Thank you Doug Bailey for some thoughtful comments!
Doug Bailey writes:
>I noticed you used a neo-classical growth model and exogenous growth
>functions as the basis for your analysis. Might endogenous growth
>theory be a better fit for the AI scenario? Or at least wouldn't it
>be interesting to see what predictions an endogenous model might
>make? From what I remember of endogenous growth theory, the way it
>models growth seems to match better an economy where AI was
>advanced.
>Another area that might warrant further review is the neo-classical
>idea of diminishing returns. I know Paul Romer alleged that the
>diminishing returns problem might not apply if capital was expanded
>to include human capital.
This isn't another area. The essense of endogenous growth models is that they eliminate diminishing returns.
>What impact might a drastically increased
>efficiency in capital utilization have on growth models? How would this
>potential effect of AI-development be factored in to growth models?
Unless you forsee particular reasons to expect a change in the *rate* at which such utilization becomes more efficient, this effect is already included in the standard models of exogenous growth.
Robin Hanson
hanson@econ.berkeley.edu http://hanson.berkeley.edu/
RWJF Health Policy Scholar, Sch. of Public Health 510-643-1884
140 Warren Hall, UC Berkeley, CA 94720-7360 FAX: 510-643-8614