Automation vs. human innovation: how to create a fair economy


Are some companies on the verge of having more bots than employees?

Recent studies indicate a trend in this direction.

The data: Research Google Cloud shows that two-thirds of manufacturers who use artificial intelligence in their day-to-day operations report their addiction to AI is increasing. And one report of PwC predicts that by the mid-1930s, up to 30% of jobs could be automated.

The key questions: How much automation versus how much human innovation? What is better for a sustainable economy? And why do some businesses spend more on automation than people?

The opinion leader’s point of view: Jarl Jensen (, ForbesBook author of The Big Solution: Deactivating The Ticking Time Bomb Of Today’s Economy, argues that great inequalities between the working class and businesses exist in part because of cheap lending practices, allowing businesses to borrow large amounts of money. sums in the banks – and one of the results is the trend towards more automation.

“Companies prefer to have an employee base full of robots and a few humans selected to monitor the robots because it saves them money in labor costs,” Jensen explains.

“Borrowing without a maximum limit means that it’s easier, and often more affordable, for businesses to invest in automation or robotics than in their workforce. It is cheaper to take a loan from a bank to finance the purchase of artificial intelligence software than to retrain workers or engage in job skills upgrading. The sad reality of our economic system is that there is no incentive for banks to stop lending to the rich and to corporations – even if the end result is fewer jobs due to automation and intelligence. artificial.

Jensen thinks the economy can be designed to make it fairer – “an economy for the people”. Here are three of the tools he suggests to turn around the economy:

Direct deposits. “The first and best tool available to us is the money that a new and better version of the Federal Reserve would deposit directly into the bank accounts of every working-age American,” Jensen said. “It’s not a basic income. It is an essential freedom.

Jensen’s idea is that direct deposits would be made for future work. The amount that each working person would receive would be adjusted based on the signals received from the economy. “The way out of the debt trap is through direct deposits,” he says. “Direct deposits put people first. This forces the system to adapt to the needs of the population. The money we are talking about for these direct deposits is money that the Fed simply creates out of thin air, just as it does when it issues money for loans to banks. But that money doesn’t create a debt that must be repaid, so it doesn’t increase the national deficit or become a debt burden on the Americans who receive it.

Blue sky markets. Jensen describes Blue Sky Markets as money for companies that pursue the common good. This tool, he says, takes big problems out of government hands and puts them in the hands of entrepreneurs. “The Blue Sky Markets issue money directly to fund commodity exchanges that effectively solve these big problems,” he says. “They are creating money with the aim of fixing what is broken and creating a more sustainable, stable and compelling future.”

An example of the implementation of this tool is the fight against climate change. “The companies would bid on the exchange to remove CO2 from the atmosphere,” Jensen said. “Money that is not debt-based, taken directly from the Federal Reserve, would pay the lowest bidder to phase out CO2. Competition for profits would force entrepreneurs to figure out how to do it effectively and efficiently. “

New type of savings account. “Today, the money you deposit in the bank does not stay in your account,” says Jensen. “It is reused. The bank uses it to invest, to lend to other people or entities and to create more debt. But if, alongside these new direct deposits, you had new high-interest bank accounts accessible to everyone, that would prevent some of the money from flowing. Many people would choose to save money and collect interest.

Jensen says the money to pay these higher interest rates would come from the Fed. With more people saving because of this high interest rate incentive, and a lot less of that money in circulation, he explains that inflation would not set in despite all the direct deposits and blue sky markets. “And as a huge bonus,” he says, “this system makes retirement planning a lot easier.”

“Having an economy for people is about reimagining the way we value money and restructuring the way banks do business,” says Jensen. “It is about real freedom, sustainability and the optimization of society.”


Jarl Jensen ( is the ForbesBook author of The Big Solution: Deactivating The Ticking Time Bomb Of Today’s Economy. He is the founder and president of Inventagon, a company that creates simpler research and development solutions for organizations around the world. Jensen holds patents for medical technologies that have achieved sales of over $ 1 billion. He founded EuroMed, a company he sold in 2016, and has written five books on the economy and its relationship with society.


About Author

Comments are closed.