Society/Culture Universal Basic Income

[VineyIsLORD]

The aged pension bill is rising year on year, though. A function of the 'each generation exists to fund the next' approach.

My grandparents were pensioners. They lived in a tiny flat, had minimal luxuries and went to the grave with very little in the way of assets to their name.

The number of baby boomers who are now retirement age and draw a full or part pension that don't actually need it is staggering. But it's politically unpalatable to suggest that generation pay their own way.

Dont disagree with this at all. But thats just because i hate baby boomers for the most part.

 

[Seeds]

Utopia for those who own the robots and algorithms.


Provide their own work using which capital assets?

If people don't Have work to do then it means that all their needs are met. In other words it means they don't want to work. This can only exist if robots cost nothing to produce which is possible if robots can produce other robots with renewable resources.

If robot owners some how live in a society where they keep all the profits of the self replicating robots labour (which would be impossible in a democracy and could only be achieved in a totalitarian world) then people who are not robot owners would still have work to do to satisfy their wants and they would do that work with the help of capital they have created themselves. Sure the capital may be significantly less efficient then the robots but that is irrelevant if the people don't have access to the fruits of robots labour in the first place.. For those people the robots implicitly don't exist and thus those people are stuck in the pre robot world which exists today.

 

[Seeds]

So your idea of utopia is the vast majority of people starving to death or fighting over scraps because an automated labour model has priced them out of the market, and a cartel of people who have never once actually worked enjoy the entirety of human and robot labour?

Thats not a utopia.

Um no one is starving to death. Everyone has their wants fully satisfied in a world where there is no work. Their food, experiences, shelter, goods are all satisfied. If they are not then there is work to do. People who don't understand this really need to get an economics education.

The only constraint that still exists in a world with no work is time. The end point of robots if we live in a democracy is a utopia where all our wants are satisfied. It is both a capitalist utopia and a socialists utopia all at once. Why would you not want that?

 

[Total Power]

Um no one is starving to death. Everyone has their wants fully satisfied in a world where there is no work. Their food, experiences, shelter, goods are all satisfied. If they are not then there is work to do. People who don't understand this really need to get an economics education.

The only constraint that still exists in a world with no work is time. The end point of robots if we live in a democracy is a utopia where all our wants are satisfied. It is both a capitalist utopia and a socialists utopia all at once. Why would you not want that?

I remember when i was growing up Bank Tellers (my uncle was one) were s**t scared that due to automation (aka ATM's) he will no longer have a job in a few years. Fast forward 20 years, the number of Bank Tellers are still the same. We will never really a reach fully automated society. Even if we do, everyone will study IT/Engineering and you will always need someone to keep the systems up in case they go down. Then customer care is another thing,, you can never have robots answer customer calls and expect them to solve complex issues can you? these are just examples, a society can never reach full automation. Mining, farming etc, will always need human brain no matter what, but yeah maybe 150 to 200 years down the line i dont know but i wont bet on humanity to last that long the way we are going.

 

[Scotland]

Dont disagree with this at all. But thats just because i hate baby boomers for the most part.

Apart from other baby boomers, who doesn't?

 

[Scotland]

Then customer care is another thing,, you can never have robots answer customer calls and expect them to solve complex issues can you?

From my experience you'll end up disappointed if you expect this from a human, also.

 

[Mofra]

Mining, farming etc, will always need human brain no matter what, but yeah maybe 150 to 200 years down the line i dont know but i wont bet on humanity to last that long the way we are going.

In developing nations farming will be human intensive for a long time, but moves in the west for energy efficient intense factory-farms are actually surprisingly advanced.
Already there are shipping-container sized farms (albeit in prototype stage) where fresh produce is produced under strict climate controlled conditions with all water and nutrient requirements closely monitored and applied. There are whole "vertical farming" movements being established as we speak.

As an aside, this requires a smaller number of people to manage but it does require digital farmers (for want of a better term). It's a principle that applies to almost all industries undergoing 'creative destruction' - yes there is some elimination of human capital requirements, however unintended consequences lead to completely new fields being established.

Futurologists (yes that's actually an occupation now) often talk of 50% of 2050 occupations having not even been created yet. Even a decade ago being a professional blogger was mostly a pipe dream, yet we also have professional vloggers, shoppers, digital designers, etc etc.

