In a world where the federal government's tax policies and trust regulations are causing a stir, a lesser-known concern is looming over the horizon: the potential for global extinction. Assistant Treasury minister Andrew Leigh, in a speech honoring the memory of renowned Australian economist Lyndhurst Giblin, paints a rather grim picture of our future. According to Leigh, the chances of humanity facing extinction in the coming century are as high as one in six, and it's not just the usual suspects like climate change or nuclear war that we should worry about. Leigh argues that the biggest threat may lie in the very technologies that are supposed to save us.
Leigh's speech delves into the idea that economics, often labeled the 'gloomy science', struggles with the most daunting question of all: the ultimate scarcity of our existence. While economists have been adept at analyzing equity and efficiency, he posits that we now need to focus on survivability. The assistant minister highlights the vastness of human history, noting that our species is only a few hundred thousand years old, while the sun has billions of years left to burn. This perspective makes our current struggles seem infinitesimal in comparison to the potential future of humanity.
One of the most intriguing aspects of Leigh's speech is his concern about the rapid advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) and synthetic biology. He argues that while these technologies offer immense productivity gains and medical breakthroughs, they also carry the seeds of our destruction. Modern economies, he suggests, may be better at generating dangerous capabilities than at building the safeguards needed to control them. This raises a deeper question: as we embrace technological progress, are we inadvertently increasing our fragility?
Leigh's solution involves a two-pronged approach. First, governments need to develop policies to deal with the 'hazard rate' of new technologies, while also implementing preventive measures for even the most remote dangers. Second, economists must take on a more serious role in ensuring survivability. He believes that economists can contribute to this cause by analyzing equity and efficiency, but also by focusing on the bigger picture of our long-term survival.
In my opinion, Leigh's speech is a wake-up call for humanity to take a step back and reconsider our priorities. While it may seem like an extreme perspective, it raises important questions about the role of technology in our lives and the long-term consequences of our actions. What makes this particularly fascinating is the idea that the very tools we create to improve our lives could potentially be our downfall. This raises a deeper question: how can we ensure that our technological advancements serve us well, rather than becoming a threat to our existence?
Leigh's speech is a powerful reminder that while economics may be the 'gloomy science', it is also a vital tool for understanding the world around us. By focusing on survivability, economists can help us navigate the challenges of the future and ensure that humanity has a chance to endure. In my view, this is a call to action for economists and policymakers alike to take a more proactive approach to addressing the potential risks of technological advancements.
