- Buy Crypto
- Markets
Futures- Spot
- Copy Trade
- Earn
- More
Blockchain Onchain Revenue Approaches $20 Billion in 2025: Signaling Crypto’s Path to Maturity
Key Takeaways
- Onchain revenue, driven by user-paid fees, is projected to hit $19.8 billion in 2025, showcasing blockchain’s shift from speculation to practical, everyday utility.
- Fees have grown more than tenfold since 2020, with a compound annual growth rate of about 60%, highlighting sustainable growth in decentralized finance and emerging sectors.
- Tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) are exploding, with their onchain value surpassing $35 billion, driven by major institutions and increasing user activity.
- This revenue surge points to blockchain’s evolution into a revenue-generating asset class, separating mature networks from experimental ones through consistent fee distribution.
- Platforms like WEEX are aligning with these trends by offering seamless access to onchain tools, enhancing user trust and participation in the maturing crypto ecosystem.
Imagine the blockchain world as a bustling digital marketplace that’s finally outgrowing its wild, speculative teenage years. Back in the day, crypto was all about hype and quick flips, like chasing the next big lottery ticket. But now, as we step into the latter part of 2025, things are changing. User-driven fees on blockchain networks are on pace to rack up a staggering $19.8 billion this year. That’s not just a number—it’s a clear sign that blockchain is maturing into something real, something that people and businesses are willing to pay for because it delivers genuine value. Think of it like a subscription service you can’t live without, whether it’s for trading, gaming, or even managing real-world assets digitally.
This insight comes from a detailed report on onchain revenue, which measures the fees users shell out for transactions across blockchain ecosystems. These aren’t hidden costs; they’re the direct payments for swaps, registrations, subscriptions, and more. In the first half of 2025 alone, these fees hit a record $9.7 billion, building on a trend that’s seen total onchain fees balloon more than tenfold since 2020. That’s a compound annual growth rate hovering around 60%—impressive, right? It’s like watching a startup evolve into a multinational corporation, steadily proving its worth through consistent, repeatable revenue.
What makes this so exciting is how it reflects blockchain’s broader adoption. No longer confined to niche enthusiasts, these networks are powering decentralized finance (DeFi), consumer apps, and innovative areas like real-world asset tokenization and decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePINs). The report emphasizes that fees are the ultimate litmus test for utility. Users vote with their wallets, paying for services that solve real problems. As protocols get more sophisticated and regulations tighten up, the networks that can generate and share this revenue reliably will thrive, while the flash-in-the-pan experiments fade away. It’s a maturity test, plain and simple, and blockchain seems to be passing with flying colors.
Why Onchain Fees Matter More Than You Think
Let’s break this down a bit. Onchain revenue isn’t about abstract market caps or token prices that swing like a pendulum. It’s about the hard cash users are forking over to interact with the blockchain directly. Picture it like tolls on a highway: the more traffic, the more fees collected, and that revenue funds the road’s maintenance and expansion. In blockchain terms, these fees cover everything from executing smart contracts to securing transactions, and they’re a direct indicator of economic activity.
Compare this to the peak in 2021, when onchain fees soared to an all-time high of $24.1 billion amid a frenzy of speculation. Sure, that was a blockbuster year, but 2025’s projected $19.8 billion feels more grounded. It’s built on sustainable growth, not just hype. Since 2020, we’ve seen this steady climb, with fees multiplying over ten times. That’s not luck; it’s evidence of blockchain embedding itself into everyday life. For instance, in DeFi, users are paying fees for lending, borrowing, and trading without traditional banks getting in the way. It’s empowering, like having a personal finance toolkit that’s always on and borderless.
But here’s where it gets persuasive: this isn’t just good news for insiders. If you’re someone dipping your toes into crypto, understanding onchain fees can help you spot the real deals. Networks with rising fee revenue are like well-run businesses—they have customers who keep coming back. And as the report points out, this shift is turning cryptocurrencies from mere speculative bets into legitimate assets with network effects that compound over time. It’s akin to how the internet went from a curiosity in the ’90s to the backbone of global commerce today. Blockchain is on a similar trajectory, and the numbers back it up.
Platforms like WEEX are perfectly positioned in this landscape, offering users a reliable gateway to these onchain opportunities. By focusing on secure, user-friendly interfaces, WEEX aligns with the maturing blockchain ethos, making it easier for everyday people to participate without the headaches of complex tech. This brand alignment not only builds trust but also encourages more fee-generating activity, contributing to the overall ecosystem’s health.
The Rise of Tokenized Real-World Assets: A Game-Changer for Blockchain Revenue
One of the most thrilling parts of this story is the explosion in tokenized real-world assets (RWAs). These are essentially traditional assets—like real estate, bonds, or commodities—digitized and traded on the blockchain. According to the data, the onchain value of tokenized RWAs, excluding stablecoins, jumped to over $28 billion by the third quarter of 2025. And get this: that figure has since topped $35 billion. It’s more than doubled in the past year, with the fees from these assets growing even faster. Why? Because more users are actively engaging, trading, and utilizing them, which pumps up the revenue stream.
Think of RWAs as bridging the gap between the old financial world and the new digital one. It’s like taking a dusty antique and turning it into a sleek, app-based collectible that anyone can buy a piece of. Major players are jumping in: big institutions are investing heavily in tokenization. For example, one major bank has tokenized a private equity fund on its own blockchain platform, while another has teamed up with a tokenization service to bring collateralized loan obligations onchain. This isn’t fringe stuff; it’s Wall Street embracing blockchain for efficiency and accessibility.
