3 ms·

I think you are right but for the wrong reasons. The whole point about Basic Income (at least the unconditionally one) is that there are not going to be any jo

I think you are right but for the wrong reasons. The whole point about Basic Income (at least the unconditionally one) is that there are not going to be any jobs (or very few and only for highly talented people). And even if there are jobs it will always be worthwhile working (as long as it's unconditional) So if you, like me, believe that's the case, the whole discussion about whether people want to take a job or not becomes moot. It doesn't matter if they would have, they can't. A much more important discussion then becomes how we make it work financially.

Mz 9y ago
The whole point about Basic Income (at least the unconditional ly one) is that there are not going to be any jobs (or very few and only for highly talented people). If there are no jobs, it will be because we designed it that way, not because it was inevitable. Tech giants proposing basic income as the solution to their lazy lack of desire to figure out how to better distribute work tell glowing stories of how lovely it will be for low paid workers to get this extra money. They never actually explore the scenario they are actually proposing that all you get is $10k-$20k and you have little or no hope of getting a job at all ever again. That would be a dystopian nightmare and I think it is likely to end in bloody revolution. Lots of hopeless people with nothing but time on their hands who are being completely fucked over by the system with no way out of this black hole but just enough money to keep eating well, even if they are living in a tent, sounds like a recipe for creating a well trained guerrilla army.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  I wish it was that simple. Technology isn't inevitable but to the extent that we wan't to reap the benefits of it is. In other word, we aren't designing anything other than our own replacements. With regards to how SV tries to paint it thats a different discussion and have nothing to do with whether it will happen or not. It doesn't have to be dystopian (ex. Post scarcity society) but until we get there it's going to be worse not better for a lot of people. But I would challenge you to come up with an alternative that by and large at least compete with the reliance on technology. The problem is that no specific part of the whole system is responsible and everyone in the system is more or less acting rationally. So I fundamentally disagree it's not inevitable (with the above context considered)
  - Mz 9y ago
    But I would challenge you to come up with an alternative Actually, I have. I was homeless for nearly six years until earlier this month. I am medically handicapped and can't work a regular job. I was a homemaker for a lot of years, I had a corporate job for a few years and I currently do freelance writing, resume editing and I blog, which gets me a little money via ads, tips and Patreon. UBI will solve nothing as long as we do not have universal basic health care and affordable housing. If we establish universal basic health care and create sufficient affordable housing, then the last piece of the puzzle is redistributing work. We did this once before under very similar circumstances where automation was "taking our jobs." It was called The Industrial Revolution. It gave birth to the 40 hour work week, overtime pay and unions. If work is structured properly and you can get a cheap SRO or similar somewhere and not have to worry about medical bills, you can cover your basic living expenses working part time. If it is well structured where you work as little or as much as you want, then people who are unambitious hedonists or who have personal burdens, like chronic health issues, can just get by without it being a dystopian horrifying black hole that seems inescapable. Folks with more energy and/or more ambition can work harder and do more with their lives. I have written a number of pieces laying out the details. Some are listed on this page of my old blog: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html But I don't imagine you are actually interested. That "challenge" was most likely intended to mean "Shut up. It isn't like you have a solution."
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      You are assuming an awful lot of things about me. Why would I challenge you if I wasn't intersted in what you had to say? You completely ignore that there is no need to structure work if I don't have to hire people to produce or develop my products. This is the whole point and why I believe you are fundamentally looking at this wrong. The industrial revolution replaced physical work, this revolution is replacing intellectual work. You are betting on some political/ideological/moral change in people, not actually addressing the points I was making.
      - Mz 9y ago
- taysic 9y ago
  I agree with you that tech giants promoting basic income are probably only doing that as an easy and attractive answer to - what will happen to all the jobs? However, I really don't think UBI is the answer. I don't understand where the money will come from/who will do the leftover work. I think we should continue to cultivate an innovative society and new types of jobs - more appealing I think - will be created.
  - Mz 9y ago
    People that rich are used to solving certain things by whipping out their checkbook (so to speak). It may be superficially well meaning, but, no, I don't think UBI actually works. If they manage to get a UBI instituted, I think that is a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But, the odds seem pretty long against it being instituted in this country at all. So, that makes me feel it is mere posturing. I do a lot of "light one candle rather than curse the dark" type projects. I try to promote things that already exist (like gig work) that I think work. I do my best to get such info into the hands of people who seem hardest hit by the societal growing pains we are witnessing. It can be hard to measure the results of such efforts and it can be outright impossible to prove to others that it makes a difference. But, I have had experiences* that convince me that it does make a difference, so I persist. * http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/08/for-just-few-dollars-more.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/08/for-just-few...
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    But what are you basing that belief on? Thats what I would like to know. Unless you don't think computers will be able to do most of the things that create fundamental value in society. Of course you can imagine all sorts of services on top (prostitution, games etc) but the idea of the job market as something that we just keep creating new jobs for is simply not backed by reality. What fundamentally new jobs have we really seen the last 100 years besides computer engineer and how many people does that industry actually occupy. As it turns out not a lot. Everything else is just a more refined version of things that already existed in some form or another and rapidly being replaced by technology.
    - 9y ago
xienze 9y ago
> or very few and only for highly talented people How many people and jobs are we talking about, if these are the jobs expected to support the vast majority of the populace? And on a related note, why would these people not feel resentful that (by necessity) a major chunk of their earnings is directed towards everyone else? Assuming that humans will behave differently and be driven by different things than they have _for millenia_ is foolish, and why BI will never work.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Humans are part of a larger system, that system is evolution. For millions of years evolution have favored those who adapt to a new environment. Thats the proper perspective to understand this discussion, not pointing back to a few thousand years of human civilization, unless of course you claim that humans is the last word in evolutionary process. If you (like me) believe technology will take over most jobs then (U)BI is so far the best model we have as it will always make it worthwhile to work.

