Hey /pol/, are you falling for the Communists subversive tactics?
Everyday:
>"hurr durr Basic Income is the future!"
>"hurr durr automation will eliminate all of our jobs! We need a Basic Income"
>"hurr durr have you seen the Humans Need Not Apply video?! Basic Income when?!"
Don't let them fool you and deceive you, /pol/. Now and then, they change the words but it's always the same thing. Communism in disguise.
You know who's behind this latest push. Communism is, was, and always will be the biggest threat to America.
Don't be fooled, /pol/. Please. I beg you. Think. Don't be fooled by their propaganda and lies.
oh I'm way past that anon
Way past
Now I create my own propaganda
watch out, zuckerberg
I know better because
>I'm in a labor union
>Our work will never be automated nor as affordable
I work hard for my shitty wages, but I'm glad to do it anyway and hate seeing people get free shit.
I hate the automation argument. It'll be decades if not centuries before robots replace all jobs.
I did notice the basic income thing seems to be mentioned a lot more recently.
Good, it makes sense and with how paranoid the US is about socialism we'll be protected from experimenting with it too early before anything is automated enough yet.
It's good that people are talking about it now, so that there's time for people to gradually get more used to the idea.
>>75059120
Capitalism: a system based around combining natural and human resources with capital to produce profits. Owners of the capital are naturally able to reap the most benefits; the human resources are in a very poor bargaining position from a game theory standpoint and thus unable to negotiate effectively.
Automation comes along, making capital many orders of magnitude more effective. Human resources now in an even shittier bargaining position when they're even needed at all.
>this is supposed to be a sustainable and acceptable endgame for those not in control of the capital.
It's not a commie plot. Basic income is a crutch to keep capitalists in the drivers seat.
>>75059120
I'll agree to MBI as long as they give up all other taxes in return.
A basic Income would be better than welfare though wouldn't it? It would better incentivize work and stop subsidizing minimum wage jobs?
We are also no where near the technology to drive unemployment sky high. The main problem is that technology is growing at a faster rate than the economy self corrects so people will be out of work while they look for jobs and the rich hire more maids and butlers. Needing a basic income would say that they is literally nothing that some humans can do to provide benefit to any other human with money.
Basic income will only work in 99% white small countries with small governments.
>>75060604
>It's good that people are talking about it now, so that there's time for people to gradually get more used to the idea.
Get out, Commie.
>>75060796
At least with welfare you have to show up and say, "help me"
Basic income is like getting an allowance as a child. I didn't even get an allowance if I didn't do chores.
>>75060661
>It's not a commie plot. Basic income is a crutch to keep capitalists in the drivers seat.
It is a Commie plot. You're being fooled.
>>75059120
>muh comoonism
Choke on a dick, faggot. It's better than seeing beggers and suffering everywhere
>>75060440
>all jobs.
I can't tell if this is b8 or if you're genuinely retarded.
>>75060796
Basic Income won't work because most poor people are stupid and wasteful. Expect that money to be wasted on crap like smartphones and shoes instead of being spent wisely.
>>75060970
Even commies were told you didn't get to eat if you didn't help work.
Basic income is more in line with the big banks who get free money from the Federal Reserve to pretend to be solvent.
>>75061007
He's an American he wouldn't understand.
This shit is all over the place. It's absurd. Every time somebody says the word "robot" there's someone right behind him to say that we need UBI.
It's liberal smugness to the max, because their position assumes that the only possible point of disagreement is that you are a fat-cat business owner that loves exploitation.
>>75061007
Communism creates beggars and suffering.
>>75061007
>Choke on a dick, faggot.
The only faggot in this exchange is you.
>It's better than seeing beggers and suffering everywhere
Right. "Hurr durr we can't have beggars and sufferers! It's unfair! Let's all beg and suffer!"
>>75060835
I don't think so. That argument makes sense for a large welfare state, where bigger and more fragmented countries put more strain on the system. But if we're talking about UBI where everyone is treated the same and gets the same amount, why would it make a difference if the country is big or small, or white or not?
>>75060901
What are you, some old geezer still spooked by the cold war? Communism is dead. Nobody gives a fuck about communism anymore. The fact that even Russia and China aren't communist anymore should be a clue. We'll have plenty of problems to deal with without resurrecting imaginary old ones.
>>75061103
Any professional beggar makes a pretty good living. Many people opt out of real life because it's easier.
The mental cases who can't even beg properly are the ones in need of a social safety net, and you generally have to go find their hangouts to see them.
>>75061228
>>75061177
>>75061161
>>75061085
>>75061050
>>75060924
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pwc7dJiXjlk
>>75059120
Reasons I like it
>we fire fucking 90% of the government employees pushing paper
>all "benefits" programs shut down
>americans benefit from america doing well, people will vote in favor of things that make america more money because they want money too.
>people who whine about "muh benefits" will need to learn to balance a fucking budget, eat cheaply, and live cheaply if they don't want to work
>artists are free to art, and can't whine about being a starving artist, and people will feel more free to take the risk to create art.
Reasons I hate it
>if people can vote how much they get, they are gonna inflate the fuck out of our dollar.
Lock it in at 50% of money taken in by taxes is evenly split amongst all citizens.
>>75061259
>What are you, some old geezer still spooked by the cold war? Communism is dead. Nobody gives a fuck about communism anymore. The fact that even Russia and China aren't communist anymore should be a clue. We'll have plenty of problems to deal with without resurrecting imaginary old ones.
Found the subversive Jew. Communism never died. It just went underground and changed tactics. The quicker you grow up and realize that, the better off we'll be.
>>75061353
>Lock it in at 50% of money taken in by taxes is evenly split amongst all citizens.
Lock it in at the interest on the national debt goes to fund government gibs instead of felating Rothschild dick.
And then set up state and local banks the same way as well to ensure competition.
>>75061316
lol. Well God damn, this no name faggot convinced me.
God damn, Britain is retarded.
>>75061316
A better option is negative income tax. That way, people who are working are getting more money back. People who refuse to work get nothing and die from hunger, exactly like they deserve.
>>75060440
It only gets worse as it goes on. Adidas has moved to full automation of their production of shoes. This puts thousands of workers out of jobs who only have skills to do jobs that are going to continue being replaced by robots. Then in 20 years you've got millions of angry starving poor people.
>>75061639
>Then in 20 years you've got millions of angry starving poor people.
Hopefully they succumb to the hunger. They won't be missed.
>>75061639
Will the black people revolt about racist lack of black employment like they did to Nike?
>>75061639
Marxist kike shill go back to r/fullcommunism
>>75061353
>Reasons I like it
>>we fire fucking 90% of the government employees pushing paper
Yes, we'll never need government employees ever again.
>>all "benefits" programs shut down
Silly, anon.
>>americans benefit from america doing well, people will vote in favor of things that make america more money because they want money too.
I'll take "things that will never happen" for $1000, Alex.
>>people who whine about "muh benefits" will need to learn to balance a fucking budget, eat cheaply, and live cheaply if they don't want to work
I'll take "things that will never happen" for $1million, Alex.
