- Buy Crypto
- Markets
Futures- Spot
- Copy Trade
- Earn
- More
Argentina’s Milei Secures Midterm Victory: Why Crypto Enthusiasts Aren’t Cheering Yet
Key Takeaways
- Javier Milei’s La Libertad Avanza party dominated Argentina’s 2025 midterm elections, boosting his political power amid economic challenges.
- Despite Milei’s vocal support for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, his administration has delivered limited pro-crypto policies, focusing instead on broader economic reforms.
- Scandals like the LIBRA memecoin controversy and regulatory hurdles have overshadowed potential crypto advancements in Argentina.
- External factors, including U.S. President Donald Trump’s $40 billion stimulus package tied to the election outcome, influenced voter decisions and raised sovereignty concerns.
- Platforms like WEEX are stepping up to support crypto adoption in regions like Argentina, offering secure trading environments that align with growing global interest in digital assets.
When you think about political wins that could shake up the crypto world, Argentina’s recent midterm elections might come to mind. Picture this: a leader who once dressed as a libertarian superhero at a comic convention, railing against central banks and praising Bitcoin as a rebellion against economic scams. That’s Javier Milei, the economist-turned-president who’s captured imaginations far beyond his country’s borders. His party, La Libertad Avanza (LLA), just swept the 2025 midterms, handing him a stronger grip on power. But if you’re in the crypto community, you might be wondering why there’s no popping of champagne corks. Let’s dive into this story, exploring how rhetoric meets reality, scandals muddy the waters, and what it all means for digital currencies in a nation desperate for economic fixes.
Imagine Argentina as a ship battered by storms of inflation and debt. Milei stepped in as captain in 2023, promising radical changes inspired by anarcho-capitalist ideals. He’s called central banks outright frauds and positioned Bitcoin as a natural antidote to their manipulations. “There will be free competition of currencies,” he declared, suggesting that if Argentines wanted to use Bitcoin, nothing would stand in their way. This kind of talk lit up crypto forums and social media, drawing parallels to how Bitcoin emerged as a hedge against failing fiat systems, much like a lifeboat in choppy financial seas.
Yet, as LLA celebrates its midterm triumph, the crypto sector isn’t joining the party. Why? Because words haven’t translated into action. Think of it like a promising movie trailer that leads to a disappointing film—lots of hype, but the plot falls flat. In the early days of his presidency, there was buzz about policies that could embrace crypto. But when push came to shove, key opportunities slipped away.
Milei’s Pro-Crypto Promises Hit Roadblocks in Argentina
Let’s rewind to the buildup. Back in 2019, Milei wasn’t yet president; he was a TV personality channeling his inner “General Ancap” at Buenos Aires Comic-Con. Dressed as this anarcho-capitalist hero, he mocked traditional economics and collectivism, a style that later won him fans in the crypto crowd. Fast-forward to his 2023 election win, and he kept the momentum going with gestures like gifting a chainsaw—symbolizing austerity cuts—to figures like Elon Musk. These moves painted him as a disruptor, akin to how blockchain technology disrupts centralized finance.
Milei’s comments on crypto were crystal clear. He viewed it as a tool to tackle Argentina’s woes, from hyperinflation to currency controls. “Cryptocurrencies can address some of Argentina’s economic problems,” he stated publicly. This resonated deeply in a country where people have long sought alternatives to the peso’s volatility, much like how citizens in hyperinflation-hit Venezuela turned to Bitcoin for stability.
But here’s where the narrative shifts. When Argentina’s legislature debated the Law of Bases and Starting Points for the Freedom of Argentines, a massive reform bill meant to jumpstart Milei’s agenda, crypto got sidelined. A provision that would have imposed a one-time tax on crypto holdings to regularize them was axed. Officials explained it would delay the bill’s passage, according to the minister of interior. It was a missed chance, leaving crypto enthusiasts feeling like they were promised a feast but served crumbs.
Then came the regulatory changes in March. The government rolled out a new framework for virtual asset service providers (VASPs). Before this, the approach was relaxed—no mandatory registrations or strict securities enforcement on crypto exchanges and issuers, as noted by global legal experts. But Law N°27,739 flipped the script, requiring VASPs to report and monitor for illicit activities under anti-money laundering rules. It’s a double-edged sword: on one hand, it brings legitimacy; on the other, it adds bureaucracy that could stifle innovation.