Of course there will still be a shrinking of the requirement for human interaction hence a push for a universal basic income will increase.

 

[Seeds]

I remember when i was growing up Bank Tellers (my uncle was one) were s**t scared that due to automation (aka ATM's) he will no longer have a job in a few years. Fast forward 20 years, the number of Bank Tellers are still the same. We will never really a reach fully automated society. Even if we do, everyone will study IT/Engineering and you will always need someone to keep the systems up in case they go down. Then customer care is another thing,, you can never have robots answer customer calls and expect them to solve complex issues can you? these are just examples, a society can never reach full automation. Mining, farming etc, will always need human brain no matter what, but yeah maybe 150 to 200 years down the line i dont know but i wont bet on humanity to last that long the way we are going.

Agree. We are hundreds of years away from robots potentially being able to do everything. I do think it's theoretically possible but it will only be theory in our life times. This ain't a good thing though as many in the media think it would be good to keep working. It's a bad thing. We want robots to replace all the jobs and then we can use mass welfare distribution to ensure everyone benefits from robots labour. Mass welfare distribtion is only a bad thing because it disincentivises work. But once there is no need for work as in a robot utopia then there is no need to not employ mass welfare distribution. All a pipe dream in our lifetimes though.

 

[Total Power]

In developing nations farming will be human intensive for a long time, but moves in the west for energy efficient intense factory-farms are actually surprisingly advanced.
Already there are shipping-container sized farms (albeit in prototype stage) where fresh produce is produced under strict climate controlled conditions with all water and nutrient requirements closely monitored and applied. There are whole "vertical farming" movements being established as we speak.
.

Vertical farming can work for high value perishable crops grown next to the market. But man cannot live on lettuce! It is never going to replace the acres of wheat in Canada, US or Ukraine. It is necessary to distinguish between agriculture and horticulture.

The fundamental function of agriculture is to turn the sun's energy to human energy through photosynthesis. LEDs are much more efficient at producing the right frequencies of light for photosynthesis, but nevertheless the electricity to power them has to come from somewhere.
With improved traditional agriculture we can grow enough basic foodstuffs to provide the calories for an increased world population, but the problem is that it is in the wrong place and the hungry (who are mostly farmers themselves) cannot afford to buy them.

 

[Scotland]

Agree. We are hundreds of years away from robots potentially being able to do everything.

This was supposed to happen at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th 1997.

 

[igon value]

If people don't Have work to do then it means that all their needs are met.

No it doesn't.

 

[Seeds]

No it doesn't.

Explain how someone still has wants not satisfied but has no work to do?

The only example I can think of is a slave.

 

[MaddAdam]

An interesting take here

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...itzerland-referendum-refuses-to-a7505561.html

 

[VineyIsLORD]

I have to admit it would be hilarious trying to see any EU country implement it.

Switzerland voted it down mostly because the idea wasnt properly fleshed out and they didnt want to encourage migration. Likewise their unemployment rate isnt too bad yet. They will eventually adopt it imo.

 

[Pessimistic]

Trial it in south africa. Its already the screwed up economy the world seems to be heading towards. Yet south africa has enormous resource wealth.

Anyway isnt Housing costs the issue? some people with no home and some people with many (not rented out theyre that rich)

 

[Seeds]

Universal income will only become a useful thing when mass robot production is available.

The costs of current day social welfare are minuscule compared to the costs of implementing the UI and that's before any account is made of all the people who currently work who will stop working once UI becomes available.

If there was a UI of 30,000 dollars a year I would stop working for a significant amount of time and I'm probably in the top 3 percent of incomes.

The concept of UI today is ridiculous.

 

[VineyIsLORD]

Universal income will only become a useful thing when mass robot production is available.

The costs of current day social welfare are minuscule compared to the costs of implementing the UI and that's before any account is made of all the people who currently work who will stop working once UI becomes available.

If there was a UI of 30,000 dollars a year I would stop working for a significant amount of time and I'm probably in the top 3 percent of incomes.

The concept of UI today is ridiculous.

In one article I read the cost of UI was pretty comparable to what we already spend on social security.

 

[MaddAdam]

In one article I read the cost of UI was pretty comparable to what we already spend on social security.