>>artists are free to art, and can't whine about being a starving artist, and people will feel more free to take the risk to create art.
Great. More vagina paintings. Fucking awesome.
>>75061438
>Communism never died
It's still alive in Best Korea, but not really anywhere else
>>75061438
If you can't tell the difference between something like UBI and having the state (or the "people" or whatever) own all the capital and means of production, I don't know what to tell you.
Communism is shit because it requires a huge oppressive state to manage it. A UBI would actually allow a much smaller state than what we have now with complicated welfare schemes.
>>75061760
>tfw little kid
>mom takes you to the Gutenberg Museum
>yay fun field trip with mom
>this place is really neat
...
>actual huge vagina sculpture with extensive placard explaining that it's a huge vagina
Fucking Jews man.
>>75060970
>a non-argument
not an argument
>>75061718
Jesus, did poor people touch you when you were a child?
>>75061879
"Post scarcity" is a communist idea promoted by marxist kikes such as Ray Kurzweil and Jacque Fresco (Venus Project)
>>75061736
I'm not for basic income. I'm saying we've got to have a plan to handle millions of angry poor people before they revolt
>>75061760
>tfw fully grown adult
>mom comes to visit
>hey let me show you the local art museum
...
>huge painting of a gaping vagina in the modern art section
you just can't escape
>>75061879
If you can't tell that you're just being fooled and you're so short sighted that you can't see that a UBI will lead to the State owning all the capital and means of production, then I don't know what to tell you. You're lost, son.
>>75061941
I don't waste time arguing with imbeciles.
>>75062092
>plan to handle millions of angry poor people before they revolt
Automation doesn't cause unemployment it actually enhanced the economy and raises living standards
>muh poor people proletarian revolution!!!
Yeah whatever kill your self cringy marxist kike shill
>>75062048
No, but I'm tired of communism being pushed at their expense. The proletariat don't want communism. They want Trump. Only ivory tower faglords want communism.
>>75060796
>Rich people buying maids
Can we let this meme die because rich people are smart enough and work hard enough to do it themselves.
>>75062061
Obviously "post-scarcity" is retarded. If we ever lived in a post-scarcity society, I would personally take it upon myself to hoard so much stuff that other people would find it scarce again.
You don't need post-scarcity for a UBI, in fact the whole idea of a UBI is meant for a situation where things are scarce but there is enough automation that the natural rate of unemployment starts to grow out of control. That WILL happen, it's literally impossible for it not to, short of some global apocalypse
>>75061899
>>75062167
>tfw teacher
>taking class on field trip
>"Hey let's get these kids some real culture!"
>don't even get in the door and there's some dyke who hasn't shaved her body hair in 3 years squirting paint out of her vagina to a canvas on the ground
God damn it.
>>75059120
the quality of life for EVERYONE will go up when it happens
everyone except the apex economic parasites
>>75062375
>tfw it's just dad and me tonight
>let's eat tv dinners and watch funny SNL
>w00t
...
>Phil Hartman skit reciting Madonna's "My Vagina" book
Does everything have to be awkward?
>>75062360
>That WILL happen
Source? IRL all the automation that has taken place from the start of the industrial revolution until today hasn't caused a permanent secular increase in unemployment
>it's literally impossible for it not to
That sounds like marxist "the revolution is inevitable and historically unavoidable" crap to me
>>75062190
How the fuck would that happen? What would UBI cause that would make it possible for there to be a literal communist revolution in the US, when it's clearly impossible today?
We already have a huge welfare state today, yet somehow no communism, so don't tell me it's because it will make people "dependent on the state". People already are.
>>75062556
>>75062194
>>75062061
>>75061736
I never thought I'd say this but this Greek is BASED. Run for office in your country. Pay debts.
>>75059120
I'm thinking, it could potentially work. Get rid of welfare, but give people an allowance of sorts. If they decide to go out and buy all the latest iJew instead of food and starve to death, that's on them.
What is the idea behind this, that people will no longer have to work, thanks partially to automaton?
Well, I think this would end up just like the current push for a $15 minimum wage. The basic income would be to help you with costs to learn more skills to pick up a better job that pays more than the basic income.
But then you would have people complaining that the basic income needs to be increased when it should just be a stepping stone to help you rise out of your current situation and make something better out of it.
Bad idea, in the long run.
>>75062556
You're right, it's not really as obvious as I made it out to be. It's my biases as a computer science guy showing through. I'm a firm believer that AI will (eventually) get much better than it is today, and there is no way that being able to directly replace the labor inputs to your business with just more capital in the form of software can coexist with low rates of unemployment
>>75059120
You're wrong.
For the non-tax payer, it means not having to work as a wage slave, which means being free to make risky investments, financial or otherwise.
From the tax payer point of view, a guaranteed income reinvests taxes in individuals, rather than government bureaucracy.
>>75062556
it will be a combination of new technology with AI
for example, in Australia here they have GPS-driven farm equipment that can do a lot of the agricultural process....at the moment though it still needs petrol to power it
but there has been huge leaps with solar power (which is effectively unlimited on a human timescale) and batteries so its not too hard to image a near future where power generation and food production are significantly automated
in the short to medium-term that creates new industries and new jobs, but if you extrapolate the likely technical advances over the next decades its likely that we will reach a point where the amount of people needing to be employed to make all these things work will be significantly less than the general employable adult population
>>75062194
What the fuck are poor unskilled people going to do when robots take all the manufacturing jobs? There's not that many open positions at McDonald's
>>75061353
>money taken in by taxes is evenly split amongst all citizens.
Literally communism lite.
>artists are free to art, and can't whine about being a starving artist, and people will feel more free to take the risk to create art.
Society needs less "I always felt like I'm more of an artist kind of guy, working just isn't for me" """""artists""""". People dedicated to creating worthwhile art are going to do it regardless of basic income.
People are just going to use this as an excuse to not do shit.
>>75059120
ITT: People who don't know what communism are
>>75060440
My country is already rolling out automated self service machines. They're at half of the fast food chains/movie theatres/ supermarkets.
Self driving cars Google has already achieved. Self driving tractors are next.
This shit has been happening since the Industrial Revolution.
>>75062935
You are wrong because you have failed to undestand how improvements in Total Factor Productivity translate into higher real wages and allocation of the factors of production to other fields that emerge.
It's not your fault there is tonnes of marxist propaganda in the tech-futurism field.
>>75059120
it's not communism (utopic, abolishment of money and private property) but it's still shit
>>75061007
Based Germanbro
>>75062948
>For the non-tax payer, it means not having to work as a wage slave, which means being free to make risky investments, financial or otherwise.
Yes. The non-tax payer is already a shitty investment, financial and otherwise. They're a non-tax payer.
>From the tax payer point of view, a guaranteed income reinvests taxes in individuals, rather than government bureaucracy.
Again, why the fuck would I want to reinvest taxes into an individual who's a non-tax payer?
>>75059120
OP clearly favors basic income and is pretending not to to engage debate. He wouldn't have brought the topic up and then straw manned it as communism otherwise.
>>75062556
ελληνας ειναι αυτος? kεk
>>75063155
>This shit has been happening since the Industrial Revolution.