Mz 9y ago

The whole point about Basic Income (at least the unconditional ly one) is that there are not going to be any jobs (or very few and only for highly talented people). If there are no jobs, it will be because we designed it that way, not because it was inevitable. Tech giants proposing basic income as the solution to their lazy lack of desire to figure out how to better distribute work tell glowing stories of how lovely it will be for low paid workers to get this extra money. They never actually explore the scenario they are actually proposing that all you get is $10k-$20k and you have little or no hope of getting a job at all ever again. That would be a dystopian nightmare and I think it is likely to end in bloody revolution. Lots of hopeless people with nothing but time on their hands who are being completely fucked over by the system with no way out of this black hole but just enough money to keep eating well, even if they are living in a tent, sounds like a recipe for creating a well trained guerrilla army.

ThomPete 9y ago
I wish it was that simple. Technology isn't inevitable but to the extent that we wan't to reap the benefits of it is. In other word, we aren't designing anything other than our own replacements. With regards to how SV tries to paint it thats a different discussion and have nothing to do with whether it will happen or not. It doesn't have to be dystopian (ex. Post scarcity society) but until we get there it's going to be worse not better for a lot of people. But I would challenge you to come up with an alternative that by and large at least compete with the reliance on technology. The problem is that no specific part of the whole system is responsible and everyone in the system is more or less acting rationally. So I fundamentally disagree it's not inevitable (with the above context considered)
- Mz 9y ago
  But I would challenge you to come up with an alternative Actually, I have. I was homeless for nearly six years until earlier this month. I am medically handicapped and can't work a regular job. I was a homemaker for a lot of years, I had a corporate job for a few years and I currently do freelance writing, resume editing and I blog, which gets me a little money via ads, tips and Patreon. UBI will solve nothing as long as we do not have universal basic health care and affordable housing. If we establish universal basic health care and create sufficient affordable housing, then the last piece of the puzzle is redistributing work. We did this once before under very similar circumstances where automation was "taking our jobs." It was called The Industrial Revolution. It gave birth to the 40 hour work week, overtime pay and unions. If work is structured properly and you can get a cheap SRO or similar somewhere and not have to worry about medical bills, you can cover your basic living expenses working part time. If it is well structured where you work as little or as much as you want, then people who are unambitious hedonists or who have personal burdens, like chronic health issues, can just get by without it being a dystopian horrifying black hole that seems inescapable. Folks with more energy and/or more ambition can work harder and do more with their lives. I have written a number of pieces laying out the details. Some are listed on this page of my old blog: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/p/ir2.html But I don't imagine you are actually interested. That "challenge" was most likely intended to mean "Shut up. It isn't like you have a solution."
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    You are assuming an awful lot of things about me. Why would I challenge you if I wasn't intersted in what you had to say? You completely ignore that there is no need to structure work if I don't have to hire people to produce or develop my products. This is the whole point and why I believe you are fundamentally looking at this wrong. The industrial revolution replaced physical work, this revolution is replacing intellectual work. You are betting on some political/ideological/moral change in people, not actually addressing the points I was making.
    - Mz 9y ago
taysic 9y ago
I agree with you that tech giants promoting basic income are probably only doing that as an easy and attractive answer to - what will happen to all the jobs? However, I really don't think UBI is the answer. I don't understand where the money will come from/who will do the leftover work. I think we should continue to cultivate an innovative society and new types of jobs - more appealing I think - will be created.
- Mz 9y ago
  People that rich are used to solving certain things by whipping out their checkbook (so to speak). It may be superficially well meaning, but, no, I don't think UBI actually works. If they manage to get a UBI instituted, I think that is a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions. But, the odds seem pretty long against it being instituted in this country at all. So, that makes me feel it is mere posturing. I do a lot of "light one candle rather than curse the dark" type projects. I try to promote things that already exist (like gig work) that I think work. I do my best to get such info into the hands of people who seem hardest hit by the societal growing pains we are witnessing. It can be hard to measure the results of such efforts and it can be outright impossible to prove to others that it makes a difference. But, I have had experiences* that convince me that it does make a difference, so I persist. * http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/08/for-just-few-dollars-more.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/08/for-just-few...
- ThomPete 9y ago
  But what are you basing that belief on? Thats what I would like to know. Unless you don't think computers will be able to do most of the things that create fundamental value in society. Of course you can imagine all sorts of services on top (prostitution, games etc) but the idea of the job market as something that we just keep creating new jobs for is simply not backed by reality. What fundamentally new jobs have we really seen the last 100 years besides computer engineer and how many people does that industry actually occupy. As it turns out not a lot. Everything else is just a more refined version of things that already existed in some form or another and rapidly being replaced by technology.
  - 9y ago

xienze 9y ago

> or very few and only for highly talented people How many people and jobs are we talking about, if these are the jobs expected to support the vast majority of the populace? And on a related note, why would these people not feel resentful that (by necessity) a major chunk of their earnings is directed towards everyone else? Assuming that humans will behave differently and be driven by different things than they have _for millenia_ is foolish, and why BI will never work.

ThomPete 9y ago
Humans are part of a larger system, that system is evolution. For millions of years evolution have favored those who adapt to a new environment. Thats the proper perspective to understand this discussion, not pointing back to a few thousand years of human civilization, unless of course you claim that humans is the last word in evolutionary process. If you (like me) believe technology will take over most jobs then (U)BI is so far the best model we have as it will always make it worthwhile to work.