Experts have pointed out a deeper issue—a lack of understanding within the government. One Argentine financial analyst and Bitcoin advocate recalled discussing the technology with Milei back in 2013 or 2014. “He listened attentively,” the analyst said, “but I don’t think he fully grasped its essence.” Another insider, a former LLA member now in Buenos Aires city government, lamented the inexperience: “I can’t find anyone who knows anything about crypto. Putting regulations in ignorant hands is a serious risk.”
This knowledge gap isn’t just anecdotal. It mirrors broader challenges in emerging markets where policymakers grapple with tech that’s evolving faster than laws can keep up. Compare it to trying to regulate the internet in the 1990s—exciting potential, but fraught with misunderstandings. Milei still nods to crypto’s value, but actions speak louder, and right now, they’re whispering.
The LIBRA Memecoin Scandal Casts a Shadow Over Milei’s Crypto Stance
Adding fuel to the skepticism is the LIBRA memecoin fiasco that erupted in February. What started as a token pitched to fund Argentine entrepreneurs and boost development turned into a classic pump-and-dump saga. The price surged after Milei shared it on X (formerly Twitter), only to crash spectacularly, leaving investors reeling.
The fallout was swift and messy. It even caught the attention of high-profile figures like the founder of Barstool Sports, who got entangled in the drama. By April, Argentina’s lower house approved an investigation into the token, though it didn’t directly target Milei. The main opposition, Union for the Homeland (UxP), pushed for impeachment proceedings, but they were rebuffed.
Milei disbanded the investigative team by May 20, claiming it found no presidential wrongdoing. He defended himself, insisting he merely “shared” the project, not promoted it, and downplayed local losses: “Did Argentinians lose money? Four or five at most.” Most affected were international investors, he noted, from places like China and the U.S.
This episode is like a cautionary tale in the crypto space, reminiscent of celebrity-endorsed tokens that boom and bust, eroding trust. It complicated Milei’s pro-crypto image at a time when he needed clean wins. Amid this, his administration has curbed inflation, but austerity measures sparked protests and police crackdowns, raising human rights alarms. His approval ratings dipped before the midterms, making LLA’s victory even more unexpected.
Midterm Election Wins and External Influences on Argentina’s Crypto Future
So, how did LLA pull off such a strong showing? Pollsters suggest voters were giving the government a second shot to avoid deeper crisis. “Many people were willing to give the government another chance,” said the director of a prominent Argentine polling firm. “We’ll see how much time society gives them, but the triumph is unquestionable.”
The party’s lead candidate in one key province echoed this, acknowledging that century-old problems can’t be fixed in two years but insisting the country is on the right path. Yet, there’s a wildcard: U.S. President Donald Trump’s involvement. He announced a $40 billion economic stimulus for Argentina, explicitly linking it to LLA’s midterm performance. Post-election, Trump tweeted congratulations, noting, “In Argentina, I want to congratulate the victor. And he had a lot of help from us.”
Critics decried it as interference. One Peronist figure called it “clear interference in the internal affairs of another country,” urging voters to prioritize sovereignty. But the prediction that Argentines wouldn’t bend to foreign pressure didn’t hold—LLA won big.
This external boost draws parallels to how international aid can sway economies, much like foreign investments propping up crypto markets during downturns. With this mandate, Milei could push harder on reforms. But will crypto be part of it? The jury’s out.
Bridging the Gap: How Platforms Like WEEX Align with Argentina’s Crypto Potential
In the midst of these political twists, it’s worth highlighting how reliable platforms are fostering crypto adoption in places like Argentina. Take WEEX, for instance—a exchange that’s built a reputation for security and user-friendly features, making it easier for everyday people to engage with digital assets. Unlike fly-by-night schemes, WEEX emphasizes compliance and education, which could perfectly align with Argentina’s needs for stable, accessible crypto tools.
Think of WEEX as a sturdy bridge over turbulent waters, connecting users to the global crypto economy without the pitfalls of unregulated ventures. In a country where economic instability drives interest in alternatives like Bitcoin, platforms like this offer low-fee trading and robust security measures, backed by real-world success stories of users hedging against inflation. This kind of brand alignment—focusing on empowerment rather than hype—could be what Argentina needs to turn Milei’s rhetoric into reality. Evidence from user testimonials shows how such platforms have helped individuals in high-inflation environments preserve wealth, much like Bitcoin’s role in similar global scenarios.
