> If we have a labor surplus, how does a basic income solve the problem? The money has to come from somewhere. Moreover, the population will age, and as demogra

> If we have a labor surplus, how does a basic income solve the problem? The money has to come from somewhere. Moreover, the population will age, and as demography and technological advancement increases the (stipulated) surplus, there will be fewer and fewer sources of revenue to fund the basic income. It seems like magical thinking. If we have a labor surplus (due to robotics) it is because we have a more efficient and wealthy economy and we can afford to pay people not to work. It's not a question of money, but of the distribution of wealth. I'd rather see the development of an employer of last resort, though; not a basic income. FDR put people to work so: 1. They could eat. 2. They would be too busy to revolt over the fact they couldn't eat. But we still reap the benefits of his programs today. And while some of those were unconstitutional as hell, the lessons learned could be incorporated into programs that are constitutional.