You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Universal Basic Income is our future, at least according to Mark Zuckerberg
Basic Income would just have an inflationary effect that basically offsets any gains they would receive.
Quite simple logic. Prices will move up from the current floor so you are where you started.
And yes. Most people will just be leeches. Never underestimate human laziness.
Every single billionaire advocates for basic income out of sheer ignorance. Bill Gates does the same. It would be very hard to exist because value is based on demand and supply. You can't just give things away. It is a very naive perception of economics. These guys have everything and just preach utopia for PR image shilling.
Do you have a better suggestion to address the imminent job market issue following the automation and robotic revolution? Or, are you in the camp that thinks this time isn't any different from past advancements in technology, that somehow everyone is going to be some kind of social media manager?
Provided that this time is different, what do you really think will happen if there isn't a solution like a UBI? I can tell you what will happen, absolute riots and caos - that's what.
There is no "imminent market issue". Since the industrial revolution more and more jobs were created and life became better as technology progressed.
I don't know why so many people believe that automation will create problems? Do you guys watch too many sci-fi movies?
Ofcource this is not different than past times. It's not like we have developed A.I robots that can do our jobs either. I don't know where all this hype is coming from really.
Why is it that every-time no free shit is given people will riot? Riots and chaos don't happen in capitalist societies. hey happen in socialist places like Venezuela where you get your free shit...in line.
seriously guys. think about it a bit more. and try not to interpret sci-fi scenarios and Hollywood movies in the wrong way. Also look around you and try to imagine how far we are from your so called "coming automation".
I hate sci-fi. I also do NOT think life will be worse with automation. To the contrary, I think it will be great. The entire purpose of innovation is to make people's lives easier. It's not so far fetched to think that we can achieve a point in time where we reach a general equilibrium or even an excess of energy, the main driving force of economies.
I'm glad that you're taking a patronizing standpoint though instead of backing up your assertions with rational thought.
Oh also, provided that you're wrong and automation does have a significant impact on the job market, such that there isn't enough jobs for people to work, there will be riots, b/c the haves and have-nots will be further polarized. But you seem so confident in your assumptions.
I don't see the reason for basic income and even if I do there is no way you can pull this off without inflation. There is no such thing as free money. If value is just given away, it will accumulate in the economy and living costs will climb up. a new base will be created. So why are we still talking about this?
It is far fetched because everything around you, including the very universe itself is based on inequality and different dynamics. If things come into an equilibrium, aka value being spread equally across all things then everything collapses. When everything has the same value then nothing has value.
I did back them up twice. You make vague unfounded assumptions and you got served accordingly. no harsh feelings.
Inflation is created by pumping more money into the economy. I don't think a UBI is achieved by printing more money.
The universe is limited, and there will be limits. However, I do think we can extract more than enough power resources from renewables to sustain human requirements. There will be other limitations, like food and water, etc. That's something that will continue human intervention and continue to create inequality. I don't see any way around this at the moment, unless the human population declines.
We can just disagree, that's fine. I'm not looking at this as rainbows and unicorns in some kind of perfect fairy tale land. I'm simply saying that there won't be enough jobs for the majority of people, there won't be the need. Will they find other purposes and create value in the world - yes. But, it won't come in the form of a paycheck from a company, because companies will be able to optimize their operations to the point where these people aren't needed.
Can you tell me what these people are going to do when they're not working in factories or driving vehicles for logistics? I'm really curious.
I'm not sure on which side of the UBI argument I fall on, but I did want to question one part of your response kyriacos- I understand there is no such thing as free money but doesn't the government already give out free money to some folk in the form of food stamps, medicare, medicaid, housing vouchers, etc..?
they get those from taxes. With the UBI even a CEO that earns 500k a year will get the same stipend as someone who is living in the streets.
So if everyone is getting the same money, then no one is getting any money. Come on guys. Is not THAT hard. logic 101
This might give you an idea of where the other side's coming from.
Waw ...awesome video
I totally agree
Traditional jobs are likely going to decline with more automation. Other non-traditional jobs though very well could replace them. For example... what you and I are doing right now talking Steemit. I made more on steemit this year without going FULL throttle (though I've been very active) than I have many other years of my life. I made possibly close to half what I made in my paying job. So this has potential, and it is not the only INFORMATION/INTERNET space opportunity that is likely to rise.
Many traditional jobs may go away. They may also come back. A lot of it actually depends on the market.
Steemit is much like anything else though, where a few make money. It could be a full-time job for some, but it's not going to employ the masses. Also, if Steemit is incredibly popular it's going to cannibalize other social platforms.
I don't really see Steemit providing a mass of net jobs to the workforce. I do, however, see blockchain solutions contributing more to the sharing economy though. And that can have more of an equalizing effect on the flow of money, at least temporarily. But, like with anything, there always tends to be those that rise to the top 1% and then everyone else making little. You can already see this with mining in BTC.
I don't disagree with your assessment here. I just don't think it's going to provide enough to offset the losses.
I agree... I was just using it as an example of how historically new never before seen opportunities tend to replace those that were lost.
