By Greg Woolf, AI RegRisk Think Tank
As artificial intelligence charges toward human-level capabilities—from online agents and co-workers to sophisticated autonomous decision-makers—its potential to alter jobs, wealth, and societal norms grows more compelling daily. Below, we examine the key economic impacts and why outcome-centric governance is quickly becoming a necessity.
Surpassing Narrow AI: The Promise (and Peril) of AGI
For years, AI was limited to “narrow” tasks—chess engines, shopping recommendations, or automated fraud detection. Now, the conversation centers on artificial general intelligence (AGI) that can learn any digital skill, adapt to changing environments at lightning speed, and may rival (or surpass) human insights and versatility. Some believe we’re decades away; others see it happening far sooner. Regardless of the timeline, the implications for wealth management are massive: who creates value, and how will providers sustain their livelihoods?
The Labor Shake-Up: Going Beyond Replacing Jobs
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently suggested that the company’s new “Deep Research” AI agent could handle a single-digit percentage of all economically valuable tasks worldwide. Even at just 1% in the U.S. labor market, that translates to about 1.6 million jobs—roughly 1% of total employment—pushing a 4% unemployment rate up to 5% (a 25% increase). On the positive side, this could free workers from repetitive duties, accelerate productivity, and open new avenues for innovation. On the negative side, it risks intensifying inequality and displacing low- and mid-skill workers without adequate support or retraining, underscoring the urgent need for a renewed social contract.
Concentrated Gains: “Winner-Take-All” Dynamics
This could intensify “winner-take-all” scenarios, funneling wealth and power to a narrow few. Proposed remedies range from “robot taxes”—levies on AI that replaces human labor—to progressive taxation on AI-generated capital, potentially funding social programs like universal basic income. The idea of “robot taxes” grows more pressing as AI begins to perform tasks once reserved for people (e.g., negotiating or providing support). Should AI be taxed like a human worker? It took U.S. states over 20 years to apply sales tax to online purchases based on the buyer’s location, once they realized the dramatic loss in local retail revenue. Others advocate for open-source collaboration or even public ownership of AI breakthroughs, ensuring broader access and preventing a monopoly on the gains.
A New Social Contract: Rethinking the Fundamentals
We’ve lived with an implicit social contract for over a century: you contribute labor (and taxes), and in return you gain security, stability, and a chance at upward mobility. With AGI poised to challenge the very nature of work, the following questions become paramount:
What Does It Mean to ‘Work’?
If machines can outcompete humans at design, research, and strategic planning, do “jobs” remain the bedrock of economic identity—or do we redefine labor entirely?
How Do We Distribute AI-Generated Wealth?
Traditional income-based taxes may prove inadequate once AI begins producing the lion’s share of value. Tapping capital-intensive AI platforms could fund new safety nets—universal basic income, retraining programs, or direct subsidies.
Legal Liability and AI Autonomy
As AI starts to operate independently in the real world, we need a clear legal construct for its “existence” and accountability. Who is responsible when an AI agent breaches a contract, commits fraud, or causes harm?
AI “Virtual Humans”: The Case for Outcome-Centric Governance
As AI systems begin performing tasks once reserved for humans—everything from complex research to making autonomous decisions—it’s no longer enough to treat them as mere tools. Outcome-Centric Governance shifts focus to real-world results, holding AI responsible for the consequences of its actions.
Fundamental AI Principles (FAPs)
Much like Asimov’s famous laws, modern AI needs binding guidelines—backed by real enforcement—to ensure ethical behavior. These might include:Non-Maleficence, Decision-Making Transparency, Auditable Accountability, Consent-Driven Interaction, and Human Override Primacy.
Also:
Compliance with Existing Regulatory Standards – For instance, the U.S. SEC’s Regulation Best Interest mandates that broker-dealers place clients’ interests first. An AI acting as an automated financial advisor should meet the same fiduciary standard—offering unbiased recommendations rather than prioritizing profit or conflicts of interest.
Certification & Accountability – In high-impact sectors like finance, healthcare, or infrastructure, AIs could be required to pass certifications ensuring they meet fundamental ethical and safety criteria. By focusing on outcomes—whether an AI’s actions have helped or harmed real people—this framework aims to create “virtual citizens” that follow the same ethical and regulatory constraints as human professionals.
The Bottom Line: From Hype to Human-Centric Outcomes
AGI isn’t just another technological leap—it has the potential to redefine work, power, and wealth distribution. Done right, it could usher in an era of unprecedented prosperity and creativity. Done poorly, it can breed inequality, dislocation, and threats to the global economy. By viewing AI as “virtual people” who must abide by enforceable principles, we ensure these systems adhere to the same social contract that guides human behavior—at least for now.
Greg Woolf is an accomplished innovator and AI strategist with over 20 years of experience in founding and leading AI and data analytics companies. Recognized for his visionary leadership, he has been honored as AI Global IT-CEO of the Year, received the FIMA FinTech Innovation Award, and was a winner of an FDIC Tech Sprint. Currently, he leads the AI Reg-Risk™ Think Tank, advising financial institutions, FinTech companies, and government regulators on leveraging AI within the financial services industry. https://airegrisk.com
