Capitalism?
Fascism?
Distributism?
Communism?
Capitalism with UBI?
Pic unrelated.
Capitalism?
Fascism?
Distributism?
Communism?
Capitalism with UBI?
Pic unrelated.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
I think Capitalism with a UBI will be the ultimate approach. The most difficult part will be restructuring the tax system, with whole industries automated there will have to be ways other than payroll to accumulate taxes to pay for UBI and/or education for new, relevant jobs.
>Capitalism with UBI
Many will disagree with me here, but if we don't do this or something similar, we will not have true capitalism, but rampant corporatism.
corporate nepotism
It won't happen.
>50s: robots will replace us soon
>60s: robots will replace us soon
>70s: robots will replace us soon
>80s: robots will replace us soon
>90s: robots will replace us soon
>00s: robots will replace us soon
>CURRENT DECADE: robots will replace us soon
Any day now, surely...
I agree my walloon friend
how can a robot replace me if I am already self sustaining in all ways?, food, water, energy.
On an abstract level it would work like nationalized resources where citizens get a check out of the profits. Since the corporations are eliminating not just payroll taxes, but the payrolls themselves, they will have more than enough money to make this turn around, if it's done with lots of guidance.
There are many factory jobs that were manned in the 50s that are automated today. Let alone what computers have done for accounting/calculation based jobs. And technology is out there on roads you could drive to where computers are fully responsible for driving cars. It's only moving so slowly because the stakes for fucking up are so high, and everybody playing knows the rules.
"replace me" refers to performing your job so well that you would no longer be required in the economy. It means nothing in regards to consumption or sufficiency.
It already is happening and did happen in many corporations. Sure they are not fully automated yet, but don't deny reality.
Fascism or Distributism most likely, capitalism will basically have to face the fault that central planning becomes feasible to some extent in limited domains with massive computational power, and also many industries or resources can be nationalized more efficiently than can be handled privately, although markets still work for the most part and need to be preserved.
And I mean, if you dont depend on the economy, I am talking survivalist primitivism. Even if robots take all jobs, you never depended of society either way
I think either distributism or fascism would be the best systems to replace laissez faire capitalism.
Now, UBI capitalism and communism can both function as replacements too, but I think they lack something critical. I don't think they take into account human psychological needs. I think the thing that will be in demand the most in the future is purpose, and I don't think UBI or communism is capable of supplying that.
>Tribalism
Only the strongest may automate.
That picture is improperly titled. It is not a tank. The Sturmgeshutz III was an assault gun, not a tank. There is a difference.
Delete the thread.
Correct. But if you are already self sufficient in that manner, and you don't have a job, then there is nothing for the robot to replace. Robot replacement is only ever considered in terms of economical positions, not creating citizens.
Is there anything in particular those centralized economies could offer that a well-informed set of priorities could not be accomplish via UBI? One of Capitalism's strengths is the free market of ideas, a concept utilized fully by our governments. When the levers of power are used to run businesses, rounding errors get amplified to profound effects, that aren't always understood well enough in time. The consumer innovation should be coming from the private sector, giving the government too much control of that encourages abuse.
>Pay no mind to the jobs gutted by automisation
Well, distributism and fascism both still keep economic power within the private sector, distributism merely makes sure that the property is distributed among the populace (but still remains private and not collectivized), whereas fascism merely demands that the private sector benefit the nation as a whole rather first and foremost.
UBI with something.
You will have a large portion of the population who are essentially professional food-eating air-breathers with no labor available. So they need to be taken care of or they'll rampage.
Another thing is that without a large population that are buying and consuming, mass production will be pointless since no one's buying.
UBI capitalism, some form of socialism, some form of benevolent fascism, or some mix. All I know for sure is, the ancaps probably don't have a plan for this situation.
>All I know for sure is, the ancaps probably don't have a plan for this situation
Ancaps have a very precarious situation, because if their system ever came about it would require not merely prosperity, but very high happiness constantly distributed among the populace to keep them from attempting to form a government.
Obviously communism. Marx described communism as the system of production that would emerge when capitalism had finished its technological maturation.
How can you see that he's a waloon?