I'm in that camp and still very concerned. Not that I think UBI would be an actual solution these issues.
Unnecessary strawman.
I'm also very interested in the possibilty of establishing a form of basic income that isn't based on taxation. If theft can be avoided, then there might be ways to ensure a certain level of income to pay for essential living expenses without distorting markets by state force.
It's never gonna be as easy as these people think though. They're UBI is little more than outright legalized theft.
did come across one interesting idea for a "universal income" that's based in actual work that anyone can do. it involved a crypto "governance" model, where the new currency is mined by randomly selecting biometrically-confirmed users instead of having mining conglomerates wasting energy repeating fruitless tasks. Mining could even be performed on something as simple as a cell phone. The key being that technology will be the great unifier, and as anyone and everyone will soon be able to "afford" at least a low-end smart phone, those resources can be used to perform, well, certainly more efficient work than is currently being performed with bitcoin and other POW crypto-currencies. This is the whitepaper on it:
https://github.com/the-laughing-monkey/cicada-platform
Interestingly, Cicada may make for a perfect fit with @Dan's upcoming EOS platform:
EOS Highlights and Favorites from Ethereal and Consensus 2017
golem ["will?"] do this as well. the scenario about the mining is still sci-fi. heck it is like asking today someone to mind btc on their cellphone. the tasks won't be so easy to accomplish — and if they are — the rewards will be minimal.
something like "watch an ad and earn 0.01 cents" that we have today. again. it is not wise to speculate with "what ifs" when we already have technology and innovation and still weren't be able to implement BUI.
The problem is not technological. it is economic. it has to do with how humans perceive and create value. As long as people want to remain individuals with unique characteristics BUI cannot happen. it is against evolution itself. this is the same reason why communism failed and why we revert back to awesome capitalism. we like the pyramid. we like the A sexy instead of B. we are selfish and want to propagate OUR genes. This is what all comes down to. human nature.
"Prices will move up from the current floor so you are where you started". Unless you have hyper-productivity generated by automation and advanced robotics.
No. Other job sectors like "social media manager" and "online content evaluator" will be created. Advance Robotics and automation will not change the current system. They will only enhance and expand it in different directions.
Hyper-productivity will still raise prices since there will be higher demand. it doesn't change anything.
Unless those goods are priced in something other than Federal Reserve Notes. Not to mention when the people are able to print goods without the necessity of money. Technology WILL change the current system. The current system is obsolete.
what i mean by system is demand and supply. capitalism. how value is created. it doesn't matter who issues the money. money represents value. if you give some for free to everybody then eventually everything will rise from that point on. basic logic.
Or more specifically you'll never be giving the people anything of tangible value because the government can't actually add value. It "creates value" only through the coercive process of redistribution while also taking a vig for their "efforts." You can't take $10 away from a man and then give him back $12 and then propose to do that for everybody @automaton and I don't mean to be mocking as if that were an obvious conclusion.
Nonetheless, scarcity is a real attribute that pertains to certain parts of our reality. You can deny its existence but it's not actually missing from your life. When you want another potato chip at the end of the bag or whatever the proper analogy is-- you have that scarcity thing. If there wasn't a counting system to keep track of how many chips and Ferraris everybody was going through, we'd eventually have a lot more consumption than production. It's a nice idea to want more free things, but somebody has to create those thing, even if it means creating robot parts or robot algorithms. Land, earth and materials will not assemble itself and magically do all of things for us. Surely, nobody here would expect anything to that extent.
I have never suggested Government give anyone anything. I'm actually against it. I'm talking about putting the means of production in the hands of the many. By giving the people the means of production they can produce what they need without the need of Govt or Banks. Maybe you don't see it yet..but you will soon..
The majority of people who contributed early cultural or scientific breakthroughs to western society came from privileged backgrounds where they had no need to work. This was overwhelmingly the case from ancient Greece through to the 19th century.
I don't think advocating for universal basic income is the same as expecting a utopia, thats just making a straw man assumptions about the motivations behind such an idea. Also 'this won't result in a utopia' is not a rational argument against universal basic income.
There's a notion in the western world that making people's lives easier in anyway will compromise their character or destroy society. This is an extremely unexamined assumption that most people make without realising and originates from the the barbaric and extreme forms of christianity that dominate our early history, it's our cultural interpretation of how original sin operates in society. Give women the vote and they will turn into beligerent man beating barren she-beasts, free the slaves and they will drink themselves to death because they have no supervision, banish capital punishment and everyone will murder whoever they lay eyes on because there is no strong deterrent not to, raise minimun wages and society will fall, teach the unwashed masses to read and society will fall. Time and time again it is the negative and uncharitable projection of what happens after society lifts it's standards that has proven to be naive. History is unquestionably in favor of universal basic income. I do think your concerns about inflation are valid but as with any other major social reform, people will figure out how to make the fundamental changes necessary to preserve their new expectations and values intact. It will probably just be rocky for a generation or two and then take a viable form.
It's not ignorance. They are trying to turn you into a serf, so they can control every aspect of your life by issuing sheets of paper.