13 ms·

Of course there are productivity boosters. The dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, vehicles, computerized booking, and many other pieces of technology have replaced t

Of course there are productivity boosters. The dishwashers, vacuum cleaners, vehicles, computerized booking, and many other pieces of technology have replaced the need for many additional workers. The problem is that, as states, we are not translating these increased profits into increased quality of life for citizens. UBI is the most obvious way to start doing it. What we want is to in effect charge companies in relation to how much profit they're making off replacing workers (increasing productivity). When a company is able to replace 10 workers with technology, they should pay at least enough taxes for 5 workers to live off UBI. Repeat until everyone that wants to can live comfortably off UBI. While other people voluntarily work to make a lot more money than UBI.

caseysoftware 7y ago
We are translating these into the option of increased quality of life. The fact that people spend 2-3 hours/day watching TV, YouTube, and screwing around online in general is a demonstration that most people do have a higher quality of life. Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. What people choose to spend that time doing is up to them. Most will use it to watch TV/Netflix/etc while a much smaller number will work on skills and things to make their lives better.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  > Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. If you're working a ton of hours in a low wage job, there's a good chance you can't get a stable home if you cut back to a reasonable amount of hours. In a situation like that it's not "optional", even if you wouldn't actually die. Even if you have a solid 40 hours a week job, and you get paid well enough that you'd be happy cutting back to 32 hours a week, it's very hard to arrange something like that. It's only optional if you have an especially good negotiation position or you're lucky, not if you're a normal worker. > a much smaller number will work on skills and things to make their lives better It's pretty awful to expect someone that's already working far more than full time to spend even more time practicing work skills on top of that. Anyone that can do so is amazing, but anyone that doesn't do so should not be blamed. Edit: To the dead reply to this: No one with an ounce of self respect is going to incentivize leisure? Even if you have no humanity in you, and don't think people deserve a single free hour in the week, it's less efficient to work people until they're worn out. You're cutting off your nose to spite your face because the poors don't "deserve" it. People don't get depressed because they lack 100+ hours of labor to slog through in a week. The ennui of feeling no purpose kicks in a hell of a lot lower than that.
  - ooobit2 7y ago
    >>Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. >They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. We didn't outlaw child labor definitively until the FLSA in 1938. The Great Depression was a huge turning point, and children were forced out of employment as adults desperately needed any employment available. But even during WW2, there were debates about reversing the laws because Germany was using forced labor on children to support its war efforts. People were more willing to give women the right to vote than to ratify laws that stopped parents from having their children work in a factory, sweeping a store, or selling newspapers or shoe shines or other repetitive, easily-replicated duties. >It's pretty awful to expect someone that's already working far more than full time to spend even more time practicing work skills on top of that. Anyone that can do so is amazing, but anyone that doesn't do so should not be blamed. No one with an ounce of self-respect is going to incentivize leisure. You don't create value in life by relaxing. There's a saying among Muslims that Allah did not give you life for you to rest in it. And that perspective is what divides top performers from their peers. This is a frustrating philosophy to read. Where in the world did you get the idea that you're already being asked to do too much... before you've even managed to have something to show for any spent effort whatsoever? Depression is rooted in idling. The less you straddle life with one foot in, and the other out, of your comfort zone, the more you become risk averse. The more risk averse you become, the less motive you have to act. The less motive to act you have, the less value you create. Less value becomes less purpose. Less purpose becomes less incentive to live. If you don't want to work hard, fine. But to suggest that the bar should be lowered so you can feel like you're amazing too, when you've chosen to preoccupy yourself with leisure, is immature. Life doesn't reward you for smarts, it rewards for effort. If you can't see that now, you'll waste years and years growing increasingly angry at the world for not giving you what you think you've earned. Trust me, waking up to realize you've got nothing to show for your so-called hard work, and that itself proves you haven't done hard work, is harsh. I'm coming to terms with that at 33. Don't wait as long as I have to accept that feedback from the world around you.
  - caseysoftware 7y ago