I'm pretty sure Marx didn't predict Artificial Intelligence, and Communism is actually a rather outdated and suboptimal ideology for dealing with rising automation.
>they'll rampage
That's the whole point. They're instigating a civil war, WWIII, global warmign or any other man made catastrophy. This will result in a huge decline in human population.
The best system for automation if you know much about automation, is anticollectivism, which is kind of anarcho capitalism. The reason being is that all other systems would hinder themselves rather than push forward.
Whatever. The thing you call the mode of production that follows capitalism is communism.
artificial intelligence is a means of production, its also a good way to replace the price system for allocating consumer goods.
Calitalism is no different than communism. It gives the chance for a small group of people (the rich) to live more freely, but so did communism (with their party bureaucracy). Even the elites get pretty degenerated in the end because there is no long-term plan.
Islam.
tell me, if everyone loses their jobs due to robots making goods and doing services
who will buy the goods and services?
I mean, without this retarded UBI that the rich wont be paying because they run the government
And tax is paid for mainly by the working and middle classes
Thomas Jefferson's Farmer Philosopher ideals
Robots have replaced a ludicrous proportion of people in the manufacturing industry.
if economic ignorance was a commodity you guys would be the richest people in the world.
Distributism honestly seems like the "fairest" system out there, the only problem is I'm not sure if it would work as efficiently as capitalism.
what the fuck is UBI?
It wouldn't, thats the thing. Granted, automation would lessen this, but if you accept distributism then you also have to accept the fact that some things are going to get more expensive from the lack of economy of scale.
That being said, I don't know if there is an ideology out there that fulfills human psychological needs as much as distributism does.
"distributism", i.e. socialism, will never work. Why do so many cling to it in the face of history?
Automation leads to more jobs, not less. Automakers are a great example.
>the rich wont be paying because they run the government
The rich pay almost all the taxes in the U.S.
All the threads today suck hard.
you realize socialist economies have actaully existed, unlike, say, libertarian ones.
It's a form of "socialism" that avoids tragedy of the commons.
Universal Basic Income.
There's like two dozen ways of implementing it but the basics is pay every single person just above the poverty line.
Basically if such a large portion of society don't have jobs they can't consume, and when they cant consume, industries and thus countries fall apart at the seams, so to prop this up you give everyone enough money to keep the wheels running smoothly.
Practically every government is neoliberal these days though, and such a plan would require huge taxation, so it's not gonna happen until its too late in all likelyhood, if it happens at all.
hahahaha. And who belongs in that "highest quintile", what do they earn? and being the one who pays tax (and still earns more than the other quintiles) just means you have more power over society if that quintile decides to bail.
Thanks. Henry Ford made a point to pay his workers enough so they could buy a car. Seems like that was his way of solving this problem. So, either we pay people enough to live above the poverty line, or we give them UBI. Is that our choice here?
On the one hand, we have "raise the minimum wage" on the other, we have "government handouts."
Where is it written that nobody can be poor?
>you realize socialist economies have actaully existed,
They do, but they never last.
Canada was about to collapse before you found all the oil and nickel. You still can't field a viable army.
People came to believe socialism may work because of the Nordic countries...but they aren't capable of defending themselves because there was no money. If you can't defend yourself, you aren't a country, you're a Protectorate of a real country.
UBI will become mandatory, and it will have to go up every year in line with the economy. However, it will still allow for very vast wealth gaps. I think another mechanism might be needed to ensure some level of equality.
Capitalism with UBI
This way society would thrive. We could even implement it now.
Why did you add all that nonsense about Canada?
>And who belongs in that "highest quintile",
Before public employee unions in 1960, it was people who don't live for quitting time and a six-pack with friends. Even so, pols are a tiny minority of the rich.
>just means you have more power over society if that quintile decides to bail.
They can't bail. Where would they go? And even death doesn't save them because of the Death Tax.
A UBI won't last.
Ancient Rome taught that lesson, and America is learning it now. We've had a UBI since the 1960's, and all it gets you us is violence and a cycle of never-ending poverty.
>Why did you add all that nonsense about Canada?
Because it's true. Canadian money was a joke when I was a kid.
Google yourself up some old headlines from the beforetimes.