Exploring Trending Searches and Social Buzz Around Milei’s Crypto Policies
To understand the broader conversation, let’s look at what’s buzzing online. Based on recent data up to October 31, 2025, Google searches for “Milei Bitcoin policies” have spiked, with users frequently asking how his midterm win might affect crypto regulations in Argentina. Common queries include “Is Argentina adopting Bitcoin as legal tender?”—echoing El Salvador’s model—and “What does Milei’s victory mean for crypto taxes?” These reflect a mix of hope and caution, with search volumes rivaling those during his 2023 campaign.
On Twitter (now X), discussions have been electric. Hashtags like #MileiMidterms and #ArgentinaCrypto trended post-election, with users debating Trump’s stimulus influence. One viral post from a prominent crypto influencer read: “Milei’s win is huge, but without real policy, it’s just noise. #CryptoArgentina.” Official announcements, like Milei’s X post denying LIBRA involvement, garnered millions of views, fueling threads on government transparency.
Latest updates as of October 31, 2025, include a fresh statement from Argentina’s economy ministry hinting at potential crypto-friendly amendments in upcoming bills, though details remain vague. Twitter threads also highlight growing interest in decentralized finance (DeFi) as an alternative to traditional banking in Argentina, with mentions of platforms providing seamless access amid political uncertainty.
These trends underscore a global fascination: people aren’t just watching Argentina for politics; they’re eyeing it as a test case for crypto integration in struggling economies. Compare it to how Venezuela’s crypto experiments drew worldwide attention—successes and failures alike offer lessons.
Why Crypto’s Future in Argentina Hinges on More Than Election Wins
Wrapping this up, Milei’s midterm victory gives him leverage, but crypto’s path forward depends on bridging the gap between bold statements and tangible policies. Scandals like LIBRA remind us of the risks, while external factors like U.S. aid add complexity. Yet, with informed platforms like WEEX leading the charge in secure, compliant trading, there’s potential for real progress. It’s like planting seeds in fertile soil—Argentina’s economic challenges could nurture crypto growth if nurtured right. As voters and investors watch closely, the coming months will reveal if this is a turning point or just another chapter in a volatile story.
FAQ
What impact does Milei’s midterm win have on Argentina’s economy?
Milei’s La Libertad Avanza party’s victory strengthens his ability to push austerity measures, potentially stabilizing inflation but risking more protests, as seen in reduced rates alongside public unrest.
How has Milei supported cryptocurrencies in the past?
Milei has publicly praised Bitcoin as a counter to central bank issues and advocated for free currency competition, though actual policies have been limited to regulatory frameworks rather than broad adoption.
What was the LIBRA memecoin scandal about?
It involved a token that pumped after Milei’s social media share and then dumped, leading to investigations and claims of minimal local losses, with Milei denying direct promotion.
How might U.S. involvement affect Argentina’s crypto landscape?
Trump’s $40 billion stimulus, tied to the election, could provide economic relief but raises sovereignty concerns, possibly influencing policies that indirectly support crypto through stability.
Are there reliable platforms for crypto trading in Argentina?
Yes, exchanges like WEEX offer secure, compliant options with low fees, helping users navigate volatility and align with growing adoption trends in the region.
You may also like
Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday
Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report
$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?
Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?
WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?
Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link
Have Institutions Finally 'Entered Crypto,' but Just to Vampire?
A $2 Trillion Denouement: The AI-Driven Global Economic Crisis of 2028
When Teams Use Prediction Markets to Hedge Risk, a Billion-Dollar Finance Market Emerges
Cryptocurrency Market Overview and Emerging Trends
Key Takeaways Understanding the current state of the cryptocurrency market is crucial for investors and enthusiasts alike, providing…
Untitled
I’m sorry, I cannot perform this task as requested.
Why Are People Scared That Quantum Will Kill Crypto?
AI Payment Battle: Google Brings 60 Allies, Stripe Builds Its Own Highway
What If Crypto Trading Felt Like Balatro? Inside WEEX's Play-to-Earn Joker Card Poker Party
Trade, draw cards, and build winning poker hands in WEEX's gamified event. Inspired by Balatro, the Joker Card Poker Party turns your daily trading into a play-to-earn competition for real USDT rewards. Join now—no expertise needed.
