Many of you are aware I have been advocating the doing away of foodstamps, social security, unemployment benefits, disability benefits, and the rest of the rag bag of government programs. I'd like to replace it all with a universal basic income. The following video explains my motivation.





Watch it and tell us your thoughts.

It is an interesting idea. Because my phone is being screwy, I have trouble viewing video so I apologize if this is answered in video. Would inflation increase if the government pumped money into the economy through giving people money?

(January 21, 2015 at 10:00 am)Nope Wrote: Would inflation increase if the government pumped money into the economy through giving people money?

It would, yes. If there is more money to spend (whether created from thin air or redistributed via taxation) then more goods will be purchased and supply will decrease and prices will increase. The best outcome in this scenario would be that with increased demand there would be a need to increase supply, which would mean more businesses, more jobs, and more and more people earning a living instead of living off of the basic income.

Keynes called, he wants you to build an army of Orcs, and then he's coming back.

What would happen if most of humanity didn't have to do anything in order to produce wealth?
All wealth would be automated; maintenance of that automation would also be automated. Human intervention would be redundant...
There would be no work left for humans...
No work, means no jobs, no jobs means no income... no income means starvation and death. Or does it?
Machines would be supplying the world with food... virtually free food for all. Whether they get that food with the aid of food stamps or some basic income, is, ultimately, irrelevant, as long as they get access to the food.
Unless, the machines stopped producing food and, somehow prevented humans from producing their own food on the land that's available...
Would machines learn self-preservation, at the cost of human lives? Are present day machine programmers incorporating into their learning machines a sense of preservation of the humans that share the planet with them?
What would happen to the remaining fauna and flora in the planet, if machines found a way to get rid of humans? Why not all other living thing?
The planet would become populated with machines... what would they do?
Why would they go on working if no end consumer is there?
Food?... everything is dead.
Art and literature? can machines learn to appreciate art?
Can they realize the emergence of a new problem and react to it and solve it?
What would they use as a power source?

Could this be the next big mass extinction this planet will see?

The end is nigh!

Personally, I miss having to carry my clothes down to the river and beat the dirt out of them. I enjoyed marching into the woods with my bone axe and doing hours of chopping. The fact that most of my day is spent on entertainment and diversions, of which this forum is one example, and socialising is truly depressing. The fact that I have a standard of living that the wealthiest person 1000 years ago would envy makes me feel very bad. And as for living twice as long...the guilt, the guilt! I just hate all this modern technology...it has ruined an otherwise purposeful and productive life.

However, I would definitely stop at giving machines the right to vote.

(January 21, 2015 at 10:03 am)Tonus Wrote:

(January 21, 2015 at 10:00 am)Nope Wrote: Would inflation increase if the government pumped money into the economy through giving people money?

It would, yes. If there is more money to spend (whether created from thin air or redistributed via taxation) then more goods will be purchased and supply will decrease and prices will increase. The best outcome in this scenario would be that with increased demand there would be a need to increase supply, which would mean more businesses, more jobs, and more and more people earning a living instead of living off of the basic income.

You can print more money and not have inflation. The value of money comes from goods and services. If the amount of goods and services are growing faster than money is being printed, that dollar in your wallet will continue to be worth more even though the government is printing copious amounts of them.

---

(January 21, 2015 at 10:45 am)Animated Earth Wrote: The end is nigh!

Personally, I miss having to carry my clothes down to the river and beat the dirt out of them. I enjoyed marching into the woods with my bone axe and doing hours of chopping. The fact that most of my day is spent on entertainment and diversions, of which this forum is one example, and socialising is truly depressing. The fact that I have a standard of living that the wealthiest person 1000 years ago would envy makes me feel very bad. And as for living twice as long...the guilt, the guilt! I just hate all this modern technology...it has ruined an otherwise purposeful and productive life.

Without a universal basic income replacing a the rag bag of government programs, the system which will develop instead is one where the government tells you how much to spend on food, how much to spend on housing, how much to spend on utilities, etc. Your life will be managed by a robot social worker.

I actually like the idea of a universal income whereby everyone receives the same amount. Unfortunately, I cannot imagine the one percent, or the majority, agreeing to it because they are too greedy and want to maintain their lavish lifestyles.

(January 21, 2015 at 12:45 pm)Sionnach Wrote: I actually like the idea of a universal income whereby everyone receives the same amount. Unfortunately, I cannot imagine the one percent, or the majority, agreeing to it because they are too greedy and want to maintain their lavish lifestyles.

The way a universal income works is everyone gets a set amount, but you can still earn more. Implement a universal basic income right now and some people would sit at home and smoke pot all day. Others would work while there are still jobs. The ones who work would have more money than the ones who do not. There would still be rich people and poor people.

What a universal basic income does is give people control over their lives instead of having the government control it by issuing you food stamps and writing checks to your landlord, etc.

The universal basic income is an interesting idea - especially as we are moving to an economy which cannot create enough jobs for everyone.

But...you state this:
What a universal basic income does is give people control over their lives


and that presumes that everyone is capable of controlling their own lives.

That's a major assumption that needs significant research.


What do you do with the ones who blow the whole thing on gambling or booze in a month?