    > They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. If you limit your perspective to the last ~120 years, you are correct. I did not.
- dmos62 7y ago
  I'm not sure I follow your point. Are you saying that automation and reduced manpower requirement is reasonably trickling down to the working class or that it isn't?
- viklove 7y ago
  You're completely missing the point and using this as an opportunity to call wage laborers lazy. Nice. As automation becomes more pervasive, billionaires and VCs are not the only ones who should be benefitting from it. Wage laborers should also get rewards from that, meaning higher wages, and no need to work 40+ hour weeks. We should be working on improving QOL for all people, not just wealthy asset holders. But sure, just call them lazy so you can feel good about yourself when you keep treading all over them.
WalterBright 7y ago
> The problem is that, as states, we are not translating these increased profits into increased quality of life for citizens. Are you sure about that? For example, air travel used to be a luxury only for the wealthy, and you wore your best clothes for a flight. Now airplanes are filled with people dressed in sweats and paying very cheap fares. Tourist destinations are buried in tourists the world over. Buying a home computer used to cost $3,000. Now you can get one for a couple hundred, and that's in inflated dollars. What you get when you buy a car is enormously better than what was available in the 1960s. I love old cars, but I'm well aware of the overall poor quality of them, lousy crash resistance, high maintenance, crummy handling, etc. Clothes are historically cheap as dirt. My mom would sew layer after layer of patches on my jeans. Nobody does that anymore. My aunts would knit socks for me. Nobody does that anymore. (Still have the socks, they're treasures now.) In general, things are so cheap it makes no sense to fix or maintain them. Just get another one. Kids get a small mountain of toys for Christmas. Back in the 60's you got a handful of items, and did not feel deprived at all. You can get a color TV for a couple hundred bucks, one that is far better than the $$$$ ones from the 1960s. Think about all the entertainment you can get for free from the push of a button. You can get an MIT education for free in your home. You can get any question answered by typing into your computer. Steak is much, much cheaper than when I was a boy. Then it was a luxury. Fresh food from all over the world, 12 months a year, at your local grocery. Our homes are much bigger than they used to be. Car stereos used to be so expensive people stole them all the time. Today car stereos are so cheap they are worthless. I built a home theater in my basement from equipment I got at the thrift store for $50. The HD projector was $600 new, and is probably even cheaper today. The screen was $50. The same setup would have cost $20,000 25 years ago, and wouldn't have been HD. I remember when home stereos were expensive, like $thousands. Now you can buy excellent equipment at the thrift store for $20. I remember buying stuff mail order from Sears with 3 to 6 weeks delivery time. Now I am spoiled rotten by getting it in 2 days. Teenagers were expected to work starting at age 16, at least up through the 70s. Now a person's first job is often after college. Nobody had a microwave or dishwasher when I grew up. Every meal meant time at the sink washing everything by hand. People rarely ate out. My how that has changed. Seriously, we live in a golden age.
- novok 7y ago
DickingAround 7y ago
UBI as payment for automation seems like a dream when you imagine getting free money/stuff. If you're the one that creates life-changing automation and now you have to pay more because you invented, it's a nightmare. A nightmare that discourages invention. The nightmare gets worse when you imagine that now a government with a history of incompetence, violence, and corruption is in charge of collecting and redistributing vast wealth. I wouldn't trust any person, and collection of people, or the populace as a whole to tax and redistribute that much wealth; it will bring out only the very worst people to want that power.
- not2b 7y ago
  If you are the one that creates life-changing automation, in most cases you've probably signed over your invention to the corporation that you work for, they give you a one-time bonus and get all of the rights. The owners then use the government to get a monopoly to use that invention, denying it to others. Automation takes capital to deploy effectively, and most of the rewards go to the owners of that capital, with relatively little going to the inventor.
StandardFuture 7y ago
Most of the things you have listed have existed long before the Resort ever came into existence. The people required to run the resort and the jobs they would be doing were already calculated with consideration of the existence of these tools. So, it is a stretch to say that these are the productivity-boosters that have brought us into a post-scarcity+UBI phase of humanity. The real problem in our modern economy is very clearly our lack of productivity booster innovations. Most recent advancements in standard of livings have been in mobile apps and games. Wowzers. True job productivity innovations are near nil in recent times, specifically for very physical businesses like a Resorts. Globalization does make certain things much cheaper, however. But, that doesn't really help the Resort and that is entirely different conversation all together.

