James Thomson

can only come from taxation or a reduction in spending, which would be aged care, healthcare, NDIS and defence.

That's it.

Yeah, well, look, no, they're relying on a huge cut to the NDIS.

They are.

It's in the outer year of the budget, but I think the number is something like $19 billion of reductions in the 2030 financial year.

So, wow, are they going to be able to do that?

Let's see.

Yeah, I think so.

I mean, look, there's obviously a lot of subjectivity around the pointlessness and stupidity of someone's job.

What might appear pointless and stupid to PD or the anthropologist, you know, might actually be a reasonably important cog in the wheel.

I take, you know, I take the point that there's a lot of –

meetings that could have been emails in many workplaces and lots of waste in those industries, finance, insurance and real estate.

There's probably also lots of bureaucracy in government services and the public service and that sort of thing.

So I guess the question though is, you know,

To take those two jobs that PD suggests are socially beneficial, teachers and nurses...

how do they get affected by AI?

I mean, a lot of nursing will be handed to humanoid robots eventually, you would think, and a lot of teaching is education, you think, is right in the gun of AI.

Okay, Andrew has a bit of a related question.

If AI causes unemployment of 10% to 20%, given the budget is highly reliant on personal income taxes, how will this affect government revenue?

Poorly, you would think.