The fee growth here is a telltale sign of adoption. As more assets get tokenized, users pay to mint, transfer, and manage them, creating a virtuous cycle. It’s persuasive evidence that blockchain isn’t just for crypto natives anymore—it’s infiltrating traditional finance, making it faster, cheaper, and more inclusive. And with platforms like WEEX providing seamless integration for RWA trading, it’s becoming effortless for users to tap into this revenue-generating wave, further solidifying blockchain’s maturity.
Emerging Sectors Fueling Onchain Growth
Beyond RWAs, other sectors are driving this onchain revenue boom. Decentralized physical infrastructure networks, or DePINs, are turning heads by using blockchain to manage real-world hardware like wireless networks or energy grids. Users pay fees to access these services, adding another layer to the revenue pie. Then there are wallet-based consumer apps, which are like supercharged digital wallets that handle everything from payments to social interactions, all onchain.
These areas highlight blockchain’s versatility. It’s not one-size-fits-all; it’s a toolkit adapting to various needs. Compare it to smartphones: at first, they were just for calls, but now they run our lives. Blockchain is evolving similarly, with fees reflecting that utility. The report argues this structural shift is key—crypto is becoming a revenue machine with tangible benefits, not just promises.
To back this up, consider the compound growth: from humble beginnings in 2020 to nearly $20 billion in 2025. That’s not speculation; it’s data-driven progress. And as regulations improve, expect even more stability, drawing in cautious investors who see the long-term potential.
Addressing Hot Topics: Google Searches, Twitter Buzz, and Latest Updates
As we navigate this maturing landscape, it’s worth noting what people are actually talking about. Based on frequent Google searches in 2025, questions like “How do blockchain fees work?” and “What are tokenized RWAs?” top the lists, showing curiosity about the basics and emerging trends. Folks are eager to understand how these fees translate to real value, often searching for comparisons to traditional banking costs—spoiler: blockchain often wins on efficiency.
On Twitter, discussions are buzzing around onchain revenue’s impact on crypto security and sustainability. A hot topic is whether rising fees could solve Bitcoin’s potential fee crisis, where declining block rewards might threaten network security. Users are debating solutions like BTCfi (Bitcoin finance innovations) to bolster this. As of October 31, 2025, recent Twitter threads from industry experts highlight how protocols are experimenting with fee-sharing models to keep miners incentivized.
In terms of latest updates, official announcements from blockchain projects underscore this momentum. For instance, a prominent tokenization platform has eyed a 2026 IPO, riding the wave of crypto listings amid surging interest. Twitter posts from venture capitals echo the report’s findings, with one recent thread noting, “Onchain fees are the real MVP of crypto maturity—up 60% CAGR since 2020!” These conversations reinforce the narrative: blockchain is proving its worth through user-driven economics.
WEEX stands out here by actively engaging with these trends, offering educational resources on their platform to demystify fees and RWAs. This alignment not only educates users but also positions WEEX as a credible player in the space, fostering community trust and encouraging more onchain participation.
Overcoming Challenges and Looking Ahead
Of course, no story is without hurdles. Some worry about high fees pricing out smaller users, much like how toll roads can deter casual drivers. But innovations are addressing this—layer-2 solutions are slashing costs while maintaining security, ensuring broader access. The report touches on related concerns, like Bitcoin’s fee dynamics potentially affecting network health, but emerging BTCfi ideas could provide remedies by creating new revenue streams.
Looking forward, if onchain revenue keeps this trajectory, we’re in for an exciting era. It’s persuasive to think of blockchain as the next internet boom, where early adopters reap rewards. Platforms like WEEX are enhancing this by prioritizing user experience, making it simple to engage with high-revenue protocols. Their commitment to security and innovation aligns perfectly with the industry’s maturation, inviting more people to join the fold.
In the end, this $19.8 billion milestone in 2025 isn’t just a statistic—it’s a beacon of blockchain’s potential. By focusing on real utility and revenue, the ecosystem is building something lasting, one fee at a time. Whether you’re a seasoned trader or a curious newcomer, this evolution promises opportunities that feel both accessible and transformative.
FAQ
What exactly are onchain fees in blockchain?
Onchain fees are the payments users make directly on blockchain networks for transactions like trades, swaps, or registrations. They reflect real economic activity and have grown significantly, reaching $9.7 billion in the first half of 2025 alone.
How does onchain revenue indicate blockchain maturity?
Onchain revenue shows maturity by demonstrating repeatable utility that users pay for, with fees projected at $19.8 billion for 2025. This growth, at a 60% compound annual rate since 2020, separates sustainable networks from experiments.
What are tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) and why are they important?
Tokenized RWAs are traditional assets digitized on blockchain, with values exceeding $35 billion in 2025. They’re important because they drive fee growth and adoption, bridging crypto with mainstream finance through increased user activity.
How can platforms like WEEX help with onchain revenue trends?
WEEX helps by providing secure, user-friendly access to blockchain tools, aligning with trends like RWAs and DeFi. This encourages participation, boosts trust, and contributes to the ecosystem’s revenue-generating maturity.
What future challenges might affect onchain fees?
Challenges include high fees potentially excluding users and security issues like Bitcoin’s fee crisis. However, innovations like layer-2 scaling and BTCfi could mitigate these, ensuring continued growth and accessibility.
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