caseysoftware 7y ago

We are translating these into the option of increased quality of life. The fact that people spend 2-3 hours/day watching TV, YouTube, and screwing around online in general is a demonstration that most people do have a higher quality of life. Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. What people choose to spend that time doing is up to them. Most will use it to watch TV/Netflix/etc while a much smaller number will work on skills and things to make their lives better.

Dylan16807 7y ago
> Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. If you're working a ton of hours in a low wage job, there's a good chance you can't get a stable home if you cut back to a reasonable amount of hours. In a situation like that it's not "optional", even if you wouldn't actually die. Even if you have a solid 40 hours a week job, and you get paid well enough that you'd be happy cutting back to 32 hours a week, it's very hard to arrange something like that. It's only optional if you have an especially good negotiation position or you're lucky, not if you're a normal worker. > a much smaller number will work on skills and things to make their lives better It's pretty awful to expect someone that's already working far more than full time to spend even more time practicing work skills on top of that. Anyone that can do so is amazing, but anyone that doesn't do so should not be blamed. Edit: To the dead reply to this: No one with an ounce of self respect is going to incentivize leisure? Even if you have no humanity in you, and don't think people deserve a single free hour in the week, it's less efficient to work people until they're worn out. You're cutting off your nose to spite your face because the poors don't "deserve" it. People don't get depressed because they lack 100+ hours of labor to slog through in a week. The ennui of feeling no purpose kicks in a hell of a lot lower than that.
- ooobit2 7y ago
  >>Or to put it another way, most people don't have to work 16+ hours/day just to stay alive. >They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. We didn't outlaw child labor definitively until the FLSA in 1938. The Great Depression was a huge turning point, and children were forced out of employment as adults desperately needed any employment available. But even during WW2, there were debates about reversing the laws because Germany was using forced labor on children to support its war efforts. People were more willing to give women the right to vote than to ratify laws that stopped parents from having their children work in a factory, sweeping a store, or selling newspapers or shoe shines or other repetitive, easily-replicated duties. >It's pretty awful to expect someone that's already working far more than full time to spend even more time practicing work skills on top of that. Anyone that can do so is amazing, but anyone that doesn't do so should not be blamed. No one with an ounce of self-respect is going to incentivize leisure. You don't create value in life by relaxing. There's a saying among Muslims that Allah did not give you life for you to rest in it. And that perspective is what divides top performers from their peers. This is a frustrating philosophy to read. Where in the world did you get the idea that you're already being asked to do too much... before you've even managed to have something to show for any spent effort whatsoever? Depression is rooted in idling. The less you straddle life with one foot in, and the other out, of your comfort zone, the more you become risk averse. The more risk averse you become, the less motive you have to act. The less motive to act you have, the less value you create. Less value becomes less purpose. Less purpose becomes less incentive to live. If you don't want to work hard, fine. But to suggest that the bar should be lowered so you can feel like you're amazing too, when you've chosen to preoccupy yourself with leisure, is immature. Life doesn't reward you for smarts, it rewards for effort. If you can't see that now, you'll waste years and years growing increasingly angry at the world for not giving you what you think you've earned. Trust me, waking up to realize you've got nothing to show for your so-called hard work, and that itself proves you haven't done hard work, is harsh. I'm coming to terms with that at 33. Don't wait as long as I have to accept that feedback from the world around you.
- caseysoftware 7y ago
  > They almost never had to, so that's a pretty lousy bar to use. If you limit your perspective to the last ~120 years, you are correct. I did not.
dmos62 7y ago
I'm not sure I follow your point. Are you saying that automation and reduced manpower requirement is reasonably trickling down to the working class or that it isn't?
viklove 7y ago
You're completely missing the point and using this as an opportunity to call wage laborers lazy. Nice. As automation becomes more pervasive, billionaires and VCs are not the only ones who should be benefitting from it. Wage laborers should also get rewards from that, meaning higher wages, and no need to work 40+ hour weeks. We should be working on improving QOL for all people, not just wealthy asset holders. But sure, just call them lazy so you can feel good about yourself when you keep treading all over them.