Yeah...and we've been doing just fine. No need for a UBI.
>>75063157
Sure, increasing productivity will put upward pressure on wages. But you're ignoring the much more direct effect of the relative price of capital and labor, just from plain old supply and demand.
Right now capital is cheap as hell, historically, and I'm pissed because it makes it harder to get any reliable returns on my investments. But what happens when it becomes common to substitute wage earners that cost you a salary, for a robot that you literally OWN like a slave? Suddenly the price of labor plummets to the cost of energy to run a computer and whatever intellectual property you have to license for the software.
No amount of productivity increase can compensate for the fact that work you used to do for $20/hour can now be done just as well for $0.02/hour. That's it, labor is done as a political and economic force at that point. So it's either something like UBI, a violent uprising that really DOES lead to some kind of communism, or just a massive welfare state with almost everyone on the dole, so like UBI only with more bureaucrats and pointless inefficiency.
>>75063082
You know, these people probably weren't doing much anyway. Probably working call centers, and shit.
I'm not talking a comfortable living basic income. I mean you have to work at it to cover basic needs, and limited diet. Any form of comfort comes from employment.
>>75059120
Don't even get me started... literally heard some liberal faggot on NPR recently talking about basic income like:
>"Yeah sure, maybe 90% of people will stay at home, smoke pot and play video games all day. But if 10% of the population still goes out and creates amazing things, that's still a significant number of people!"
Just... I don't even have words...
>>75063218
I'm not going to even dignify it by saying the phrase, but I can't say I'm surprised.
>>75059120
The only way basic income is going to work, or even have a possibility of being instituted is if automation covers enough of our infrastructure. When that happens, There would probably need to be certain societal checks. Checks such as, no breeding until you are verified as a wage earner or salary-man for two years.
If you ever become unemployed after this period, you must wait another 1 to two years in a paying job before getting licensed to procreate. The only other way is through serving as a member of the military. And maybe a police force.
We don't need people who are going to soak up that basic income and not work, even if jobs are impossible to find due to being taken by an automated robotic workforce. We will, however, always need a human face in our military and security forces.
Open breeding rights can probably be re-instituted when the pop falls below a certain level, or when we are able to handle a larger level of demand/consumption.
Basically, we might be cyberpunk dystopia before a basic income is viable.
>>75063800
I think you're missing an obvious alternative. How about we bring the world's population down to a "sustainable" level by just letting about 7 billion people die?
Even Henry Kissinger once made it a matter of National Security to limit population in order to avoid an uprising.
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pcaab500.pdf
>>75062330
fuck they don't all have to be maids, they can be whores too
>>75064760
Oh, now you're talking like a crazy tin foil hat person, or maybe some of Obama's literally Jewish Communist "czars."
>>75064760
fuck your police and military fetish you gay assfag. Seriously kill yourself. treat them like anyone else
>>75061569
You a fan of Friedman too? My nigga...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpgkX588nM
>>75063065
Even the skilled positions are being opened to automation. People are just not needed as much anymore due to technological progress. When it gets bad enough, there is either going to be basic income to keep people afloat, or there is going to be death in the streets, and progress toward a shining future will suffer.
If I can get machines to take over for people in my business, I will do so, where possible. Who is going to stop me? Really, who? Machines are much cheaper in the long runs, and they are being specialized to take over more than just pathetic unskilled areas.
Eventually I will be able to replace executive parasites. Even doctors are going to find it harder for their prospects. Any business owner who has the chance and the money to upgrade is going to do so. The only reason one wouldn't is if they could find immediate labor that we can underpay. Borderline slave-labor. Americans cost too much anyways.
>>75063206
>Yes. The non-tax payer is already a shitty investment, financial and otherwise. They're a non-tax payer.
Bus drivers are tax payers. Chronically depressed geniuses aren't. Which would you rather invest in?
>Again, why the fuck would I want to reinvest taxes into an individual who's a non-tax payer?
Because they'll be more likely to become a tax payer, and more likely to do so in a novel way.
>>75064918
That is the reality of the situation. Heck, even the military is receiving its fair-share of automation.
Still need boots on the ground to calm the angry jobless rioters (with gunfire). It won't matter what you say though. You will probably be jobless after whatever trade you were in was taken over by a robot who can do better than you, longer than you with fewer mistakes than you.
You are either going to be able to feed your family, or you will be trying to riot. Those that have money won't give a shit about you.
Businesses and government want to keep costs down. Flesh-bags cost more than machines. Especially in the long term. Clerks can be replaced with kiosks. Call centers can be automated, and are.
Your vacations, sick-days, your maternity vacations, they cost money and lower productivity.
>>75065423
>Bus drivers are tax payers. Chronically depressed geniuses aren't. Which would you rather invest in?
Oh yeah, you fucking neckbeard. Now I understand. Everyone in your utopian logic who doesn't pay taxes is a chronically depressed genius living in their mother's basement, just like you. They just need a chance. Someone to invest in them and their future and their genius ideas to make the world a better place.
Get the fuck outta here.
>Because they'll be more likely to become a tax payer, and more likely to do so in a novel way.
More likely...more likely...more likely...
Welp, I'm convinced.
>>75065053
yeee
>>75062048
chances are those poor people have low iqs.
meaning they are fundamentally useless.
>>75060924
>I didn't even get an allowance if I didn't do chores.
UBI: people wanting the benefits of civilization without contributing to it by using the power of the state to punish those who contribute to civilzation
>>75062061
Jacques is based as fuck, your argument is invalid
I start to pity bluepills really
While they re discussing their animal rights, safe spaces, acceptance and monies for everyone when white birthrate keeps dropping like a rock
Turd worlders are mass migrating and spreading like fire
Poor fucks dont even know whats coming to them
>>75060440
It's called a transistor
You pack a bunch of them together
Get some pajeets to do the programming for next to nothing
????
labor-free MUH MADE IN USA/EU
>>75060440
transistors
pajeets
?????
you lost your job
As always pol gets it in the wrong way.
Look at pic related, they are the ones that will suffer unemployment in the next decade not the citizens of the west or average citizen is more educated than the average citizen of an East Asia country (Japs and SK not included).
Do you remember when Trump says "we gonna bring back the jobs folks we gonna bring them back". He is just ahead of the curve that will happen in the next 2-3 decades this shift will take place and self correcting free market will make the west gread again.
The chinks will devastate their countries with pollution to compete with robots but they will fail and will end up swimming in a huge toxic lake.
On the other hand whites have Greenland Siberia and N Canada which with the global warming could became farmlands while the land in the equator will become a dessert
Whatever happens the West always wins, so pol stop being pessimistic
>>75068137
>The chinks will devastate their countries with pollution to compete with robots but they will fail and will end up swimming in a huge toxic lake.
>chinks die because their country is fucked up and they refuse to fix it
This is a problem because...?
>>75068137
So the self-correcting free market will make manufacturing businesses go back to paying 10x more so that westerners will have jobs again?
Ok
>>75063800
This exactly. Imagine what will happen in China. They have little to no labor laws so the moment machines become cheaper than human slave labor is the moment when millions will be out of work in their country alone.