Also costs of cops, both state-funded and rental variety, to assuage elite fears that masses will rise up and take their s**t back.

 

[Seeds]

In one article I read the cost of UI was pretty comparable to what we already spend on social security.

There needs to be better information on this. I've read some that are similar as you say and some that suggest it is astronomically higher. Logic suggests the latter as the former implies ridiculous government monitoring costs. Surely the government can't be that inept? Maybe I'm wrong and the libertarian capitalists are right about government costs. Surely being a socialist you would agree with me.

We also need to account for the assumptions. Like how many people stop working when it comes in. The current test runs won't help with this as they are only temporary 2 year test runs and people know that it is a test. I think the number who stop work or move to only part time work will be far more significant then anyone is even remotely considering and this will make government deficits skyrocket.

 

[Total Power]

There needs to be better information on this. I've read some that are similar as you say and some that suggest it is astronomically higher. Logic suggests the latter as the former implies ridiculous government monitoring costs. Surely the government can't be that inept? Maybe I'm wrong and the libertarian capitalists are right about government costs. Surely being a socialist you would agree with me.

We also need to account for the assumptions. Like how many people stop working when it comes in. The current test runs won't help with this as they are only temporary 2 year test runs and people know that it is a test. I think the number who stop work or move to only part time work will be far more significant then anyone is even remotely considering and this will make government deficits skyrocket.

Where’s the evidence that jobs are being eliminated by Robots and that there are no new jobs created as we speak?

When I was young lad and going into the electronics industry I was told that “we would all be out of a job soon modern technology and all that”. In Australia the car industry used to take up hundreds of thousands of workers, Today its almost gone. We now import labour “457” to deal with some shortages.Also during my working life I witnessed a huge increase in automation in all manufacturing sectors.Despite all these “losses”, despite the augmentation of manual labour with automation, despite the import of labour and our population growth, I note that unemployment has not changed much!I think its a bit early to call the demise of work for humans.

 

[Scotland]

In one article I read the cost of UI was pretty comparable to what we already spend on social security.

I don't believe this, at least not for Australia.

The 2016/17 budget estimate for welfare and social security is $158b. That's less than $7000 per citizen. I don't know how much a basic income needs to be, but I'm guessing a bit more than that. More like $20-30k I'd imagine. We'd need to allocate the entire budget to pay for it. Said budget is ~50% funded by personal income tax and around 15-20% from corporate tax, so either individuals and or businesses will be paying for it.

Let's say I earn $80k and effectively contribute $20k in tax. The system isn't going to allow me to pay $20k in tax then just get $20-30k back, and simply calling the first $20k tax free is no different to what we have now. It would end up being something like 50c in the dollar on every dollar earned after the first $40k tax free which is effectively just Robin Hood economics by another name.

The concept sounds too good to be true. Money goes to old people that no longer work, the disabled, people with kids, the unemployed. It doesn't go to me because I don't need it. The system gives too much to people that don't really need it, but at its core is targeted. I don't see how a system where a guy with cerebal palsy or a lady in her 80s getting the same cheque from the govt I do is sustainable.

 

[Seeds]

Where’s the evidence that jobs are being eliminated by Robots and that there are no new jobs created as we speak?

When I was young lad and going into the electronics industry I was told that “we would all be out of a job soon modern technology and all that”. In Australia the car industry used to take up hundreds of thousands of workers, Today its almost gone. We now import labour “457” to deal with some shortages.Also during my working life I witnessed a huge increase in automation in all manufacturing sectors.Despite all these “losses”, despite the augmentation of manual labour with automation, despite the import of labour and our population growth, I note that unemployment has not changed much!I think its a bit early to call the demise of work for humans.

There isn't any yet and it can only take place once robots can perform all tasks and create other robots themselves with only renewable resources. That is the only world where there is no jobs. I

 

[Total Power]

There isn't any yet and it can only take place once robots can perform all tasks and create other robots themselves with only renewable resources. That is the only world where there is no jobs. I

True but this wont be during our lifetime though.

 

[Pessimistic]

You'd think computers could manage themselves but app management seems to be a labor intensive as ever

 

[Total Power]

You'd think computers could manage themselves but app management seems to be a labor intensive as ever

The recent Centrelink debt management system is going well ,even if you dont owe them, nothing can be done till there is a review and you still have to pay.