Didn't dismiss it, we just disagree on what 'impact' means. I think it's gonna be great, you think it's gonna be shit. That's all.
Universal Basic Income
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Has this been successfully tried in some smaller state to see if it actually works?
Alaska apparently, from their oil money.
Yeah I forgot about the Alaskan dividend fund. Its not much but definitely better than nothing.
I don't think it will be shit at all. However, we need to plan for the inevitable impacts.
More efficient than childish. One image summed that interaction up so well.
fair enough mate.
Living there is hell a frozen hell so that state doesn’t count
It's not UBI, but I do receive SSDI checks valued at over $1100 a month and I can tell you it has helped out in tremendous ways. It's helped prevented me from being homeless and from starving, and now that I have a good paying job, it's helping me pay off my debts faster.
Universal basic income may be the future anyway, with AI getting smarter every year and eventually they will start taking peoples jobs to the point too many people will lose their jobs, unlikely in the past when technology took people’s jobs but at same time created new jobs now we have new technology who can be used to do every other task that doesn’t need creativity. Feeling worry about the millennials -including my kids.
Why I paid £50,000 for dinner with Theresa May and how robots are set to take ALL of our jobs
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...gpin-reveals-paid-50k-dinner-Theresa-May.html
https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money...gpin-reveals-paid-50k-dinner-Theresa-May.html
If automation is a real problem (which it is, I believe) wouldn't it make sense to reduce the number of days we work? For example, we could work 4 days per week only. Isn't that the goal of automation anyway? To reduce human workload so that we have more free time to enjoy life? Why nobody is talking about this?
Rather than UBI a complete Welfare program to provide a safety net for job losses coupled with Training Programs to transition to match Job Skills.
Those programs don't work, though. And what are you going to retrain truck drivers to do?
Companies will simply pay you for the time you work, unless there are some regulations/laws in the Country/state that changes this. The big problem is that in some Countries the workers have little power and rights, so when a company in these countries increase the degree of automation this will not mean that you will work less for roughly the same wage.... The company will simply reduce the number of employees, and increase profits/offer their products at a lower price. Then when these companies are able to produce and sell at a lower cost, they will outcompete their competition that are based in Countries that enforces the "same wage, less hours" principle. It is the same problem and reason for why many companies produce in Countries with lower wages.
Two main "solution" to the automationproblem:
1. Increase the company tax --> state uses money for universal basic income. (most likely, but many Countries will need to enforce "income generated in said Country must be taxed in said Country")
2. Government starts regulating the private business sector heavily --> less capitalism. Elements they might implement; "degree of automation tax"(can be implemented as part of increased company tax). less work same wage (not sustainable for many companies in businesses influenced by export/import), state "takes" control over most of the business market (Communism), increased importtax (keep the money in the country) etc.
Worst case scenario: The large economical Countries in the World (China, India, USA) lets automation run free, with no regulation.... Huge profits for certain big companies. Companies in the smaller Countries cannot compete with the big companies that can produce at a lower cost.... The big companies grows bigger, and the smaller companies either need to operate in niche markets or goes out of business (Same as we see today, but more extreme).
The world is fecked when automation, VR and extreme capitalism come around. At least if the kind of absolute fecktards we have in charge now are still going.
What are you talking about?
Specifics?
Are you saying someone who drives a truck is incapable of learning another Trade?
I'm asking you what jobs you propose moving them into. Your point is often brought up, and it's always related to coding, an unrealistic target. Half the time it's a lazy 'just retrain them' with no thought as to what you'd retrain them for, and the other half of the time it's 'retrain them in something valuable like coding' which requires academic study over a lengthy period of time in a highly competitive field of graduates, when the demographic you're talking about left school with poor results, or didn't like the academic environment and don't have the qualifications or don't want to go back to school given that they're in their 40's+ ergo making the proposal unrealistic.
Now you are being utterly lazy and lying.
I never said coding.You just made that shit up right?
But yes. They can be retrained. They are not imbeciles.
What stupid assumptions you are making about these people.
So people who drive trucks are at the bottom of the working ladder?
I know two Truck drivers well.
One can actually put together a computer. He does that as a hobby.
He simply hates a desk job.
The other one I can have a conversation about on politics or sports.
He voted Bernie for the caucus.
yes. he voted Trump in the GE because he could not stand Hillary.
this may be above your level of comprehension.
People most often do what they want to do.
People who do a job because they Have to never last long.
Listen to literally any conversation on this topic, this has been done to death, including having truck drivers themselves say the things that I said in my last post about their lack of qualifications, desire not to go back to school etc given their age and the length of time they've been away from anything academic.
The coders thing is literally mentioned over, and over, and over again when it comes to reeducating truck drivers, I didn't at any point say that you said it. I brought it up because it's literally the most common thing that gets mentioned when anyone brings up retraining as a resolution to automation.
Also a literal child can put together a computer, that isn't any great degree of skill. Not sure why you reacted so hysterically to be honest. Perhaps it's above your level of comprehension, given that I wrote in plain English what I meant by the coding thing, and at no point did I say that you said coding.
