Core Insights - The report argues that regardless of whether AI represents a true technological revolution, it will inevitably exacerbate the inherent contradictions of the current U.S. capitalist framework, potentially leading to either a short-term financial crisis or a long-term deflationary environment with intensified social conflicts [3] - The technological revolution is characterized as a deflationary process, where capital seeks profit through innovation, but the macroeconomic outcome of innovation diffusion results in declining profit margins, creating a paradox between micro rationality and macro outcomes [3][4] - The impact of technological advancements on demand is uncertain, with the net effect of technological progress on employment being a complex interplay of substitution, restoration, and enhancement effects [3][13] - The current AI revolution is showing a suppressive effect on demand, contrasting with the previous internet revolution that boosted labor shares; the AI revolution is characterized by stronger substitution effects and delayed restoration effects [3][11] - The systemic challenges faced by the U.S. in developing AI stem from a fragile "impossible trinity" that requires lower interest rates, larger fiscal stimuli, and a stable dollar credit system to work in tandem [3][12] Theoretical Framework: Capitalist Perspective on Technological Revolution - The essence of technological revolution is driven by capital's pursuit of profit, where firms innovate to lower costs and achieve excess profits, but competition leads to overall industry productivity increases, resulting in declining profit margins [9][10] - The relationship between the organic composition of capital and profit margins is negatively correlated, confirming Marx's view that an increase in the organic composition of capital generally leads to a decline in profit margins [9][10] Historical Validation: Unique Path of U.S. Technological Revolution - The period from 1947 to 1987 was characterized by a balance between substitution and restoration effects, maintaining stable labor shares and wage growth in line with productivity [23][24] - In contrast, from 1987 to 2017, the acceleration of automation and a slowdown in the creation of new tasks led to a decline in labor shares and a decoupling of wage growth from productivity [30][31] Current Application: Is AI a True Technological Revolution? - The report questions whether the current AI investments can replicate the labor demand dynamics seen during the internet revolution, highlighting that the AI sector's growth may not translate into broad-based labor demand increases [76][80] - The potential for AI to create new tasks is limited by the current pace of technological maturity and market demand, leading to a scenario where the substitution effect may dominate, resulting in sustained pressure on labor demand [90][91] Future Projections: Two Scenarios Under AI - If AI is not a true revolution, it may lead to a narrative collapse and a potential market bubble burst, with significant risks of recession as market confidence wanes [88] - Conversely, if AI is a genuine revolution, it could exacerbate existing contradictions and lead to long-term deflation, as the disparity between capital gains and labor income widens, resulting in insufficient demand to match production capacity [90][91]

Group 1 - The article discusses the pressures of modern work life, highlighting the prevalence of long hours and the 996 work culture as a norm for many individuals [1][2] - It questions the rationale behind the established rules of modern work and whether individuals have the capacity to change their circumstances [2][3] - The works of Marx and Weber are referenced as essential for understanding the dynamics of capitalism and modern society, providing insights into the relationship between individuals and their work [2][4] Group 2 - The article emphasizes the importance of understanding the bureaucratic system, noting that modern bureaucracies allow for voluntary participation and exit, contrasting with traditional systems [6][7] - It outlines the qualifications required to enter bureaucratic roles, emphasizing the need for clear roles and responsibilities within the hierarchy [8][9] - The hierarchical nature of bureaucracies is discussed, highlighting the lack of autonomy for individuals in lower positions and the necessity of adhering to established roles [9][10] Group 3 - The article explains the concept of time as a critical factor in economic behavior, asserting that individuals cannot freely determine their working hours due to the nature of labor markets [20][21] - It describes the transformation of individuals into laborers and the implications of this shift, particularly the loss of control over their working time and conditions [22][23] - The article further elaborates on the division of time for laborers, emphasizing the constraints imposed by the need to sell labor while maintaining personal survival [24][25] Group 4 - The article critiques the notion of market transactions as inherently fair, arguing that the capitalist structure creates a false consciousness among laborers regarding their interests [26][27] - It highlights the role of the superstructure in shaping laborers' perceptions and the potential for a misalignment of interests between laborers and capitalists [27][28] - The article concludes by suggesting that understanding Marx's theories can provide a different perspective on fairness in human behavior and labor relations [29][30]