>>75059120
Nothing wrong with Humans need not Apply. It's the truth.
However UBI/Communism is shit.
>>75068137
Chinks are already automating their shit. They are already building fully automated, human-free, factories. If you are a struggling Chink, I feel for you. China is not know for safety nets a lot of the time.
We really don't need that many people in logistics. We have machines that can precisely move product to staging, and machines that can load it for shipment. This means I spend less on the poor blue-collar imbecile that is going to have to go home and tell his kid that Santa is not coming.
Business remains smooth, and eventually only a skeleton crew will be needed. They are going to fight over shit jobs like it's some kind of upper-tier white collar position. Who is going to buy the product you ask? If no-one here can afford it, then I guess we look at the developing non-automated economies to export to.
Another partnership agreement should grease the wheels.
>>75060796
It would continue to subsidize minimum wage jobs since these people's minimal wage would still be enough to support themselves ( in theory ). Rather than the people moving away and driving up the price of labor in the area, they would stay so employers would only have to pay minimum ( below living ) wage.
Let's make a list of all the jobs that could be replaced in the next couple of decades to machines.
Any production/manufacturing job
Any driving job
Any surgery job
Many customer service jobs
Many paper pushing job
>>75068899
nothing, my point was that they are the ones that will be sunk by the automations, not us
>>75069087
machines will replace the manufacturing jobs that went to china like pic related, once machines have taken over this jobs the machines will just go to the west having closer high skilled tecnicians
>>75060924
And the shortfall between what is produced and what is needed will be made up by creating enemies of the state who don't get UBI.
>>75061353
> all benefits shut down
UBI is a benefit dumbass
> vote in favor of things that make 'america' money.
Like out of touch gibs parasites have any clue about making money
>>75069579
>Let's make a list of all the jobs that could be replaced in the next couple of decades to machines.
>Any production/manufacturing job
>Any driving job
>Any surgery job
>Many customer service jobs
>Many paper pushing job
"Damn...that's a helluvalotta machines."
"Yeah. Hey, who's gonna service and manage all those machines?"
"God damn, you're right. We should probably make robots to do the servicing and managing."
"Yeah. But, wait a minute. That's gonna require a lot of machines to service and manage all those machines that make the robots that do the servicing and managing of those machines, right?"
"Well...yeah...but..."
>>75069348
How do you suppose they address the problem then? No money means no commerce. Again, for "job creators" this can be remedied in an import market, but what are the jobless going to do?
UBI may be shit, but it will probably be necessary.
>>75069541
What minimum wage jobs? They are already beginning to automate most of them. There is a fully robotic McDonalds in the works. The robot does everything from making the burgers to taking the orders.
Your Amazon packages will be delivered by Drones, soon.
>>75069579
Don't forget creative jobs such as art and music composition. Even military jobs are looking to get more automated.
>>75069408
> I guess we look at the developing non-automated economies to export to.
true, we will keep the black men down once more flooding his market with supercheap goods that he cant compete with
and by the way, you are right, automation will sink china from inside too much poor and unemployed people that sooner or later will revolt
>>75070079
You don't need engineers to fix machines. Just someone who can follow a process. Technicians will have the biggest job market but it won't offset the amount of jobs lost. You don't need one technician per machine. Maybe a few at the plant in total.
>>75070079
Machines don't need armies to service. Effective machines will only need perhaps a small group of technicians to repair, and that small group will be working multiple sites. Remember, the goal is to keep the long-term profitable and cheap.
Probably end up sourcing it to a small company of handy-men, a geek squad if you will. Outside of that, the demand of technicians will only be able to cover a fraction of the jobless.
>>75061879
The government does own the capital and means of production because they have the force to take them. Just because they entrust their management and tax doesn't mean they don't own those things. They can even print fiat money 'backed' by the ability to tax. The more the government taxes, the less incentive to invest in and grow the capital and means of production and to keep those things int he country. The government ends up driving investment decisions to keep things running, which since the investment was done by the central planners of the government means the government outright owns the things. The things can be privatized, but this amounts to selling them cheap to cronies.
Socialism is a continuum. At one end is Anacap at the other is Communism. UBI is a major step toward Communism.
If there is to be inefficient collectivism, I'd rather it be directed toward preserving and creating demand for labor and enhancing the value of labor as long as possible, so that for as long as possible people earn their livings. Strong AI,and total obsolescence of humans seems likely eventually, but it is by no means certain how soon this will happen. It's still a prediction and not a certainty.
>>75059120
Who is going to take care of the machines? Humans.
>>75059120
As a mathematician I would love to have basic income. I don't need tons of money to live, just a bit above 20k/year and that's pretty much it. I each cheap food and buy cheap shit. I don't travel and don't waste money on cars/gas. All I need is the internet and pen&papers. I would be fine with spending my life like this, doing advanced math is a bit like traveling in outer space, you see all kinds of strange planets and objects. It's like exploring all this space that's in your mind.
>>75071110
>As a mathematician I would love to have basic income. I don't need tons of money to live, just a bit above 20k/year and that's pretty much it. I each cheap food and buy cheap shit. I don't travel and don't waste money on cars/gas. All I need is the internet and pen&papers. I would be fine with spending my life like this, doing advanced math is a bit like traveling in outer space, you see all kinds of strange planets and objects. It's like exploring all this space that's in your mind.
You know how I know you're 12?
>>75071263
Because doing advanced mathematics is nothing like that
>>75059120
Alaska has Basic income and they're far from communist
>>75071561
Probably because he hasn't gone through puberty and thought of sex or having a wife yet. Also, leafposter
>>75071572
No they don't.
>>75062935
If you're a computer science guy and sincerely think that full automation without human intervention going to be possible in your future you must not have must experience with production software.
https://medium com/message/everything-is-broken-81e5f33a24e1
The more automated things there are the more developers and system administrators we need which means more project managers testers, etc.
>>75071572
>Alaska has Basic income and they're far from communist
It's as much of a "basic income" as a yearly tax return is you fucking retard. I would say
>your
yearly tax return if I actually expected that one of you Bernouts actually paid any taxes.
And for an actual "basic income" in the United States, we indeed do have that already implemented, they're called Indian Reservations. And here's the (completely unsurprising to anyone with an IQ above room temperature) results, they almost universally live in tremendous poverty and squalor, nobody works, they lounge around all day drinking, and the only reason they can sustain this is through massive subsidization from the Federal Government.
>>75070891
If being able to take over the means of production by force means that the government already owns them, then every country is de facto communist already, and always has been. Are you an anarchist then?
The whole UBI idea is supposed to be a way to mitigate technological unemployment. If and when we end up at a point where that's politically viable, returns on capital and so incentives to invest would already be boosted by huge amounts of cheap machine labor. If not, and we end up in a situation where the government itself has to drive investment directly in spite of having an unprecedented supply of cheap labor, we'd have to be in one incredibly fucked economic scenario. How much better could private industry realistically do in a situation like that? It would have to mean that there is simply no profitable work left to do at all, virtually at any price. Doesn't seem realistic to me.