WalterBright 7y ago

> The problem is that, as states, we are not translating these increased profits into increased quality of life for citizens. Are you sure about that? For example, air travel used to be a luxury only for the wealthy, and you wore your best clothes for a flight. Now airplanes are filled with people dressed in sweats and paying very cheap fares. Tourist destinations are buried in tourists the world over. Buying a home computer used to cost $3,000. Now you can get one for a couple hundred, and that's in inflated dollars. What you get when you buy a car is enormously better than what was available in the 1960s. I love old cars, but I'm well aware of the overall poor quality of them, lousy crash resistance, high maintenance, crummy handling, etc. Clothes are historically cheap as dirt. My mom would sew layer after layer of patches on my jeans. Nobody does that anymore. My aunts would knit socks for me. Nobody does that anymore. (Still have the socks, they're treasures now.) In general, things are so cheap it makes no sense to fix or maintain them. Just get another one. Kids get a small mountain of toys for Christmas. Back in the 60's you got a handful of items, and did not feel deprived at all. You can get a color TV for a couple hundred bucks, one that is far better than the $$$$ ones from the 1960s. Think about all the entertainment you can get for free from the push of a button. You can get an MIT education for free in your home. You can get any question answered by typing into your computer. Steak is much, much cheaper than when I was a boy. Then it was a luxury. Fresh food from all over the world, 12 months a year, at your local grocery. Our homes are much bigger than they used to be. Car stereos used to be so expensive people stole them all the time. Today car stereos are so cheap they are worthless. I built a home theater in my basement from equipment I got at the thrift store for $50. The HD projector was $600 new, and is probably even cheaper today. The screen was $50. The same setup would have cost $20,000 25 years ago, and wouldn't have been HD. I remember when home stereos were expensive, like $thousands. Now you can buy excellent equipment at the thrift store for $20. I remember buying stuff mail order from Sears with 3 to 6 weeks delivery time. Now I am spoiled rotten by getting it in 2 days. Teenagers were expected to work starting at age 16, at least up through the 70s. Now a person's first job is often after college. Nobody had a microwave or dishwasher when I grew up. Every meal meant time at the sink washing everything by hand. People rarely ate out. My how that has changed. Seriously, we live in a golden age.

novok 7y ago

DickingAround 7y ago

UBI as payment for automation seems like a dream when you imagine getting free money/stuff. If you're the one that creates life-changing automation and now you have to pay more because you invented, it's a nightmare. A nightmare that discourages invention. The nightmare gets worse when you imagine that now a government with a history of incompetence, violence, and corruption is in charge of collecting and redistributing vast wealth. I wouldn't trust any person, and collection of people, or the populace as a whole to tax and redistribute that much wealth; it will bring out only the very worst people to want that power.

not2b 7y ago
If you are the one that creates life-changing automation, in most cases you've probably signed over your invention to the corporation that you work for, they give you a one-time bonus and get all of the rights. The owners then use the government to get a monopoly to use that invention, denying it to others. Automation takes capital to deploy effectively, and most of the rewards go to the owners of that capital, with relatively little going to the inventor.

StandardFuture 7y ago

Most of the things you have listed have existed long before the Resort ever came into existence. The people required to run the resort and the jobs they would be doing were already calculated with consideration of the existence of these tools. So, it is a stretch to say that these are the productivity-boosters that have brought us into a post-scarcity+UBI phase of humanity. The real problem in our modern economy is very clearly our lack of productivity booster innovations. Most recent advancements in standard of livings have been in mobile apps and games. Wowzers. True job productivity innovations are near nil in recent times, specifically for very physical businesses like a Resorts. Globalization does make certain things much cheaper, however. But, that doesn't really help the Resort and that is entirely different conversation all together.