inherited by blood.
But if more and more talented people are locked out of the career ladder due to automation and a collapsing middle class, we lose the very environment that fosters those future leaders. Then, when firms need talent, they’ll point to that lack of experience as reason enough to only trust those already in the club. A kind of Catch-22 meritocracy. You can’t rise without experience, and you can’t get experience unless you already belong.
The wall isn’t just high—it’s self-reinforcing.
Why UBI Might Be the Least Radical Option
Universal Basic Income isn’t new—it’s been piloted with promising signals:
- Finland (2017–18): €560/month to 2,000 unemployed Finns. Employment effects were modest, but well-being and mental health scores jumped, and people felt freer to retrain.¹¹
- Stockton SEED (2019–21): $500/month to 125 Californians. Recipients saw a 12% rise in full-time employment and big drops in food insecurity.¹²
- Alaska Permanent Fund (since 1982): Annual $1,000–$2,000 dividends. No dip in employment; clear poverty reductions and boosts to local economies.¹³
Critics often scoff that UBI encourages laziness. The data doesn’t support that. In fact, it shows people are more likely to seek work that’s meaningful, flexible, or helps them retrain. And in a world where millions may be excluded from traditional career ladders, the real question might be: what’s the alternative?
Picture €600–€800/month here in Ireland (or $800–$1,000 in the U.S.)—enough to cover basics, a bit of rent, or a night-school course. It’s not about luxury. It’s about dignity, and the freedom to say no to exploitative work without starving.
It could be funded by:
- Automation levies: a small “dividend” tax on firms whose algorithms displace jobs.
- Closing loopholes: end the shell games that let wealth disappear offshore tax-free.
- Inheritance surtaxes: modest, tiered surcharges on intergenerational transfers over €5 million, for example.
These aren’t wild ideas. They’re common-sense proposals to keep our societies functioning in the face of sweeping disruption.
This Is a Choice, Not a Fate
We’re not powerless in the face of this. AI and automation don’t have to mean inherited dynasties and mass unemployment. But without policies that redistribute opportunity—not just income—those will be the default outcomes.
We need new tax structures, UBI pilots, universal retraining schemes, stronger labour protections, and new paths into leadership. But first, we need to admit that the current system is evolving into something deeply feudal.
If we want a society where success is earned, not inherited, we’re going to have to fight for it. The machines aren’t the problem. The lack of imagination in those who profit from them is.
As always, be excellent to each other.
Leave a Reply