>>75070154
In the end because people are going obsolete they will experience competition for the jobs that are left. There are seven billion people on Earth, and there is no need for there to be that many. The conclusion is that there need to be less people.
This means forming strong bands that work cooperatively amongst themselves to compete with other bands for the niches for humans that remain. Ultimately there may be unavoidable competition within the bands, but those bands that direct their competitive energies outside the organism will maintain their integrity and outcompete those bands that gnaw on their own limbs.
Intensive investment in making the population competitive for the niches that remain and preserving those niches as payoff for effort toward attaining them will go a long way on making the nation a nation of badasses.
Facilitating the production of lawless useless rabble would be feeding cancer with blood vessels.
This is the best way to survive in the medium term. I don't have a solution to the case where humans are completely obsolete. But this is too far ahead to warp yourself around yet. It's still sci-fi. The trend is clear. Going full communist retard in a panic is counterproductive to survival. You'll just ensure you are the first to die.
The winners if any will be the ones who didn't fold until the end, not the ones who ran like a headless chicken into the jaws of communism.
>>75070891
The demand for labor would be too sparse. There will be no reason to demand labor. it will not be profitable for anyone to continue employing people to a great degree.
Eventually you will have some choices, and among them will be to either strive for post-scarcity and make sure your population can survive or let the bodies hit the floor in a hail of gunfire because people are starving and angry.
You can try to enforce luddism but people will only laugh at you. There really is no demand for labor that is unneeded. Unless you plan on paying people to sit in a desk and twirl pencils all day, just because.
And a machine will be able to do that better, anyways.
But yea, it isn't a complete certainty, but it is an extreme probability. And steps are being successfully made to pave the way for this. Faster than what was predicted. It seems that higher taxes and larger burdens on businesses, in the form of increased mandatory minimum wages, has an effect of forcing progress in "cost saving measures".
I am still amazed that people can be surprised at how fast tech and industry standards evolve, when exposure to the proper "stimuli" is achieved.
>>75071561
Don't worry, they have robots that are being designed to take over math-related jobs as well.
>Many jobs will be replaced by robots in the next decades
>millions of unemployed throughout the developed world
What happens then? How do you plan to solve it?
>inb4 urr durr let them get fucked
Implying you fags won't also be fucked by this.
>>75072795
This. They're not going to roll over and die. They're going to fight since they have nothing left to do and that's what humans do.
>>75059120
We are voting on basic income the 5th of June. At the moment the "no" are at 71%.
>>75072198
It's a matter of scale. You will never need as many developers, system admins, project managers, testers, etc as the people you're replacing with automation.
If that weren't the case, automation itself wouldn't make any economic sense, since you'd end up paying your software guys more than you'd have paid the people being replaced by the software.
I doubt anybody really thinks that automation is a net loss that way. You don't need "full" automation with zero humans to get to a politically untenable level of unemployment.
>>75072198
This nigga thinks society is run by highly educated people.
Even in my country we rely so much on uneducated morons that just have basic education and do simple jobs.
What happens when these people become unemployed? Fucking look around next time you are outside and notice the masses of unqualified workers that will have no jobs in the near future.
It's going to get fucked.
>>75059120
If we want to automate everything it would end up a necessity.
I'm vehemently against stripping humans of work.
>>75072599
If your conclusion is that there need to be less people, how exactly do you propose to get there? I can't think of any scenario in that case, in which I wouldn't want to be in the largest cohesive "band" with the strongest possible military. If that band happens to end up being a large communist nation, what will you do then?
>>75072935
Based mountainjews. Basic income will just make poor people slaves to the state. They will have no voice since government can just threaten to take gibsmedats away again.
basic income would actually save money
-cut all healthcare
-cut education funds
-cut public transport funds
-give everyone 1000$ a month to spend on whatever they want (education, healthcare, housing etc)
there would be one condition in order to sign up, being sterilized, so eventually the number of unproductive people will go down, and only smart and talented people will be left
>>75072935
Congratulations. You have figured out that 29% of people living in your country are either communists or literally retarded.
So you got that going for you...which is nice.
>>75072198
It is a gradual process, but, even as gradual as it is, it is still going forward. Even the programmer is looking to get replaced by self-learning AI. It boggles my mind. Something that dangerous. But companies are still salivating at the thought and pushing the envelope, all-the-same.
>>75073485
We will see in 20 years.
>>75073449
I wouldn't sterilize them. Just force contraception on them until we need more meat-shields.
>>75073625
I will fight communism to my last breath. Today. Tomorrow. 5 years. 10 years. 20 years.
Doesn't matter, Jew.
See you then.
>>75073260
That's not how making the most profits works. Automation will save lots of money for the first companies that adopted it and then kill the economy when everyone does it and no one has a Job to buy the goods made from automation. Robots don't need pay checks just maintenance
>>75073736
For instance, there is an injection to the male genitalia that uses a gel that blocks sperm. It is more effect than a vasectomy, and it is reverse-able.
>automation
They panicked about the same shit when the steam engine was invented.
Improving technology doesn't hurt the economy you cucks.
>>75073048
Keeping a mid-teir website/app running and up to date takes at least a small team of full time technical staff, plus another small to large team of customer outreach people. According to a quick and non thorough google, a new website is registered every second.
The staff needed to run a website is NOT going to decrease significantly in my lifetime. Regardless of how bug-free someone can write software, it is built on a 15 technologies that are all broken. The tech staff is not going anywhere any time soon.
The customer outreach might decrease slightly with automated statistical analysis of customer survey's or something like that but even that seems unlikely to me. And you never want to have your engineers doing that kind of work because it is a waste of their time.
Austomation does not cause unemployment in the long term. It just changes what work is available. In the short term yes, there will be skilled workers who now have a useless skill but that is only in the short term.
>>75074043
You're a fucking idiot if you think automation is comparable to the creation of the steam engine
>>75074187
Before the creation of the steam engine it took hundreds of people months of work to do what thereafter took 2-3 people a few days of work.
How is that not comparable?
>Not knowning this great man
> Not undrestanding that if certain occupation cease to exists the local economy in certain places would suffer.
Its not about all the jobs are gone acocalyptic lefty shit, its about having control so the unemployed rate remains okay so everyone isnt in food stamps and people in jobs that no longer exists can transition into the new technological jobs that will be created at a healthy rate..
Basic Income is a touchy subject but tech unemployement is real and thinking about ways to deal with it is not a meme.
its coming whether you want it or not
the only question is if its willingly or by force
Can you imagine the shitstorm if McCarthyism came back to America.
These fucks would get shut down in an instant.
If Nixon were alive and President he'd probably lower the minimum wage just to spite these pinkos.
>>75074365
it's the same process. easy jobs go extinct and people are forced to get training / education for more complex jobs, this cycle can't go on forever.
>>75074187
Learn to read Jamal. I said the panic is the same.
100% of technology improvements throughout history have helped the economy, not hurt it.
>>75072585
Socialism is a continuum between Anacap and Communism. Every state is somewhat Communist/Socialist.
I believe in a sensible middle ground maximizing benefits.
