3 ms·
The problem is not the marginal value of labour, is that the value those people create is close to 0. Even working for free, some people will just create negati
by JetSpiegel 8y ago
The problem is not the marginal value of labour, is that the value those people create is close to 0. Even working for free, some people will just create negative value.
The only solution is for the able to pay others to not work, through welfare. The improvements in technology should more than make up for this loss.
- chii 8y agoThere's no incentive alignment between those who own the tech (the source of productivity increase), and those who would need the welfare (who would presumably be consuming some of said productivity increase). The owners of the tech is highly likely to prefer to capture fully the output (by lowering taxes for example). I think there should be a way to align incentives - education paid for by owners of the tech, but also a contractual obligation to work for X years for their sponsors.
- jjoonathan 8y agoAh, yes, indentured servitude, a brilliant suggestion for uplifting a population out of poverty!
- JetSpiegel 8y agoI think the incentive is basic empathy. Just because our fellow humans are economically worthless, does not mean they are lesser people. If the point is that those people produce no value, they shouldn't work at all. They could just dig and fill ditches, but that doesn't produce value. Amazon also leeches from the public goods, but that is somehow socially acceptable.
- specialist 8y agoI've had employees that I would have been happy to pay to stay home. The NYC school system has the "rubber room", where unflushable employees are warehoused. One of the reasons I support UBI is because it's cheaper than welfare for keeping certain people out of the way.