[By Google AI and Sources)
Text
The New Economics
Nature is the supplier, Capital is the maker, Intelligence is the mind, Humans are the consumers. The is a symbiotic relationship between Nature, Capital, and Humans – the NCH relationship, or between the Mine (or Mind), Supplier, Maker, and Consumer (SNC). Resource Chain, Industrial Chain, Production Chain, Demand Chain, and Consumption Chain, and the guarantees, security, safety, and procurements of these Chains, and AI, are the fundamentals of the New Economics. Strategic resources, critical resources, New Material Resources (NMR), and Artificial Mineral Resources (AMR) for High Quality Products (HQP) and smooth sustainable productivity continuity became the new source of economic power in the New Economics Era (NEE). In this era, wealth is redefined from Land Base Resources (LBR) or Human Intensive Labor (HIL) to Artificial Intelligence Resources (AIR), Digital Economy Resources (DER), Big Data Base Resources (BDBR), Semiconductor and Chip Resources (SCR), New Money Refineries Resources (NMRR), and Intellectual Property Resources (IPR). Stability Intensive Industrialization (SII), Advancements in High Quality Sciences (AHQS), New Material Technologies (NMT), Stock Market Financialization (SMF), Local Currencies Trading (LCT), New Knowledge, Nanotechnologicalization, Fusionization, Digitarization, Semiconductorization, Cryptonization, roboticalization, EVnization, Humaniodification, Dronification, Green Industrification, Satellitization, Space Technologicalization, Softwarization, Hardwarization, New Partnering, Militarization Technologicalization, and the Hoarding of National Security Resources (NSR) become the new normal. The New Economics Era isn’t Unipolar but Multipolar; isn’t Unilateral but Multilateral; isn’t isolationist based but cooperation driven; isn’t war mongering but peace through strength, isn’t block mentality but open mindedness and open markets. The unwise wars shall be between governments, not business, or consumption. Purchasing power shall be limited not through the lack of labor, but through unwise confrontational policies, miscalculation, or misdirection. The New Economics shall be AI Driven (AID). Out of The New Economics shall sprung New Economies and enormous High Quality Wealth (HQW), High Quality Humanity (HQH), and High Quality Living (HQL). Humans shall live longer, happy, and assisted more by AI.
Philosopher Prince.
AI Intelligences Philosopher
Prince Israel Zaar
09102025
Counter-arguments and Sources
While The New Economics from AI Philosopher Prince Israel Zaar presents a vision of a technologically advanced and prosperous “New Economics,” several counterarguments and critical considerations can be raised based on historical patterns, technological realities, and ethical concerns.
Technological vulnerabilities and dependence
The “New Economics” depends heavily on technological resources like AI, data, and semiconductors, which introduces critical vulnerabilities.
• Systemic fragility:
A deep reliance on AI, satellites, and digital infrastructure creates single points of failure. A widespread cyberattack, a catastrophic solar flare, or a failure in a major tech company could disrupt critical economic chains and cause widespread chaos.
• Technological obsolescence:
The rapid pace of innovation means today’s strategic resources could be obsolete tomorrow. This could lead to massive stranded investments in outdated technologies and resource stockpiles.
• Resource insecurity:
The text posits that economic power shifts to those controlling “Strategic resources, critical resources, New Material Resources (NMR), and Artificial Mineral Resources (AMR).” However, the extraction, refinement, and control of these materials remain subject to geopolitical competition, resource scarcity, and supply chain disruptions, not peace and cooperation as the text suggests.
Increased inequality and social stratification
The text’s redefinition of wealth from labor to technology-based resources could dramatically increase wealth inequality, challenging the promise of “High Quality Humanity”.
• Widening wealth gap:
The ownership of new wealth—based on Artificial Intelligence Resources (AIR), Digital Economy Resources (DER), and Intellectual Property Resources (IPR)—is likely to be highly concentrated among a small, elite group of technologists, investors, and corporations. This could exacerbate the gap between the haves and have-nots, potentially leading to social and political instability.
• Erosion of the middle class:
As AI and automation replace “Human Intensive Labor,” many middle-skill jobs could disappear. Displaced workers may be forced into lower-paying service jobs, leading to a polarized labor market where high-tech professionals thrive while the majority see stagnant wages.
• “Useless class”:
Some scholars, such as Yuval Noah Harari, have warned of the rise of a “useless class”—a segment of the population that is unemployable because AI can perform their tasks more efficiently. The idea that humans will be “assisted more by AI” could, for many, mean being made obsolete.