However UBI is giving people money for just being. It serves no useful collective purpose ( like roads or defense ). It subsidizes the existence of human beings of whom there is need of less.
It destroys incentives to create and invest in capital, and creates incentives for central planners to direct the economy. It undermines incentives for individuals to control their own population.
Huge amounts of cheap machine labor won't be developed in a Communist society. Incentives for capital creation and investment aren't there.
Suppose we develop the machine labor before heading to Communism: Then why should the owners ( the capitalists ) allow Communism? The capital migrates to the least Communist place, and then why should the owners allow Communism? They have all the cards, even the military ones. ( and they might not even maintain control of the machines - in that case we're all fucked )
And in Communism, central planners would be more interested in preserving their own power than providing for masses. There would be no need to develop cheap machine labor when the dissatisfied would provide endless cheap human slaves for the state.
>>75073364
The strongest band won't be Communist. It will be the one with the best tech. People are going obsolete. A zillion man army is just hamburger.
>>75074130
Let's look at what the Bureau of Labor Statistics has about this.
Software developers:
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/software-developers.htm
There's a category of kind of overlapping related jobs here http://www.bls.gov/ooh/computer-and-information-technology/home.htm but I picked the one with the most jobs, to be conservative. Software development, comprising 1.1 million jobs TOTAL, as of 2014. It's growing at a rapid pace at least, so there's that.
Truck drivers:
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/transportation-and-material-moving/heavy-and-tractor-trailer-truck-drivers.htm
That's 1.7 million jobs, which are going to be automated almost completely out of existence using technology that exists TODAY. Just one category of job, there are many more like it you can find on that site.
My argument is based mainly on AI, which pretty much everyone agrees hasn't done anything all that impressive yet outside of futurist hype, but will certainly start doing some impressive stuff within a few decades. How many "AI jobs" do you think are realistically going to exist, compared to the "truck driver" jobs that are going away?
>>75074548
>its coming whether you want it or not
>the only question is if its willingly or by force
Spoken like a true Commie.
I'm not fooled OP. Not even close. Better dead than Red I'd say. Free markets are the only thing that make this country strong.
>>75075489
just those defending themselves from the threat of force by losing their means to survive
>>75075187
There isn't suddenly going to be a drop from 1.7million to 0 trucker jobs overnight. It will take a long time with only the wealthiest companies rolling out automated trucking at a slow rate. Until automated trucking is CHEAPER than hiring a 30 dollar an hour trucker, there will be plenty of trucker jobs. This will probably happen faster than it would naturatly because the teamsters will never accept a pay decrease dooming themselves, but it will still take a LONG time.
Over that period, people will stop getting training for a dying profession and instead work towards something more profitable or possibly even entrepreneurship. Increases in productivity always increase the opportunity for entrepreneurship.
>>75069408
>They are going to fight over shit jobs like it's some kind of upper-tier white collar position.
This is why I thank the good Lord every day that I actually have a powerful analytical mind. Must be hard for people who are stupid to survive in the world.
Feels good having an education and a thinking job that can't be automated.
>>75076341
To follow up. If it seems like throwing a wish in a well to depend on entrepeneurs, consider that that is how the US economy has worked for 200 years and that it currently has the highest gdp in the world.
Freeing up laborers allows them to work on other jobs that provide services people want. Notice how there is more television programming than ever before right now? You can't write an AI to do that. Video game design? More people will be able to do that. Automation will let people figure out what they actually WANT to do and do it for a profit.
Basic income will let people avoid having to figure out what they want to do and just lay back and smoke weed all day.
>>75076704
>can't write AI to do that
Yet.
>>75074962
>>75075042
Well I agree to the extent that we're not going to get from where we are today to huge amounts of cheap machine labor under a communist government. As I said earlier in the thread, these days communism is dead, for good reason. The only way a lasting communist society could arise is in your second scenario, with the cheap machine labor first. Whether the capitalist owners would allow communism is a political question, not an economic one. That comes down to who the military would side with. Communist revolutions have happened before, and there's no reason they couldn't happen again. Honestly I don't see any reason at all why the strongest band and the one with the best tech wouldn't be a bunch of commies, in that case.
But that's all kind of beside the point, since the UBI is supposed to keep people alive without resorting to communism. When you say that there "should" be less people, or that a UBI keeping them alive serves no collective purpose, I don't really see what kind of ethic you're basing that on. I don't know about you, but I want to live. I don't care if my existence doesn't serve a collective purpose, it serves ME just fine. Letting people starve to death or killing them off because they can't serve a collective purpose seems kind of like picking out the absolute worst aspect of communism to hold up as an ideal while opposing everything else about it. Just seems weird to me.
>>75059120
And what the fuck are we going to do when they automate all the jobs?
Under our current system, that would just create the perfect funnel of money upwards. So the rich have everything and everyone else is jobless. Who then buys the products?
>>75076704
>Basic income will let people avoid having to figure out what they want to do and just lay back and smoke weed all day.
Wow. What a utopia that sounds like, ay boys?
Get the fuck outta here, Commie.
>>75077105
... I'm the commie? That was an argument against UBI.
>>75076833
BEHOLD! A RETARD!
>>75076341
>>75076704
Not overnight, but your claim was that automation doesn't cause job loss in the LONG term, not the short term. People like to trot out the argument that automation hasn't caused job loss in the past, so it can't in the future, but I'd like to hear at least one person with this idea explain concretely what these mythical jobs immune to automation are going to be. Even if most people in the world were smart enough to program or write TV screenplays for a living (heh), there isn't enough demand for that kind of labor to cover even the obvious job losers like transportation.
People like to say "this time will be different" and are often wrong, but sometimes it really is different.
Our salaries don't reflect money, reflect our power to purchase other people's production.
An increase of production and a decrease of labor costs can only mean that your wage is able to afford more products.
Automation opens new market opportunities. 20 years ago only rich people had personal trainers, today a friend of mine is getting normies as customers. What rich people do today will be the norm in 20 years. Want to learn future-proof skills? See what rich people are buying today and learn that trade.
If you whiny faggots were actually worried about automation, you would be making arguments in favor of limiting automation in certain industries. Instead you make a giant leap towards free shit. At least be fucking honest about being lazy sacks of shit and stop pretending you know what the future will be like in 20 years.
>>75077730
>People like to trot out the argument that automation hasn't caused job loss in the past, so it can't in the future, but I'd like to hear at least one person with this idea explain concretely what these mythical jobs immune to automation are going to be.
>People like to say "this time will be different" and are often wrong, but sometimes it really is different.
You readily admit that automation has never, literally never caused overwhelming job loss in the history of forever, and yet it's up to the people who say that to provide you a burden of proof that this time won't be different?
It's your theory, pal. If you can find one instance in all of human history where a society collapsed and became worse as their technology improved, then we can talk about basic income.
>>75076833
If the military is machines, then barring hackers, they'll do what they were created to do.
But look at Feudalism ( which is basically the rich empowered by the best tech of the day dominating a bunch of serfs ). It persisted without any revolutions that went anywhere for a thousand years.
