One could argue that 2 + 3 = 6. Yet, an argument 10,000 pages long will not make a stronger case for this faulty equation. I think we all know what you are arguing. We know what you mean. What you mean is just rubbish. Words will not help your case.
My last meme sums it up pretty perfectly. If you don’t get that then it’s obvious what you’re missing.
My dear boy, I hope you understand this is not as simple as 2+3 = 7. In my opinion, you are not understanding nothing what I have said so far. You are just indoctrinated in a way that you can’t see any further than your Tv show or your twitter account. The problem here is that the long-term sustainability of humanity is not granted under the current socio-economic structure/model. I’m 100% sure of that. You are just blind living your short-term and thinking nothing but only to follow the others.
The other big problem right now is that there are billion of people that live in poverty and extreme poverty. Scarcity is just an illusion created to control people’s real freedom. I know you believe your are free, however you are not, buddy.The current model creates so much scarcity that it has already pierced in the bones of the people.
Black Swan (CFA Charterholder) believes fervently that long-term scarcity will be the main driver for long-term innovation. Up to this level we have arrived…
Still not the point I made at the end.
I honestly don’t get it.
I will try to interpret the best I can.
“If I had wheels” means that If I were/had something I could never have because I’m human and humans can have wheels…, then I would the thing related to it (“the wagon”), but it just impossible because its a none sense. Am I right?
I have not asked none of you yet to provide a model that would grant long-term sustainability of humanity. Nor none of you have wanted to do it or could. Two explanations arise then: 1) you just know any shet how, or 2) you are all little fegs that can’t stand on an idea without feeling your chicken legs trembling.
More or less.
Point is, it will never work because nobody wants it to work. Don’t believe me, look at this convo. You need the rich countries to agree to charity or else the whole system doesn’t work. Rich countries will never agree because they like having a disproportionate (inefficient for the rest of the world) share of the resources. End of story. The rest is just a stoner talking about world peace.
So when you keep saying “if this and if that” you’re just uttering nonsense that has no basis in reality, and if I had wheels, I’d be a wagon.
With all due respect, but I will disagree with this. You should better rewrite it as “Nobody wants to work on something they don’t like”. Believe me when I tell you that there are a lot of people that love to work… to work on things they like and feel are meaningful for their lives at least.
Have you ever heard the phrase “For the love of art” or “for the art’s sake”? Well, this is it.
I’m 100% sure you love to work. Just don’t lie 
You are interpreting reality from a point of view of “I don’t think our government would like that” or “I don’t think my president will allow that”. Come on man, please, this is what we have been talking about all day. The people decide, not the government.
It’s true and likely the government would not accept this model, but because the people itself didn’t want it, not because the government didn’t want.
The challenge is that the people should recognize that their environment is not long-term sustainable. When will this happen? When every little chicken is in the problem of lose life if don’t change… so bad right?
We, at least today, should start recognizing and stop bragging about a model that is destined to fail (by blood or not). I’m so sorry, but it’s true.
That first sentence was a typo. I meant “because nobody wants IT to work.”
As far as the rest I’m not putting this on the government. I’m saying the country as a whole does not want your system. Nobody cares if India starves, at least not enough to give up their outsized portion of the pie and without the wealthy nations joining in it’s just stupid ramblings. The model will never fail because the rich can happily continue to hold their asymmetry and the rest can just deal with it. Nobody cares if half the population starves to death if it means they can maintain their share of the resources. The reason the system exists is because everyone who has a larger slice wants to keep it that way. Welcome to reality.
Horriblegaffe, are you a bot dispatched on AF for the amusement of its programmers?
Please provide the source for the $36k number. I was not aware Canada has a UBI, as I believe they are still looking at pilot programs. I don’t know though, so please educate me.
A situation where 90% of people do not work because of automation is pretty different from any existing models. I assumed that UBI would extend to children since they are people and it is universal, but if it does not then obviously people on a subsistence income are not going to have tons of expensive kids. If automation gets to a place where the means of production are such that there is a resource surplus without the need to work, that is a very different situation than 10% of people being on public assistance.