I also asked you a simple question, about what jobs you propose retraining them for so we can talk about whether it's feasible, because this is a common discussion that has happened many times, but you didn't answer. It's generally well understood that the kinds of jobs that are worth retraining people for, are academically above the level of lots of the kinds of jobs that are under the threat of automation (truck drivers, call center staff, retail staff etc).
One hundred years ago people used to work 7 days per week for whatever hours per day. Today the norm in western countries is 8 hours per day, 5 days per week, and anything above that is considered overtime. This is not true for everyone, but it is still true for a large part of the population. This happened because countries made a decision to change the laws. Theoretically, the same can happen in the future and we can switch to a 4-day work week.
(And no, we don't have "less capitalism" because we have a 5-day work week and not a 7-day work week!)
Now you are being completely disingenuous.
So someone else said coding so it must be the universal go to area for finding another job?
A simple google search can bring up alternative jobs a truck driver can do. Yes. they can be trained in these jobs.
But importantly you have not addressed this point.
Most people do what they want to do.They may not all like their employers or where they work. But they do what they are capable of doing..or they get fired.
Not being hysterical at all.
Just calling you out for supporting a view that you have, that has no basis whatsoever.
So a child can put together a Computer.
Pathetic response.
btw I don't buy into this All Truck Driver jobs are suddenly going away.
What happens when an industry begins to fade away. There is gradual transition.
I'm not against UBI. It is simply a dead end solution. All I am saying is we can strengthen Welfare programs which is a support against someone losing a house or going without food. And yes. Retraining in areas people are interested in.
There are always skills people can learn. No one but an imbecile is incapable of learning.
An imbecile cannot drive a truck.
You are here insulting Truck drivers and people who do similar jobs.
I can have a discussion with some who has differing views. But at least start with being honest.
Or we can try introducing a UBI and those people could work where, or do what they like?
UBI is a shot gun approach.
So an industry goes away and there is nothing else?
A strengthening of the Welfare program is the way to go.
Different administrations have systematically weakened welfare programs.
We need to reverse this trend.
So why haven't we? What does strengthening the welfare system entail? Giving out more money? More benefits? More taxes? Sounds similar...
Sometimes a shotgun is the perfect weapon. It's all good being against the idea of a UBI but you could say what you see as it's flaws? And how what your proposing fixes the flaws you see in a UBI?
Maybe a truck driver would prefer a UBI, so they can take up writing or become a personal trainer it whatever. Maybe that UBI will help them retrain as a coder in their own time. For me it isn't "is UBI a good thing?" ... It's "how the feck do we implement it properly and fairly?"
I'm out anyway but there's lots of info in this thread already. I agree with Zarl too on the point he was making, but I think you took it the wrong way...
Last edited:
I don't really know why you're twisting and turning this so many times, seemingly looking for a reason to be offended. I basically brought you up to speed on the discussion that's been happening globally on automation and you've decided to pretend like these are all my original thoughts and are all wrong, despite me just giving you the TLDR of what the discussion has centered around so I'll give you the benefit of doubt here and approach this from the position of you not knowing much about this ongoing debate and start again to clear up any misunderstanding.
Firstly, you are not the first person to bring up automation and retraining. This has been done many times, not only has it been brought up, it's been discussed quite extensively. As such, there's common things that people who advocate for retraining tend to say. The big one recently, is that because coders are in high demand, you can retrain truckers to be coders.
Please understand that this is not my idea, but rather the idea of those who favour retraining. It's been mentioned a lot, but it's unfeasible because the skills that it takes to become a coder are outside of the remits of those who are typically at risk of automation. Not to mention the sheer time it takes, the requirement for them to come from good schools with great scores, the competition amongst much younger, more intelligent and higher qualified candidates etc etc.
I mentioned coding, because it's the one that everybody who proposes retraining tends to go to, there are even global hashtags about coding because people who propose retraining keep mentioning it. I asked you if you meant coding, because that's always the one that people go to. I also gave you the option to say 'no, I mean jobs like this' so that we could discuss those, but you chose not to respond, and instead get all huffy and insulted. If you can propose some jobs here that you think you could retrain people into, then please name them so we can discuss it as a feasible option. You simply cannot post something like 'retrain them in areas they're interested in'. This is a nothing statement, you need facts in front of you about the areas that are not at risk of automation, that's worth retraining people to move them into, and the requirements that those jobs have and whether it's feasible to retrain them to do that. You also need to understand that the sheer number of people that are at risk of automation, outweigh the number of available jobs in desirable fields that they're already not qualified enough to get into. You don't seem to have researched much into the issue, looked at any numbers to see how many people it affects in how many different sectors to understand the scope of how difficult it is going to be to retrain them. You cannot magic jobs out of thin air to move these millions of displaced people into.