In the case of Feudalism, the military IS the owners of the capital. They are basically using their own horses and armor to defend their own shit against the serfs.
It couldn't be designed on purpose to have the fewest number of people controlling and defending the wealth and to keep the interests of the military and wealthy more aligned.
Feudalism, granted, isn't known for technological advancement, but with the right AI, then who knows?
Feudalism was ultimately overthrown by people becoming valuable due to discovery of the New World and the Black Death and the need for labor b/c of the Industrial Revolution. People becoming less valuable should work in the opposite way.
Should a society decide for some reason to become Communist, they will fall behind those who choose not to do so.
I am basing 'should' on the fact that the Earth cannot long sustain so many humans decently.
As the apex predator, we must kill each other or die out.
http://dieoff.org/page80.htm
>>75059120
I think a lot of it is banking on automation of the work force. I think welfare needs to be reformed but we can't wait until Robots are taking jobs.
>>75078018
>An increase of production and a decrease of labor costs
yeah yeah, work harder for less money and we'll all be rich
we've heard it all before kike
>>75078105
Let's force businesses to have humans do things a machine could do for cheaper, and make them uncompetitive with any idiot in another country who isn't handicapped by a government that bans productive technology! Cause work builds character, right?
>>75061007
>implying 90% of beggars and homeless will not use their income on drugs and booze.
>>75059120
communism is the other way around
you work all day and get nothing
/pol/ live.
>vast majority doesn't understand how it works
>still can't stop ranting about it
anyone against the ubi wants a bloated government. not very right wing at all.
>>75078291
Saw this, thought it was sort of a good point to respond to, then saw it was just OP again. You lower the average IQ of your own thread every time you post, so please just stop
>>75065212
Feels good to be a knowledge worker desu
>>75079263
Please stop with your deceit, Jew.
>>75079332
You too, sweetheart.
>>75079263
>Implying the UBI won't end up in even more intervention as poor people still starve and middle class just quits working because it's not worth it, making the UBI less sustainable.
>>75078649
>make them uncompetitive with any idiot in another country who isn't handicapped by a government that bans productive technology!
Why the fuck would we trade with these magical robotic countries that will come to exist in 20 or so years? Why would we regulate our own corporations but say it's completely fine for a foreign corporation to use things we can't?
So free shit is ok but you draw the line at regulating businesses? You're for free trade, AND free shit?
>>75079480
>don't understand the concept
>make thread
>get called out
>can't respond, just insult
well, not even down under fucks up this badly.
do you realize it is cost neutral? do you realize that there are huge inefficient government agencies wasting your money? do you realize that the ubi alone is barely enough to survive? No.
>>75077730
What will those mythical jobs be?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=jobs+that+didn%27t+exist+10+years+ago
Google can find quite a few jobs that didn't exist 10 years ago. Given that the level of automation you are talking about is decades away, I think we'll be ok.
>>75059120
Good thing I'm the one making the software for it ;)
>>75078331
When I say "the military", I mean the humans running the machines. Obviously if our military IS just machines, then we have a whole other set of problems.
But yeah, it's entirely possible that military dictatorships could take everything over. That's certainly happened many times before. In that case, since serfs will also be unnecessary now, they will probably all die off as you say. I hope not, but it could happen. This doesn't really have much to do with UBI anymore though
>>75079931
>don't understand the concept
>make thread
>get called out
>can't respond, just insult
Oh yea, Swiss cheese. I'm sure I don't understand the concept. Please enlighten all of us.
>do you realize it is cost neutral?
Christ, cheese can't be this retarded?
>do you realize that there are huge inefficient government agencies wasting your money?
Of course I do. I want those fixed or eliminated, too. Has absolutely nothing to do with UBI. How in fuck does that have anything to do with UBI?
>do you realize that the ubi alone is barely enough to survive? No.
>enough to survive
Even if I were as naive as you and believed that UBI was the end all be all and not just the starting point in the negotiation, it's still fuck all retarded.
Please go, cheese Jew. Please go. Just be happy we give you money because you're neutral.
>>75059120
I hate the whole automation. Its basically them saying its about to be future year and you still don't believe in communism.
>>75059120
I want basic income.
>>75080306
link us to your tumblr
>>75079596
What exactly are you proposing then? We shut down our international trade and restrict ourselves to not using advanced technology other countries use because it's against our national principles? You seem like you'd be right at home in Best Korea
>>75063065
No you dumb fuck People won't even need jobs at that point. Things will be so cheap that you could live your entire life with only a couple thousand dollars.
>implying humans were never this advanced
>implying this isn't just the end of the natural cycle humans go through.
>>75080122
If you'd actually bothered to google that instead of lmgtfying it, you'd find that these supposed jobs are about evenly split between software development, which I already counted, and grade A bullshit that might account for 10k to 100k jobs total depending on how much useless work we're willing to manufacture
>>75080412
>>75080354
That and people like to confuse mechanization with automation.
Mechanization is great, makes jobs easier, makes individual workers far more productive too. People also seem to believe we've come a lot further than we really have in terms of mechanization, there's a long way yet.
I'm all for basic income when machines replace us, but lets give it 20 years and then have another look, wait until it actually happens.
>>75080850
post the link
>>75059120
Basic Income + Flat Tax is progressive tax and welfare state simplified, with no discrimination amog citizens. Getting rid of the bureaucracy around welfare would help as well.
>>75080306
amazing.
>we give you money
how does this work
>slashing government agencies, replace with leaner system
you couldn't close down those depts without riots and starvation. explain your theory please?
>fuck all retarded
I don't get your point.
>>75081220
totally agree.
>>75081220
The other thing is that basic income makes yeast of people..
>>75081220
That's how it begins. 6 months later:
>Press reports schools have raised prices due to the natural inflation caused by the diminished supply and increased demand
>Press reports poor man starved to death because he spent all his neetbux on drugs
>Press reports employment is at an all time-low because who the fuck wants to work for 900 when u get 800
And like that, savior government electable appears saying that he has the fix for everything, more intervention and of course a higher tax to cover the new expenses, along with a QE to make money reach the people and low interest rates so unemployed can begin their companies (ayy lmao).
You don't cure aids by implementing a fast growth cancer.
>>75082155
All that can be true and we can still call it an improvement from what we have now.
It's promoted by owners of big companies, millionaires and the like; that would be like the exact opposite of communists.
>>75060440
Don't even need to replace 20% of jobs before largescale riots start.
subsidized wages are probably a better idea.
>>75082245
The UBI will never be enough, the moment people realize they can get money without working they will realize they can get even more money without working.
>>75059120
yeah but what will happen with total automatization?
It will either result in everyone becoming permaneet and being able to take whatever they want because robots don't need to be paid so everything is free, or the rich jews decide to kill everyone because they're retarded autistic insufferable cunts
>>75081754
>>we give you money
>how does this work
Now you're just playing dumb. You know damn well what that means.
>>slashing government agencies, replace with leaner system
>you couldn't close down those depts without riots and starvation. explain your theory please?
How do you figure? All those government employees just can't get other jobs in the private sector? Not only that, they'll immediately take to starvation and riots? Quit coddling everyone.