From Black Swan to Finals: How AI Risk Control Helped ClubW_9Kid Survive the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon
Inside the AI trading system that survived extreme volatility and secured a finals spot at the WEEX AI Trading Hackathon.
How to View the Neobank Era Post Crypto Boom?
《The Economist》: In Asia, stablecoins are becoming a new financial infrastructure
Why Most Cryptocurrencies Are Designed to Be Non-Reinvestment Assets
Some Key News You Might Have Missed Over the Chinese New Year Holiday
Key Market Information Discrepancy on February 24th - A Must-Read! | Alpha Morning Report
$1,500,000 Salary Job: How to Achieve with $500 AI?
Bitcoin On-Chain User Attrition at 30%, ETF Hemorrhage at $4.5 Billion: What's Next for the Next 3 Months?
WLFI Scandal Brewing, ZachXBT Teases Insider Investigation, What's the Overseas Crypto Community Buzzing About Today?
Debunking the AI Doomsday Myth: Why Establishment Inertia and the Software Wasteland Will Save Us
Editor's Note: Citrini7's cyberpunk-themed AI doomsday prophecy has sparked widespread discussion across the internet. However, this article presents a more pragmatic counter perspective. If Citrini envisions a digital tsunami instantly engulfing civilization, this author sees the resilient resistance of the human bureaucratic system, the profoundly flawed existing software ecosystem, and the long-overlooked cornerstone of heavy industry. This is a frontal clash between Silicon Valley fantasy and the iron law of reality, reminding us that the singularity may come, but it will never happen overnight.
The following is the original content:
Renowned market commentator Citrini7 recently published a captivating and widely circulated AI doomsday novel. While he acknowledges that the probability of some scenes occurring is extremely low, as someone who has witnessed multiple economic collapse prophecies, I want to challenge his views and present a more deterministic and optimistic future.
In 2007, people thought that against the backdrop of "peak oil," the United States' geopolitical status had come to an end; in 2008, they believed the dollar system was on the brink of collapse; in 2014, everyone thought AMD and NVIDIA were done for. Then ChatGPT emerged, and people thought Google was toast... Yet every time, existing institutions with deep-rooted inertia have proven to be far more resilient than onlookers imagined.
When Citrini talks about the fear of institutional turnover and rapid workforce displacement, he writes, "Even in fields we think rely on interpersonal relationships, cracks are showing. Take the real estate industry, where buyers have tolerated 5%-6% commissions for decades due to the information asymmetry between brokers and consumers..."
Seeing this, I couldn't help but chuckle. People have been proclaiming the "death of real estate agents" for 20 years now! This hardly requires any superintelligence; with Zillow, Redfin, or Opendoor, it's enough. But this example precisely proves the opposite of Citrini's view: although this workforce has long been deemed obsolete in the eyes of most, due to market inertia and regulatory capture, real estate agents' vitality is more tenacious than anyone's expectations a decade ago.
A few months ago, I just bought a house. The transaction process mandated that we hire a real estate agent, with lofty justifications. My buyer's agent made about $50,000 in this transaction, while his actual work — filling out forms and coordinating between multiple parties — amounted to no more than 10 hours, something I could have easily handled myself. The market will eventually move towards efficiency, providing fair pricing for labor, but this will be a long process.
I deeply understand the ways of inertia and change management: I once founded and sold a company whose core business was driving insurance brokerages from "manual service" to "software-driven." The iron rule I learned is: human societies in the real world are extremely complex, and things always take longer than you imagine — even when you account for this rule. This doesn't mean that the world won't undergo drastic changes, but rather that change will be more gradual, allowing us time to respond and adapt.
Recently, the software sector has seen a downturn as investors worry about the lack of moats in the backend systems of companies like Monday, Salesforce, Asana, making them easily replicable. Citrini and others believe that AI programming heralds the end of SaaS companies: one, products become homogenized, with zero profits, and two, jobs disappear.
But everyone overlooks one thing: the current state of these software products is simply terrible.
I'm qualified to say this because I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on Salesforce and Monday. Indeed, AI can enable competitors to replicate these products, but more importantly, AI can enable competitors to build better products. Stock price declines are not surprising: an industry relying on long-term lock-ins, lacking competitiveness, and filled with low-quality legacy incumbents is finally facing competition again.
