Basic Income

>Basic Income

Will this complete and utter meme ever die, or will it continue to live merely because 15 year olds everywhere cannot stop discussing it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM
anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Wait a minute...Are you telling me that people want to take the money of people who actually wasted their private life to study and work extremely hard at gunpoint and then give it to lazy people? And this is bad how exactly?

Give us a good century and a basic income will be all you'll be able to get because you sure as well won't find a job.

If housing was cheap (e.g. most of the economic rent was eliminated and houses were prefabs or the like), the basic income wouldn't have to be high.

But the degeneracy that would ensue would be difficult to deal with. People would still find ways to busy themselves and get some extra money, but it would probably mostly be prostitution and crime.

It will never work. Per capita GPD is actually a good measurement of the average salary of a country, so to give everyone a basic income in par with the average salary of a nation you would need to tax all wealth produced 100%.

Not that I agree with welfare either, but according to the liberals of ontario (who are under 6 criminal investigations) eliminating the bureaucracy involved in doling out welfare to the "appropriate" recipients will actually make it so that taxes aren't raised. Meanwhile they are planning on raising HST to 15% from 13%. Hard to believe them honestly, sounds like bullshit to me. Any fellow Ontarians have any input?

>automation leads to universal unemployment
Another great meme.

>automation leads to universal unemployment

Capitalism is already on life support. Most of the jobs are make-work service industry jobs that exist only because of the government and the financial system.

I think the infinite economic growth is a meme. It's not just a matter of resources, it's a matter of reaching the limits of human potential at the small scale. It's not just labour-intensive jobs that get automated. AI is going to replace people too.

There is ZERO way in hell everybody can be still useful once they have been surpassed at everything they can do by robots, including intellectual and "social" jobs (robots will become good at that too). It makes no sense. It only takes a small fraction of the population to develop and maintain the robots, and only a small fraction of the population is smart enough to be good at it.

I hope they bring back the manufacturing jobs, but they real purpose behind that is probably to automate them. Hopefully we will have figured things out before then.

fpbp

>Capitalism is already on life support.

Haha oh wow

What other system will work when automation and self-service takes over? A UBI would be able to replace the welfare system in its entirety and would work perfectly to replace craft based wages.

I love how the undertone of your stance is technology is bad and productivity is bad.

Well, Marx's theory was based on real labor, so the Marxists need to bring back manufacturing.

Then they can rise up.

>m-muh incentive to work

Why basic income? Why not just abolish all taxes? Taxes for existing is the reason we all need to have jobs.

youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM

What's wrong with modern SSI? Besides it takes forever to get, I think it works fine for those unable to work.

If you can work, fuck you, ask your sister if you can live there or something.

No you keep bringing it up.

Read Economics in One Lesson by Hazlitt. It will explain to you why you are wrong.

>technology is bad and productivity is bad
I don't think that. But we will have to be enlightened enough for it.
Personally I think the protection/restauration of the environment and the colonization of space could be good ways to channel the excess industrial capacity and inspire people and keep them busy.
It's either that or wars and mass extermination I'm afraid.

What do you define as economic growth?

>impliying poverty has to do with money

poverty is not an economic issue, it's a sociological issue.

if you give "basic income" to people they will feel even worse than poor; they will feel miserable.

>future technological progress will certainly do what all past technological progress has not done at all

The "party of science", ladies and gents

It's strange, because eventually everything will be able to be taken care of by robots, but how do we get to there from here?

There will eventually be one last thing to automate. Everything else in life is taken care of. So what's the incentive to work and create that one last thing when you would never receive anything for it? Fame? Because you're bored?

It was suggested to Johnson, but instead we got a "great society" and niggers who will be voting democrat for the next 100 years.

Laissez faire > UBI > welfare state

That meme comes and go just like 3d in movies. There was talks about it here in Canada in the 30s, 80s and 2016.

It would work just fine, the problem is that basic income and mass uncontrolled immigration are mutually exclusive.

>Will this complete and utter meme ever die, or will it continue to live merely because 15 year olds everywhere cannot stop discussing it?
It's communism lite.

They wont stop falling for it because its an attractive idea that requires a bit of critical thought to realize that it sucks shit.

>What do you define as economic growth?

Increased productivity per-capita. Though in a service-based economy, "productivity" seems like a slightly nebulous concept to me because I believe a lot of the work is artificially created by our bureaucracy, giant financial sector, and culture to some extent.

I'm sure I'm not as well versed in economics as you are (probably far from it). But I think that there are things that are about to change that are so fundamental to our society that some of the basic premises are going to become incorrect.

I do respect economics and people that understand it, but I have never seen a convincing explanation of how the current system could go on once most people cannot compete with robots and IAs in way at all (including the jobs of building and maintaining the robots). It's the humans that have needs and wants, not the robots.

>technology has never displaced workers on a large scale and far more advanced technology certainly won't do this either

We will be in a post scarcity economy before the end of the next decade if politicians and neo-luddites don't hold back progress.

Yeah, we're almost there!

But the most effective way to hold back progress is to give people legitimate reasons to fear it.

UBI before too many people are unemployed, create and protect jobs as long as they don't obstruct technological progress too much, fight off degeneracy.

We can get there, but I think the lolbertarians are the worst to see us through.

Take any concept, no matter how stupid, and give it a name, and you will have believers.

it'll be used to prevent the masses from resorting to crime, the lesser evil

You know UBI is the ultimate r-strategist ploy, right? Not exactly something to be proud of.

anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/

Resources are not free.

...

It won't die because it may become the only solution to the jobless future that technology/automation will create.

It's a meme now but in the future when robots take away all the jobs it's the only way for the populace to survive.