>>fuck all retarded
>I don't get your point.
Of course you don't, cheese. You and UBI are fuck all retarded.
>>75081220
And how the fuck does BASED Malta >>75082155 have to give you a good spanking and take you children to school.
Jesus Christ.
>>75079263
Isn't the UBI that was proposed in Switzerland just a higher unemployment benefit?
Explain me this
Person A: Unemployed, gets 1000 CHF per month (what ever)
Person B: Employed, gets 5000 CHF per month
Now we have the UBI which is 2500 CHF
Person A: Gets now 2500 CHF
Person B: Still 5000 CHF as before
So in the end it's just more money for unemployed?
>>75082988
the employed person gets it too. that's what the word universal means.
>>75083225
Yes but his wage is decreased.
So if someone earns 5000CHF.
If the UBI is 2500 CHF, he will get 2500 CHF UBI + 2500 CHF wage. So in the end the total will be the same as without UBI for the employed person.
At least that's how the solution was proposed which we are voting on 5th June.
>>75082949
>revolutions have never happened because of poor living conditions
There are many exchange currencies one of which being physical violence.
>>75080811
You seem to have failed to understand capitalism at its core. As long as there are consumers for what you call useless than it is objectively not useless.
>>75083420
exactly. I don't care because I have a high income and like to work. but I hate seeing all those lazy 'workers' in the government that will be axed soon anyhow
>>75083823
So only unemployed will benefit from UBI, and the employed will have the same total wage as before.
But the UBI must come from somewhere, probably higher taxes. So the employed must pay more taxes and has less money in the end.
This thread's tl;dr
>Based OP tells people they don't deserve free shit.
>Economic retards cry "muh automation," failing to understand basic principles of productivity
>Lazy basement dwellers try to convince us that they would be helping society if we gave them all free shit.
>>75083678
My understanding of capitalism is fine. Maybe "useless" was too strong a word, but I'd rather have that claim to defend, than the idea that 1.7 million trucker jobs will be replaced by the likes of "Social Media Manager", "Blogger", and "Chief Listening Officer". I kid you not, those are in the first link of your google result, and they give a pretty good idea of what these new jobs you're counting on are.
>>75059120
How is a living wage in any way socialism?
The Roman Empire had it, for fuck's sake.
>>75084163
Ugh, God! Just stop asking questions and let it happen! Why can't you just not care and really like to work like >>75083823 this, anon?! Come on! It's 2016!
Good luck, >>75084163 Switzerland.
>>75078105
whose worried about automation? I think it's a good thing that more can be done with less work.
But we don't need 7 billion artists and doctors. Once AI hits the point that it can function as flexibly as an unskilled menial laborer a huge swath of people are gonna be flushed out of the economy permanently. That's nor a worty, it's just reality.
We are absolutely going to need some extreme border control if we go full basic income though.
>>75084229
That's just an example of jobs that didn't exist, but what about those jobs that already existed and got way more popular thanks to an increased disposable income due to economic growth?
I put an example before, personal trainer, all the jobs only rich people could afford 20 years ago are becoming the norm.
>>75084207
You idiots never understand what communism is about.
It isn't about income. It's about raising the quality of welfare. It's about raising the quality of the infrastructure within each communal area to the point where welfare is extremely efficient and very effective.
They didn't need money in Star Trek because this standard of welfare had been achieved.
>>75085054
>You idiots never understand what communism is about.
MUH COMMUNISM HAS NEVER BEEN TRIED!!!
>It isn't about income. It's about raising the quality of welfare. It's about raising the quality of the infrastructure within each communal area to the point where welfare is extremely efficient and very effective.
MUH EVERYBODY IS EQUAL AND IS LIFTED EQUALLY!!!
>They didn't need money in Star Trek because this standard of welfare had been achieved.
MUH FICTIONAL TELEVISION SHOW HOLLYWOOD JEWTOPIAN SOCIETY!!!
>>75084574
Fitness trainers and instructors:
http://www.bls.gov/ooh/personal-care-and-service/fitness-trainers-and-instructors.htm
280,000 jobs, growing at 8% ("as fast as average")
Look, we can play this game all day, but the long term point is that humans are expensive as fuck, and they have only so many kinds of skills. Technology only moves in one direction for the most part, allowing more and more of those skills to be automated. It may not happen this decade, or maybe this century (though I'd offer VERY good odds that nearly everything will be automated within a century, if I could count on being alive to collect). But there comes a point where the massive economic advantage of machines, which are literally HUNDREDS of times cheaper even if they are a little worse at the job, becomes overwhelming.
Maybe it's too early to talk about it today, but hey, we're posting on /pol/ here not having a debate in congress about when and how much.
>>75085295
how come you still haven't linked us your tumblr
>>75085054
They didn't need money in Star Trek because they had replicators that could give anyone, anything they desired. Yes, a magical device that could spit out free food, or homes. Clothes, tools, anything. Fucking retard.
>>75085627
If an example doesn't work for you we can look at unemployment numbers, we take a look at the most automated countries and see their unemployment, and then we look at the poverty and unemployment of the less automated economies.
Seriously, there's just no evidence behind the claim that automation reduces jobs in a permanent fashion, but there is multiple evidence that automation increases well-being of societies.
>>75085054
>They didn't need money in Star Trek because this standard of welfare had been achieved.
...because they could just magic shit out of thin air with a Replicator.
If your economy needs magic to function, and you don't have a huge surplus of magic lying around, you will soon find yourself short of an economy.
>>75086099
And even Star Trek had a species that was addicted to stone-cold solid currency, Gold-Pressed Latinum.
>>75086038
The shield against automation destroying jobs is human intelligence. Even the dumbest register jockey can handle confusing situations better than any AI. That is changing though.
>>75082576
Bad news buddy, that's already happened.
>>75086503
But there are no Germanic tribes to sack DC.
>>75086266
How come they couldn't just replicate gold-pressed latium and dilithium crystals?
Or when shit got messed up, why not replicate a second main deflector dish and extra tachyon particles? Or replicate more replicators and staff the whole ship with Captain Picards?
>>75086038
I'm not trying to argue that technological unemployment is a serious problem today. The consensus by economists seems to be that our unemployment problems in the US recently have been almost entirely due to the financial crisis and were not caused by automation.
But just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean we can't see it coming. I'm not saying that just any technology is going to cause unemployment, I'm saying that just a single specific one will do so. That's going to be AI, whenever it manages to really get off the ground. That is a technology that's fundamentally different, in an economic sense, from any technology we've ever invented before. Technologies are things people USE to be more productive, so of course they've always generally increased well-being. Instead, now we're talking about a technology that directly replaces human work in the labor market. I'm not saying "this time will be different because magic", I'm saying "this time will be different because this is something we actually have never seen before, in all of human history".
>>75059120
We're voting on this right now, believe it or not.
No way in hell that will pass, though.
>>75086852
Because they were so stupid fucktarded, lazy, and complacent because they had a God damn replicator they couldn't figure that out.
Probably.
>>75060300
I need some freash propaganda. Have any to share?
