Dwarkesh Patel Podcast
Episode overview

Alex Imas and Phil Trammell – What remains scarce after AGI?

Dwarkesh Patel Podcast · 5 Egleze moments
Alex Imas and Phil Trammell – What remains scarce after AGI?
Episode summary

In this episode, Dwarkesh Patel interviews Alex Imas, Director of AGI Economics at Google DeepMind and Professor of Economics at University of Chicago, alongside Phil Trammell, Head of Economics at Epoch and research scholar at Stanford. The conversation centers on what economic theory predicts about automation, wages, and wealth distribution in an AGI-dominated world. Imas challenges common predictions of labor market collapse, noting that labor share has remained remarkably stable at over 60% of GDP despite centuries of automation, and argues this could continue if demand patterns and capital variety expansion prevent satiation. He reveals critical data gaps in tracking consumer elasticities and job transformations, calling for a Manhattan Project level effort to collect economic data on AI's impact. Surprisingly, current evidence shows no significant white-collar job losses from AI, with even software engineering showing continued growth. The discussion explores whether a 'relational sector' where human involvement is intrinsically valued could sustain employment, or whether evolutionary selection for wealth-maximizing agents like Elon Musk will drive labor share toward zero through compound capital accumulation. On redistribution, they debate the feasibility of universal basic capital versus negative income tax, noting the political economy risks of government-dependent populations. For developing countries, they recommend indexing AGI supply chains through sovereign wealth funds rather than retraining programs, given AI's rapid advancement. The conversation concludes with concerns about concentration versus commoditization, noting that widespread AI access may be necessary both for broad prosperity and to prevent dangerous government control over a few powerful labs.

Key points
Watch original episode More from Dwarkesh Patel Podcast

5 moments from this episode

Source-linked · editorially selected
01
AI & Tech

Economists Say Labor Share Could Stay High Even With AGI Automation

Alex Imas of Google DeepMind and Phil Trammell of Epoch challenge assumptions that automation necessarily reduces labor's share of the economy. They note that despite centuries of automation, labor still captures over 60% of GDP, and this could continue through AGI if demand elasticities and increasing capital varieties prevent satiation. This contradicts widespread predictions of collapsing labor share.

Read this moment →
03
Money

Wealth Concentration May Shrink Labor Share If Rich Never Satiate on Capital

Phil Trammell argues that if wealthy individuals like Elon Musk never stop wanting more capital for projects like space colonization, their preferences could dominate the economy through compound growth. This evolutionary selection for 'greedy optimizers' could drive labor share to zero even without technological unemployment, contradicting standard economic models that assume diminishing marginal utility.

Read this moment →
04
Geopolitics

Developing Countries Advised to Index AGI Supply Chains Over Job Retraining

When asked what countries like India or Nigeria should do if excluded from AI production, economists recommend sovereign wealth investments in AGI supply chains over retraining programs. They argue the speed of AI advancement makes indexing more practical than education, though success depends on whether AI becomes commoditized like electricity or concentrated like social media platforms.

Read this moment →
05
AI & Tech

Economists Find No Evidence of White Collar Job Losses From AI

Despite widespread concern about AI-driven layoffs, rigorous analysis from Yale's Budget Lab shows no significant employment decline in white-collar sectors. Even entry-level software engineering shows slowed growth rather than contraction, contradicting narratives of a current automation crisis. Imas suggests many reported AI layoffs may be normal workforce adjustments reframed.

Read this moment →