Automated Economy Explained: Mechanics of a Basic Income
And this is why we need to decentralize. A centralized Internet and technical ecosystem will make a fully open accessible automated economy impossible. Wikipedia is only possible because it's on the Internet and anyone can contribute to it. Google or Microsoft could offer a DVD with encyclopedia but it's not as accessible.
All humans should be owners rather than workers. Bots can become the workers. It is practical to build this today and why not give it our best attempt?
Politician's greed can invent all kinds of schemes....
I kind of like the obvious placement of the needless middleman in the video.
As usual ignores the biggest issue with the system. You would have to tax an economy by like 70%. This would never work, all the smart kids would leave and all the value would leave the country as well.
Robots who live off electricity are supposed to care about paying 70% of the taxes while we humans live like royalty? Program them differently and avoid that?
You're assuming only the human being can do labor which is a false assumption. Humans don't like paying taxes because humans have to trade time for income. If humans can get income without having to trade time for it then it is measurably superior.
In the video it is assumed that few people will own business that would get taxed. These businesses would simply move out of the county. Everyone would become poor and the country with UBI would eventually become 3rd world country.
Another way to look at 70% tax is that it desteoys productivity which leads to the same end result.
Quite unlike the roman system that had other ways of keeping overall productivity high.
If you want UBI u cant use taxes for it.
The video assumes we will all own businesses. Honestly it could play out in many different ways depending on if AI is centralized or decentralized but no matter how it plays out the fact is that humans have to get income from somewhere or the economy will collapse.
Productivity isn't rising because of humans working longer hours or working better. It's AI and automation raising productivity. So putting the incentive to raise automation should in theory raise productivity.
You assume the amount of labor to run society is infinite? It is finite. This means after a certain point having more human labor isn't important. It means there will be children born who will just not be in demand in the market if it's a traditional market as we know it. At the same time AI, robots, etc, will become much more cost efficient, productive, and valuable. Humans simply will be able to own automated businesses.
So tell me why we shouldn't all own automated businesses? Tell me why you would rather be an employee than an owner? Even if the tax on automation were 70% it wouldn't hurt you or me if we both own shares in the automated company. Our income is relative to the economy and the income of others and the number we settle on is just the number necessary to meet the cost of living.
No the video assumes few have businesses.
U also misunderstand the tax effect. It destroys productivity. Its irrelevant where the productivity comes from a 70% tax kills 70% of it. As a result everyone gets poor because other countries wont have that tax.
Rich people will move and so will all productivity leaving a countey with a bunch of useless lazy people.
Robots don't lose productivity due to taxes. Robots love paying taxes and working at the cost of electricity. Why are you applying human emotions to robots?
Rich people will own more robots than poor people. There will always be people who own more shares than you. The point is not you, or me, or any of us would have to trade time for income unless we really want to.
Worrying about what rich people will do is irrelevant. Would you rather have less time and happiness so rich people don't move? I don't even think it matters where rich people are because robots can be built anywhere or even operate completely in cyberspace bringing profits to whomever owns them.
You are focused too much on what other people are doing.
what's the minimum viable size?
It appears as though a thorough integration of Kartik Gada's ATOM/DUES proposal is lacking in this presentation: http://atom.singularity2050.com/