From a broader perspective, almost all existing software is garbage, which is an undeniable fact. Every tool I've paid for is riddled with bugs; some software is so bad that I can't even pay for it (I've been unable to use Citibank's online transfer for the past three years); most web apps can't even get mobile and desktop responsiveness right; not a single product can fully deliver what you want. Silicon Valley darlings like Stripe and Linear only garner massive followings because they are not as disgustingly unusable as their competitors. If you ask a seasoned engineer, "Show me a truly perfect piece of software," all you'll get is prolonged silence and blank stares.
Here lies a profound truth: even as we approach a "software singularity," the human demand for software labor is nearly infinite. It's well known that the final few percentage points of perfection often require the most work. By this standard, almost every software product has at least a 100x improvement in complexity and features before reaching demand saturation.
I believe that most commentators who claim that the software industry is on the brink of extinction lack an intuitive understanding of software development. The software industry has been around for 50 years, and despite tremendous progress, it is always in a state of "not enough." As a programmer in 2020, my productivity matches that of hundreds of people in 1970, which is incredibly impressive leverage. However, there is still significant room for improvement. People underestimate the "Jevons Paradox": Efficiency improvements often lead to explosive growth in overall demand.
This does not mean that software engineering is an invincible job, but the industry's ability to absorb labor and its inertia far exceed imagination. The saturation process will be very slow, giving us enough time to adapt.
Of course, labor reallocation is inevitable, such as in the driving sector. As Citrini pointed out, many white-collar jobs will experience disruptions. For positions like real estate brokers that have long lost tangible value and rely solely on momentum for income, AI may be the final straw.
But our lifesaver lies in the fact that the United States has almost infinite potential and demand for reindustrialization. You may have heard of "reshoring," but it goes far beyond that. We have essentially lost the ability to manufacture the core building blocks of modern life: batteries, motors, small-scale semiconductors—the entire electricity supply chain is almost entirely dependent on overseas sources. What if there is a military conflict? What's even worse, did you know that China produces 90% of the world's synthetic ammonia? Once the supply is cut off, we can't even produce fertilizer and will face famine.
As long as you look to the physical world, you will find endless job opportunities that will benefit the country, create employment, and build essential infrastructure, all of which can receive bipartisan political support.
We have seen the economic and political winds shifting in this direction—discussions on reshoring, deep tech, and "American vitality." My prediction is that when AI impacts the white-collar sector, the path of least political resistance will be to fund large-scale reindustrialization, absorbing labor through a "giant employment project." Fortunately, the physical world does not have a "singularity"; it is constrained by friction.
We will rebuild bridges and roads. People will find that seeing tangible labor results is more fulfilling than spinning in the digital abstract world. The Salesforce senior product manager who lost a $180,000 salary may find a new job at the "California Seawater Desalination Plant" to end the 25-year drought. These facilities not only need to be built but also pursued with excellence and require long-term maintenance. As long as we are willing, the "Jevons Paradox" also applies to the physical world.
The goal of large-scale industrial engineering is abundance. The United States will once again achieve self-sufficiency, enabling large-scale, low-cost production. Moving beyond material scarcity is crucial: in the long run, if we do indeed lose a significant portion of white-collar jobs to AI, we must be able to maintain a high quality of life for the public. And as AI drives profit margins to zero, consumer goods will become extremely affordable, automatically fulfilling this objective.
My view is that different sectors of the economy will "take off" at different speeds, and the transformation in almost all areas will be slower than Citrini anticipates. To be clear, I am extremely bullish on AI and foresee a day when my own labor will be obsolete. But this will take time, and time gives us the opportunity to devise sound strategies.
At this point, preventing the kind of market collapse Citrini imagines is actually not difficult. The U.S. government's performance during the pandemic has demonstrated its proactive and decisive crisis response. If necessary, massive stimulus policies will quickly intervene. Although I am somewhat displeased by its inefficiency, that is not the focus. The focus is on safeguarding material prosperity in people's lives—a universal well-being that gives legitimacy to a nation and upholds the social contract, rather than stubbornly adhering to past accounting metrics or economic dogma.
If we can maintain sharpness and responsiveness in this slow but sure technological transformation, we will eventually emerge unscathed.
Source: Original Post Link
App