Raw LLM Responses

So, the snarl that I see is that if unemployment actually /were/ at 25%: (1) I would start expecting some degree of violence against AI firms. Nothing the government couldn't deal with, but some SLA-equivalent with that as their axe to grind. (2) I wouldn't expect full class solidarity (that almost never happens - even in the most pro-Labour seats in the mid-20th century, the Tories would often hold 10-20% of the vote outside of the depths of the Great Depression), but I'd expect that at some point you'd have bubbling vibes regardless. Institutional blockades work...until they collapse and people just start taking communications off-line. Basically, I take issue with the ability of the media to suppress ideas in the absolute. In the abstract it can work, but at some point what you're more likely to get is a blind spot shocker (look at the last three presidential elections for how this can play out, or for AOC getting into the House - she was outspent like 18-to-1 - or Dave Brat being outspent 40-to-1 and upending Eric Cantor). Money really isn't everything, and if a third of the voters in a seat are unemployed and all decide to turn out for a primary (let alone internal party processes), Katy bar the door. I also don't think the AI firms are that /dumb/: (1) I'm pretty sure they could come up with some sort of UBI setup that somehow advantaged them over everyone else - I'm thinking of the capture of e.g. the ICC. Throw in that a hypothetical scenario of 25% unemployment (I'm presuming this also implicitly includes discouraged workers) and broader underemployment; the fact that it wouldn't be evenly distributed (you'd have pockets of lower unemployment - the DC area, likely, given civil service protections - and other areas where it would be far higher); and the fact that it would mean that even of folks who have jobs, a LOT would know lots of people who are in a bad spot). (2) The AI systems might even recommend a UBI. Again, I don't think the sort of centralized control over narratives is anywhere near as complete as the scenario implicitly requires exists, and so the idea that it might say "No, really, you need to do this" isn't insane. (3) The other issue is actually getting people to "bite" on the desired distractions. There are plenty of people who will just not manage to care about e.g. that celeb breakup. Why? Well, that would involve them seeing their movies and so on, and look at Hollywood's troubles. And there are plenty of distractions which would work for different groups but themselves be destabilizing (see also: Hawaii's mongoose problem) or be contrary to the government of the day's preferred objectives.