4 ms·

If Facebook paid people in exchange for the content they produce, it's not UBI, it's normal income. UBI happens when you get paid for nothing. Looking the examp

If Facebook paid people in exchange for the content they produce, it's not UBI, it's normal income. UBI happens when you get paid for nothing. Looking the example from Alaska, though, it makes sense - it encourages people to move to a place they might not consider otherwise. Perhaps UBI would be a good idea if offered by cities that are facing issues with declining population, as an incentive for attracting more people.

Latty 9y ago
UBI is in the focus for a lot more than attracting people to an area - it's a solution to a future (present?) where we don't need everyone to work. The reality is when all the menial jobs are automated, you have to reclassify anyone not capable of non menial jobs as disabled, create busywork jobs that don't give value / actively don't automate things just to create jobs, or provide UBI. Maybe the first option combined with better education would work, but UBI seems like the best option. It should also cut costs around welfare and, morally, I think it is right - everyone should be able to live, regardless of ability. I think the idea of UBI as incentive is dangerous because it leaves a lot of potential for rug pulling when it sees success.
- felipeccastro 9y ago
  I don't think we'll reach this point of all jobs being automated, where UBI becomes an absolute necessity, mostly because human desires are unlimited, but that's beyond the point I'm making here. I'm curious about why you think UBI as incentive would be dangerous, especially in the scenario I described. Doesn't this already work in Alaska? What kind of rug pulling you expect it might happen?
  - Latty 9y ago
    Human desire might be, but human ability isn't. If we don't raise the level of education everyone can get, and to a lesser extent even if we do, some people just will not be able to do any of the jobs that aren't automated - that's already true today. As I said before - our current solution, call them disabled and provide for them specifically, would have to be expanded, or UBI would solve the problem universally. As to it being an incentive - if you provide a UBI as an incentive, you will presumably get people moving there to receive that UBI. When enough people have moved to the place and the incentive is stopped, it could easily cause huge issues as those people who moved will be relying on it. It's probably only an issue if the UBI is high enough.

Latty 9y ago

UBI is in the focus for a lot more than attracting people to an area - it's a solution to a future (present?) where we don't need everyone to work. The reality is when all the menial jobs are automated, you have to reclassify anyone not capable of non menial jobs as disabled, create busywork jobs that don't give value / actively don't automate things just to create jobs, or provide UBI. Maybe the first option combined with better education would work, but UBI seems like the best option. It should also cut costs around welfare and, morally, I think it is right - everyone should be able to live, regardless of ability. I think the idea of UBI as incentive is dangerous because it leaves a lot of potential for rug pulling when it sees success.

felipeccastro 9y ago
I don't think we'll reach this point of all jobs being automated, where UBI becomes an absolute necessity, mostly because human desires are unlimited, but that's beyond the point I'm making here. I'm curious about why you think UBI as incentive would be dangerous, especially in the scenario I described. Doesn't this already work in Alaska? What kind of rug pulling you expect it might happen?
- Latty 9y ago
  Human desire might be, but human ability isn't. If we don't raise the level of education everyone can get, and to a lesser extent even if we do, some people just will not be able to do any of the jobs that aren't automated - that's already true today. As I said before - our current solution, call them disabled and provide for them specifically, would have to be expanded, or UBI would solve the problem universally. As to it being an incentive - if you provide a UBI as an incentive, you will presumably get people moving there to receive that UBI. When enough people have moved to the place and the incentive is stopped, it could easily cause huge issues as those people who moved will be relying on it. It's probably only an issue if the UBI is high enough.