Universal Basic Income again

Those that move up the ladder will always depend on those who build their offices and homes. AI will never replace that.

 

Oh yes it can! Robots with AI would be better because they could build 24 hours a day.

 

The Universal Basic Income idea is a first step toward "equity" where everyone will receive the same income regardless of what they contribute to the economy.

Actually what equity really is about, is the distribution of goods based upon your loyalty to the state.

 

I want to see robots install a toilet or lay a brick. How 'bout wire electrical components in a house? Are they good at painting? Maybe it could be done, but no more custom buildings......just little boxes that all look the same.

I don't know a man made item does not breakdown. Sure 24 hrs a day for how long before they go to the shop where they must be diagnosed by another robot and then moved to another station where a robot does the repairs.....but all these robots break down as well. And there will be robots mining the materials to build the robots.

 

According to its proponents and its detractors, AI can do anything. As for the durability of robots, they have been doing repetitive tasks in factories for many years. They just don’t look like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

 

Okay, so the government take one dollar. It spends twenty-five cents on behalf of itself, and gives 75 cents to someone as UBI Agin, there is no net change.

 

...and this sounds like a good thing to you?

 

You are not considering the velocity of money and how that impacts inflation. Increasing the velocity of money increases inflationary pressure because it increases demand.

 

And you think that the scenario I described increases the velocity of money?

 

So there is a net loss of 25% of the money, for the government to take it with one hand, and give it back with the other. And, as always, there those who pay in versus those who receive.

It's called redistribution....

 

How did you come to that conclusion? I am opposed to equity. I support equality.

 

Not a net loss. The government would obviously spend it (on salaries, supplies, etc), so that 25 cents would also be returned to the economy.

 

Yes, and perhaps more importantly, it increases demand, thus leading to inflationary pressure.

 

Fair enough. I guess I misunderstood your meaning, which is precisely why I asked for clarification.

 

Call me crazy but I think people will migrate to the jobs available. I of course don't know how it will all shake out, but I'm pretty sure none of us are going to live to see a Star Trek-like "moneyless socialist utopia" with UBI so everyone can lounge around watching a tiny portion of the population work.

 

That's why I see trades to continue as ...trades for a long time. Even when we reach the point where a robot plumber is technologically possible, the price point for that is not going to make robot plumbers economical for a couple of generations.

 

MCSGA.....Make Common Sense Great Again!

 

Do you believe there will be enough trade jobs to accommodate the loss of over 1/3 of all jobs in this nation?

Really? That’s beyond delusional
Even if people want to work we likely will not have the jobs — I really hope I am wrong and you are right though.

I also don’t think a start trek society will ever exist with humans; greed, corruption and laziness are all but assurances that it will never happen.

I hope the inverse doesn’t happen where the very wealthy insulate themselves and the rest of the world just descend into squalor. I think Elysium is likely what’s going to happen (without the spaceships or happy ending).

 

Earlier in this thread you used the term "suddenly" as if we are all going to wake up one morning and those third of jobs will have just vanished. Like all of the other jobs we've lost over time...it will be over time.

Excluding your party's irrational immigration policies, the native birthrate is in negative territory, so all things considered, we would be on track to have a population number to match the jobs. But you guys don't want that so...

 

Then you guys should stop doing it.

 

Its only next gen that has a post scarcity society.

 

I have seen studies showing that jobs in the transportation sector will likely be impacted very quickly once the technology is there.

Truckers made a pretty good wage and that entire industry will be impacted as will taxi or ride sharing services. Not to mention the fear that vehicles will move to more of a luxury item than a necessity.

You obviously have no idea what my beliefs are and only highlight your own lack of a narrative by assuming such. Do you posses the capacity to not bring other posters into a discussion?

 

Another way is saying it is that the money will go to people who have a higher marginal propensity to consume. Wealthy people spend a lesser portion of their income on good and services. They save and invest more, which has a very important function in the economy.

 

If I get a UBI, I will be content making less money, which translates directly to me being content being less productive. Given that money is a representation of production, paying me to be less productive on a social scale only works if there's someone else who will be incentivized inversely to be more productive and essentially pick up my slack. How do you see that happening?

 

This makes no sense. It's as if you're trying to pull a "I know you are but what am I?" Did you even read the post?