So I just asked someone making around 40k per year what she thought of a 5k universal income. Average GDP per capital in the us is 55k so technically she under contributing to society. Anyways, her instinctual response was how was it going to be paid? I said taxes from the rich redistributed to the poor. She immediately equated the poor with rapists, drug dealers, and minorities. And the rich as herself. Pretty interesting response imo. But I guess bs has a point. People are truly against it in the us.
Yeah I find it interesting. I haven’t spent much time in Scandinavia, but it’s amazing the misperceptions people have about that sort of system here in the US. But it’s also interesting the misperceptions they have about capitalism in America.
Ive always thought of redistribution of my capital to those less fortunate than me a fee that I pay, so that I am not murdered and my things taken. I find it interesting that when people have more and more they dont seem to realize their taxes go into a society, and that if that society breaks down the masses will surely kill them first.
I suppose that logic no longer works when you have designed the laws to protect the rich at the expense of the poor and the police will serve you better. Alas, thats how I have always thought of taxes and I certainly dont cry and throw darts at a dart board with government agencies when doing my taxes
I’ve not read the whole thread but has anyone put forward another solution for hows things would work when a huge % of current employment is wiped out by AI?
Clearly it would never work worldwide but it could work in small countries, I’d have no issue with it in my country that has a population of 4m.
I don’t think most wealthy people are against some form of taxation as it clearly goes to pay for the society that supports you. Nor do I think most are against some form of outright wealth redistribution. It’s when the government overreaches with taxes, spending frivolously and/or the masses adopt the idea of “eating the rich” as a means to make their lives better is when we have problems. Look up Tragedy of the Commons.
Probably one of the better examples of this is rent control; it helps the current inhabitants immediately, but destroys value and creates scarcity of housing over the mid-to-long term. Politicians jump on board because they appear to be helping the little guy. This was one of the foreign ministers of Vietnam back in the late 80s: “The Americans couldn’t destroy Hanoi, but we have destroyed our city by very low rents. We realized it was stupid and that we must change policy.”
agree, but we got to put the current situation in perspective. There’s huge evidence that wealth inequality is becoming immense if we look at history since WW2 (read thomas piketty’s book). Meanwhile, the maximum marginal tax rate is way lower than what it use to be in the golden era of capitalism (1945-1975). The 1950 top federal tax rate on regular income was 84.36%.
Nobody’s talking about eating the rich, there’s just a limit to the amount of wealth inequality a society can tolerate before the common people start rebelling and start voting for extremist that may plunge the world in chaos. It’s doesn’t even matter if the rich deserve their money or not, the people won’t care.
the 36k number is not in stone. just something i looked up one time.
i’ll break it down the best i can.
CCB: $6,400 per kid so $12,800/yr
OCB: $1,350 per kid so $2,700/yr
OTB: $1,600/yr
GST Rebate: $850/yr
Ontario Works (welfare, 2 kids): $14,500.
the total in this scenario is $32,450 after-tax. i may be forgetting some of the smaller boutique benefits for low income folks, particularly as they relate to ontario works. if you get into subsidized housing the number will be higher. every additional kid brings in another $8,300 after-tax per year. if that is not an incentive, i don’t know what is.
you’d get more if you’re a single parent. also, if you get a low paying job, you only lose some of your ontario works benefits, don’t pay any tax and you get subsidized daycare up to $400/month (i think) with two kids.
I think that is basically every ones argument for UBI. Automation has destroyed manufacturing in america more than offshoring, even if trump could bring back manufacturing the amount of jobs would be severely smaller and most of those would be engineering jobs which arent exactly the people who are hurting and he wants to help anyway.
A lot of very smart people have basically admitted UBI will have to happen due to the fact that AI is only going to get smarter and smarter (and even your one of a kind difficult job will likely be able to be recreated) so it will become a bigger and bigger problem. The real question is when/how is it implemented. When do we start? At what level? I assume like most things when it starts impacting college educated white folk itll start to gain more traction, which is a shame for the working class & rust belt folks who are going to be in a bind until we get there.
Glad to see states like NY taking measures like they are with this free education for under 125k a year families at state universities. Certainly will provide some affordability and a path to a better life for many. Im interested in UBI as its an interesting thought experiment, but in the short term funding education at the lower and higher levels seems like the best bet to drive american growth