Is a Universal Basic Income Inevitable ?

in #life7 years ago

People often talk about the rise of machines and the mass automation movement as some far off distant thing, but the reality is that in a few decades, the amount of jobs replaced by machines will leave our economy unable to function. In the past when you created a new industry it would often mean that you needed a higher amount of people for the new jobs that were created, but this is no longer the case. The jobs that are being created today are primarily programming jobs and far fewer are needed than before. If our population continues to grow there will literally no longer be any jobs for children of the next generation.

Having an unemployment rate higher than 25% is not an option as we have seen in many countries post war or most recently Greece after their collapse. There will literally be rioting in the streets and people who cant feed their families. So what should we do in order to make sure this doesn’t happen, because not having riots in the street is good for your country as a whole. So it seems like we will either have two options, the first of which is have the government make it mandatory to have a worker tied to a robot ( probably not going to happen in the long run) or to create some sort of universal basic income system in order to take care of everyone.

The problem with a universal basic income is not only selling an entire country on the idea, especially a country like the United States, but also figuring out the economics of such a system. We would literally be throwing away hundreds of years of economic theory for a system that is untested and untried, unless we were to roll out small test beds for the system, like some countries in Europe have. In addition you would have to sell an entire country on the idea and with countries like the United States, where many people have big problems with handouts, it would probably be a very hard topic to sell. In the long run I would probably expect the federal government to take a step back to see states be the ones who make the decisions.

Another huge problem with a basic universal income is where do you actually get the money to distribute to the public? One easy way is to tax the companies that are producing the goods in the territory of the people living there, but that might just force companies to move elsewhere. You could also put heavy sales tax on items , but that will just cause the price of the goods to go up and have the buyer eat the burden. Hopefully in the future what will end up happening is there are so many competitors and the cost to make the goods is so cheap that it will force goods to a point where anyone could afford them.

Perhaps one of the most overlooked problems a universal income might cause is that it gives human beings no purpose in life. Many people relate to their job as their purpose and those who don’t have one become lost. I could imagine a world where people just get high and do nothing all day because they simply don’t need to. Is this really living? There are many more important questions that would need to be addressed before such a drastic economic policy would be adopted, but I do think that at some point we will need to seriously look at adopting a basic universal income. What are your opinions?

Sort:  

✋️👋 you hit the majors ones in my opinion.

Where does it come from? As taxation is theft 😎

Additionally, it is completely possible that people would lack purpose and become depressed and/or more lazy. It's on them in the end, but we end up back to how we got the currency for the UBI in the first place?

I think in theory it would be great!!! Big party for all 🎉
Tell me where it would come from though. If it involves government and/or taxation it has already failed.

Peace ✌️

I agree with you completely, Taxation is Theft.

I think Crypto UBI has a place, I don't even think it necessarily even needs anything more complex than bitcoin.

The best way to growth the cryptocurrency space is to increase adoption.

You literally give away the crypto, I think you can even make the case for a selfish incentive to do so to increase adoption and value of the currency.

You build a system to fairly distribute a pot of money, and I think the money will come.

The hard part is preventing abuse:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoUBI/comments/2v2gi6/proof_of_identityproof_of_person_the_elephant_in/

Crypto has made a bunch of anarchist/libertarian leaning people much wealthier than they previously imagined, if the crypto community can voluntarily supplant and eventually replace the welfare state it will help us to destroy any and all justification for the warfare state that it is attached to.

I put a lot of thought and experimentation into this back before I got wary of reddit's censorship:

https://www.reddit.com/r/FairShare/top/

https://fair-share.github.io/#/about

https://www.reddit.com/r/FairShare/wiki/voluntarystatelessdistributed

I want to look into rebuilding this idea in Ethereum soon, but I will need to find a good oracle that can be trusted to limit signups somehow.

I like it.

As you say and with anything, the preventing abuse will be the hard part.
Can be worked out though. ;-)

It does meet the two criteria I made mention of.
It is not Government being voluntaryist/anrchist in nature.
And it is not happening/alive via taxation but via code and I imagine the work to make that coin/currency come into reality.

Open to it and interested in knowing more. I'll check out the reddit post. Thank you!

I am interested in helping with such a coin..... been considering such a thing myself to create... as well as other models in blockchain to help people... for instance charity service/good credits that are tradable among the homeless

Through the chattle bonds which are created when a citizen is born in any country which is supposed to go to infustructure but as we've seen it's been poorly spent other ways. All American citizens have what's called an exemption account associated with a chattle bond worth ten million and the individual is the trustee of that account. Thats why anytime someone gets any type of legal paperwork from the gov the name is in all capitals. Its referencing a different entity but because its under cannon law to move forward it only takes a reply instead of full disclosure by the petitioning party. Where as common law is more common sense, golden rule basically lol.