Just give everyone a dollar a month.
nothing you said is even remotely accurate, nor relevant to the subject about socialist economies. Canada has never been a socialist country, and it certainly has never had a socialist economy.
>So, either we pay people enough to live above the poverty line, or we give them UBI. Is that our choice here?
Pretty much. But the point of UBI is that there will come a point where automation will have the vast majority of the current workforce simply not being necessary, so even if companies paid enough, there simply wouldn't be enough positions available. Hence why you see people acting as if its some inevitability.
Either way though, corps are going to lose out. But the alternative is basically French Revolution: Global Edition.
It's a fucked up issue to be sure.
The loss of jobs have been being talked about since the cotton gin
Capitalism
And break up the corporations
Like we were supposed to do like 10 years ago
Fuck no. Capitalism is wasting our resources. UBI will make this worse! A meritocracy with AI oversee of the world's industry is the way to go. That and sovereign nations too.
>nothing you said is even remotely accurate,
Agreed. It's dead-on accurate.
If Norway didn't have the US protection, they'd have been conquered by the Sovs.
Canada did ok until the end of WW2. After that, you went socialist, and your armed forces are not adequate for your defense...except that your and our heavy manufacturing economies are so interdependent, that would probably save you even if we refused to defend you.
>nor relevant to the subject about socialist economies.
It's the heart of the subject. Socialism is not viable for any unit bigger than a household. Our pilgrims learned that in 1621.
>Canada has never been a socialist country
Fuck, you were just pretending to be retarded to troll me. Good one?
>And break up the corporations
>so we can all live like it's 1500 again. The good old days.
A baseline living wage with capitalism on top.
you're clearly some kind of very dumb child who thinks they're clever. i'm going to wait until you return to the topic and cease fantasizing about things that have nothing to do with the subject.
I'm not, he's joking that I just want free shit.
>I will call you a poopyhead and say you don't make sense.
Nice debate tactic.
You know I am correct, Mr. Socialist.
Own who you are and be proud, or work to change it. Denial doesn't help anyone.
>corporations took over the world in 1501
>heaven on earth ever since
like what was done with Bell you dope
There were always groups that acted like corporations.
In 1501 the CEO was called a King, and stockholders were called Nobility.
Outlaw corporations, and something else will take there place.
Humans always band together for their common good. At least corporations follow laws passed by their subjects.
Expansion onto other planets.
Bell Telephone? What's the connection?
Bell didn't go away. It just spawned.
Break up any corporation, and it just makes more. It's like government that way.
Any system needs to take into account both automation and that scarce resources will not just be given out for free.
Ideally all of the basics that would be paid for with a UBI should be automated/produced right at home and anything extra can be earned by the remaining work left and volunteering. A society where every time you leave through the front door is voluntary and not because you have to be somewhere.
None of the above
True answer:
Removal of anybody who will be a "burden" and just buy sneakers or beats headphones instead of food/rent
Then institute UBI
here read up on the modern economic history of your own country:
en.wikipedia.org
Fascism is the future
You never explained how Bell was related to anything.
Are you confusing a monopoly with a corporation?
Bell was a monopoly because no one else had the means to bring comms to rural Kansas. When competition was even possible, Bell was broken up.
Bell is a great example of how we became civilized because of corporations.
Ironically, we wouldn't be able to talk about corporations here with corporations.
Underrated, I think.
When we have a surplus of people no longer needed to do mindless industrial tasks, we can either kill them off with stupid wars, or find new problems to use these real assets for.
UBI is just going to be a welfare on steriods, pacifying a huge section of the population and keeping them on the edge of poverty. No hope of advancing and no chance to do anything of worth. imho, a horrible way for a person to 'live'.
ubi is just cultural standardization on the 99.9% vs the 0.1%, freezing it at the edge of misery for the most, just on the edge of stability vs revolution.
UBI is welfare.
The only difference is that there are supposedly minimum qualifications to get welfare, but anyone with an IQ above 10 can get around them, and lower than 10 will get them automatically.
Every generation thinks they've come up with something new, but it's all been done and discarded many times before.
Yeah break them up cunt.
You just had an autistic fit because of semantics.
A system where people help each other.