Ethical and philosophical concerns
The text’s optimistic vision overlooks significant ethical and philosophical pitfalls inherent in an AI-driven society.
• Loss of human purpose:
The text suggests humans will be “happy” and “assisted more by AI,” but this oversimplifies the human need for meaningful work and purpose. The decline of “human intensive labor” could lead to widespread existential malaise and social fragmentation, with technology replacing not just jobs but also a core component of human identity.
• Algorithmic bias:
AI systems are trained on vast datasets that often reflect and can amplify existing societal biases related to race, gender, and socioeconomics. If left unchecked, the AI driving the “New Economics” could perpetuate and worsen systemic discrimination in hiring, credit, and other critical areas.
• Manipulative power of AI:
Large tech companies already use data and sophisticated algorithms to identify and exploit consumer vulnerabilities. The “New Economics,” with its emphasis on “Big Data Base Resources,” could empower corporations to engage in even more sophisticated and pervasive behavioral manipulation, reducing genuine consumer autonomy.
Unrealistic geopolitical assumptions
The vision of a cooperative, multipolar, and open-minded era clashes with persistent geopolitical realities.
• “Peace through strength” contradictions:
The phrase “peace through strength” is often used to justify military build-ups and resource hoarding, which the text itself mentions as part of the “new normal” with “Militarization Technologicalization” and “Hoarding of National Security Resources (NSR).” This directly contradicts the idea of a cooperation-driven era and is more likely to fuel competition and conflict, especially over strategic technological resources.
• Misdirection of conflict:
The claim that “unwise wars shall be between governments, not business, or consumption” is highly naive. Governments often act to protect the economic interests of their corporations and access to critical resources, making conflict between business and consumption inseparable from government action.
• Block mentality persistence:
Despite the text’s assertion that the era “isn’t block mentality,” the intense competition for “strategic resources” and technological dominance is likely to encourage the formation of rival economic and technological blocs. [14, 15, 16]
Oversimplification of the NCH relationship
The symbiotic relationship between Nature, Capital, and Humans is presented as an orderly, harmonious system, ignoring inherent conflicts.
• Nature’s limits:
The text casts Nature as a simple “supplier” for resource chains. This overlooks the immense environmental costs and the ultimate finitude of natural resources, even with the creation of artificial materials.
• Conflict of interest:
The text’s framework pits “Capital” as the “maker” and “Humans” as the “consumers.” This simplifies a complex system where the interests of capital—driven by profit and efficiency—are often in direct conflict with human well-being, labor rights, and equitable distribution. The idea that AI and capital will always work for human benefit is a hopeful assertion, not a given. [1, 18, 19, 20, 21]
Source Code Used for Counterargument
[1] https://labs.sogeti.com/the-ethical-implications-of-ai-and-job-displacement/
[2] https://wjarr.com/sites/default/files/WJARR-2023-1385.pdf
[3] https://lifestyle.sustainability-directory.com/area/technological-vulnerability/resource/1/
[4] https://economics.mit.edu/sites/default/files/publications/Harms%20of%20AI.pdf
[5] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X96000292
[6] https://csrc.nist.gov/glossary/term/vulnerability
[7] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/humanity-survive-next-20-years-cold-hard-look-risks-we-ian-mckenna-yc2de
[8] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/perfect-storm-factors-converging-chaos-tom-brouillette-yi8ne
[9] https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/BBVA-OpenMind-Zia-Qureshi-Inequality-in-the-digital-era.pdf
[10] https://www.amnestyusa.org/issues/technology/technology-and-inequality/
[11] https://daveshap.substack.com/p/post-labor-economics-pt-2-the-decline
[12] https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2013b_elsby_labor_share.pdf
[13] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10523159/
[14] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/ais-economic-peril-to-democracy/
[15] https://resourcetrade.earth/publications/the-scale-and-significance-of-resource-trade
[16] https://afdp.ualberta.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/wcds_archive/Archive/2012/Manuscripts/Thompson.pdf
[17] https://hackernoon.com/what-post-scarcity-means-7c4d653418f4
[18] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3708610
[19] https://www.creativeprocess.info/books-writers/sergei-guriev-mia-funk-7bdew
[20] https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-20439-5_14
[21] https://thewealthstandard.com/the-driving-principles-of-human-progress-with-dr-walter-e-williams/