THere is no taxation. You are just voluntarily paying the amount that gets taxes today because you are a responsible person, aren't you?

If by voluntarily, you mean if we don't pay, large men with guns will come kill or cage you, then yes.

So in other words you don't.

How do magic streets in existence then?

Excuse me? So rather than have a debate you prefer to cast aspersions on me? Classy. Believe it or not, not ONE CENT of your federal income tax in the USA goes to building roads. It all goes to paying interest on the Federal Reserve Debt.

Excuse me?
I asked a question, you not really answered. I tried to quench out your meaning and then you start going around with one certain kind of tax in a far away country.
Why?

Why not instead of concentrate on the problem: If no one is paying for infrastructure, no infrastructure is build.

Actually you made a statement, one insinuating I don't contribute to society, THEN you asked a question...

I can not speak for your country, I can only speak for my own. Conversely systems of taxation are usually similar world wide, and I imagine your own system of taxation is largely focused around paying interest on money printed out of thin air.

To your point, you ASSUME no one will pay for roads... but guess what. Private industry has plenty of incentive to do so own its own. The government does not build roads, contractors do. Furthermore to my point, the majority of taxation simply goes to banks who have the privilege of printing money for nothing, NOT infrastructure.

It is ideal but hardly possible I'm my opinion. The upper class would be sacrifice too much from their point of view and not every rich person had a good heart of healing others. Some places even struggle to set up minimum wage, so universal basic income? Not gonna get enough vote from the upper class

Great idea and inspired blog! Can I resteem? @calaber24p

Most users here are happy to be resteemed, I don't think you need to ask :)

Don't need to ask ;-)

Great article and post, thanks for sharing.

Has anyone told you, you look like Bob Saget?.... Just saying

Another great post once again, thanks for sharing.

Thats SOCIALISM they will control what you eat where you live, what to drive..All aspects of your life will be controlled even worse then it is now!

Keynesian economics doesn't work, never has.

Too bad that it has (New Deal anyone? Saved the US and not least gave it hope), contrary to neolibs ideas (just look at Greece).

A band-aid on a bullet hole might slow down the bleeding, but that doesn't mean it is a fix.

Which is about as understandable as that Gold glitters only at the end of the rainbow.

Actually it makes perfect sense due to the laws of physics and biology. It is called a metaphor. In other words just because there was temporary relief does not make it a functional system.

You still have not explained what you mean with temporary relieve or what (dis)functional system you mean.

Well if you can not follow the simple flow of the comments here I am not sure I can help you.

Universal basic income = Marxism. Once the people depend on the government for survival, there is no freedom and defacto Communism, and no one will question the government for fear of getting cut off. Think about that before you cheer for your "free" stipend.

My solution is fairly simple ...
There is no shortage of work that needs to be done that machines cannot do ..reforestation .. Fish habitat .. Clean up everthing the thousands of old underground gas tanks .......you get the idea the things that are not done as there is no profit in it ..
Alter the monitary system to allow for this. There would be great long term benifit .. So it could be added each year to the countries gdp or how ever they would like to justify it...sorry for the typos on my phone and it is about ten letters behind my finger lol

Why you think machines cannot do this?

Machines are used even today for re (no: for new)forestation. In fucking China, not some high wage area!
Fish habitats... not fully automated, but hydroponics already has fairly automated processes, and tehr eare even plants involved, not only fish.

Yes we can automate these things to some point but with 80% of world fish stocks gone we are not doing a very good job ..
There are tons of unprofitable thi gs that need doing and need doing badly that are not ... It would solve the work problem and clean up the planet as it is a bit of a mess.

A lot of people in the US already DO lay around all day and get high, because that's what they want to do. There's actually not a thing actually wrong with that, except a large number of them are ODing, which makes the whole system (largely sponsored AND enforced by the pharma manufacturers (they directly fund a lot of police forces, and the major reason they're pushing Narcan so much is to keep their customer base from drying up due to attrition).
The fact is, HAVING to work just to survive pretty much short-circuits the value of civilization; animal life is restricted to such a paradigm because they do not have civilization (even the ones with sophisticated societies). That's the real end-value of automation (for humans; AI might evaluate it differently), it enables civilization's value to be realized.
Anyone who wants to, though, could pedal some power into the grid, or grow food, or paint, or teach, or haul trash, or... and they would ADD VALUE whatever they do.
We have the server-power to enable appropriate allocation and demand-balancing now.

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.30
TRX 0.12
JST 0.034
BTC 63750.99
ETH 3130.22
USDT 1.00
SBD 3.95