Lastly, you were the one that held up the fact that your friends can build computers, as some kind of qualifier of their skill level or intelligence, which is ironic because building a computer requires neither of these things, it's literally just plugging bits in and connecting cables. It's something that children literally can, and often do when they get into gaming. So my reply isn't pathetic, it's a fact. The fact that you held it up as some kind of measure of intelligence was flawed to begin with. It's something that takes very little knowledge or skill to do, with a million YouTube videos showing a novice how to do it in 5 minutes.
What's important is meaningful figures. If we stick with truckers, the average trucker is 49-55 years old and has been out of the academic system for over 30 years. Not only that, but the average trucker is educated to only high school level. Therefore you need to be realistic about the types of jobs that you want to retrain them into, and you need to be realistic about whether the average candidate is going to be able to achieve a qualification high enough to give them a realistic chance in that field. And it needs to be a field that isn't at risk of automation, so that we're not wasting everybody's time.
If you can do that, you'll be ahead of most people trying to work on this serious problem.
Last edited:
Magic word.
Taxes.
The fact is the middle class pays enough taxes. Except it is being given back to the top ...as cuts...instead of being invested back. You call it More benefits. I call it reinvestment.
Not against UBI as I said. But it is temporary at best.
Whether it is a truck driver or any other person who lost his job they want to work. It could be anything. A proper program will help that person find his or her way back that best fits.
We need to look at countries where it works.
I already pointed out the main problems with UBI in the US. Without a strong social safety net I don't see the incentives lining up for UBI to improve anyone's lives because there is not enough protection from a social safety net and regulations aren't designed to prevent price gouging that every greedy corporation is going to be after with a UBI.
UBI won't mean shit to the hundreds of thousands going bankrupt by medical expenses. And when so much of the US is built on corporatism there is no way the unrealisitc Andrew Yang argument (if everyone charges 10 for a burger someone will charge five and "win" against the competition) will actually happen. You have massive industries where idealized competition won't affect prices - utilities, telecoms, big pharma with their patent protection, etc - and without a social safety net the UBI is just going to be seen as a massive cash grab for selfish businessmen who are going to use everything from planned obsolescence to lobbying to get at that free cash. Banks will start increasing fees for everything (that always hit the poorest the hardest), entertainment companies will jack up prices on everything, all the monopolized industries like utilities and telecoms will develop new payment schemes to increase prices. Big pharma will create new payment schemes to gauge people who need/want medicine etc.
I firmly believe any country absolutely needs a strong social safety net (universal health care, consumer protection, regulations on finance, green new deal) before a UBI becomes a desirable and feasible option.
One of the ways you could deal with AI/Automation is to reduce the number of days people work by incentivizing people to work 2-3 days a week. This could be done through having tax bracket where you suddenly pay a huge amount of tax on any income over a certain level. For example if your income up to 25-30k is taxed at 0% and anything above that is taxed at 50% than a lot of people would probably just work enough to earn 25-30k. I'm currently in a similar position because I moved to a new country to pursue a degree and after completion of my studies I'm struggling to find a job in my field of study because basically I changed my major to do a masters degree in IT after doing generic business undergrad degree. I find that I'm not adequately skilled to find a job in IT and currently work part time in Retail. I find that I'm really unmotivated to pick up extra shifts or work full time in retail because my part time wages fall mostly on tax free threshhold whereas I'd be paying 20% taxes on any extra money I make doing extra shifts. Most people wouldn't go part time at that level because it's a reasonable amount and my expenses are really low because I'm single but increase the tax free threshhold and make the tax rate 40-50% than people would definitely start going part time. This plan would however drastically reduce the income tax revenue for the government.
Why would anyone want to incentivize people to work less?
Working sucks man
For how the majority of people feel about their jobs, that is probably a true statement. Hence, there should be no need to incentivize people to work less.
That's definitely not true. It sounds all well and good in principle, but I work with people now who push through the 40K tax bracket and still want to earn more and more despite being taxed through the eyeballs on it. It's just the way of the world, that if you give people the opportunity to earn more money they will likely take that opportunity
Yes, I have read this and it's a great book, I recommend it. It says that for the protestants salvation comes through work, and this has helped establish capitalism. However, this book was written in 1905, and today most people are not motivated by religion any more.
By the way, the 8-hour work day was not easily adopted, either. A lot of people had been trying for many years (strikes, demonstrations, etc):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day
Last edited:
All fair points but I live in the UK so I'm looking at it in that context. I see you and @Red Dreams are looking at it from a US perspective... Can't help you there.
What? So truck drivers are dribbling halfwits who can't do anything else? I quit truck driving and moved Into i.t, I'm no smarter than anyone else.
Feel free to answer the question with suggestions? Your anecdotal experience doesn't combat the average statistics and even the words of truckers themselves who are worried about the situation and as I said above, this is not my opinion that I just pulled out of nowhere, but the actual argument that's being had by those at the top who are discussing the issue. If you have an issue with their statements and statistics, feel free to refute them.
Last edited:
Anyone can be retrained, apologies if I mistook your meaning, but all that's required to retrain are resources and a will to do it.