4 ms·

That most Americans can live paycheck to paycheck makes me feel better about the post AGI full UBI era. I’ve been thinking about this a lot. Does it really mat

That most Americans can live paycheck to paycheck makes me feel better about the post AGI full UBI era. I’ve been thinking about this a lot. Does it really matter if everyone is living paycheck to paycheck? They aren’t starving to death. They have access to bread and circuses. If we all go on a $1000/month UBI, we’ll still have a decent standard of living. We’re in for a phase transition in the global economy and the relation of the poor to the rich, but it won’t be as bad as the doomsayers on HN are claiming.

pibechorro 4y ago
Extracting money violently from people to give it free to others creates a whole subculture of people who will do the very minimum and be totally dependent on the state. we saw it during the pandemic how many people refused to work. A bare bones safety net so people don't starve makes sense, but full lifestyle subcidies do not. It rots society and its theft from those who are productive.
- spamizbad 4y ago
  There's no supporting evidence things like Superdole contributed to the COVID labor shortage. What actually happened was a ton of low-wage workers were laid-off, found jobs elsewhere, and their employers struggled to find people willing to work low-wage jobs when everyone else was paying more.
- qualudeheart 4y ago
  That would be correct if we lived in a twentieth century communist society in which the local spectrum of Mittelstand, to Petite Bourgeoisie to Bourgeoisie consisted of humans with moral rights. I would not advocate for this in a society with twentieth century conditions. I am advocating for this in a twenty-first century economy in which most wealth will be controlled by corporations and artificial intelligences. In another comment in another thread I’ve also stated that private entities like Jeff Bezos would operate their own welfare programs. Black celebrities in particular are known to reinvest in the neighborhoods they grew up in. I predict that the State will provide the basic necessities and that private entities will provide comparatively more luxurious goods to those willing to their loyal patrons. Should the investment portfolio which me and my girlfriend have been building from our salaries as elite embedded systems engineers grow as I think it will, I would provide such a welfare system to those close to my heart. As a good citizen I consider that a civic duty. I believe that your libertarianism should be compatible with either of these forms of welfare.
chollida1 4y ago
Can you explain what the "the post AGI full UBI era" means? I assume AGI refers to the company that got bailed out in 2008. I'm less clear on who is getting full UBI? I have yet to find a person or company that is getting full UBI.
- qualudeheart 4y ago
  You would do well to browse the threads discussing advanced forms of artificial intelligence. Artificial General Intelligence, AGI, is artificial intelligence that can perform any cognitive task that humans can perform at a human level or higher. It’s commonly predicted by people like Robin Hanson and Elon Musk that such intelligences would dominate the workforce. Most people will eventually become unemployable as it is always possible for a machine to perform their job cheaper. I’ve predicted that the State and private entities will build welfare programs or UBI. This will be done for political reasons, as the most probable alternative would be civilization scale chaos on par with any Communist revolution of the last century. Such programs will also allow those with power to cement their power further, as the recipients of welfare could not afford to bite the hand that feeds them.
  - chollida1 4y ago
    Ha, as the other commenter pointed out, I was way off and misread the Acronym. I appreciate the time you took to educate me:)
  - anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    > always possible for a machine to perform their job cheaper. > the State and private entities will build welfare programs or UBI. These two things don't seem to add up. If you're paying the person anyway why not have them do a job? It's not as if the labor of the AGI is free. The only way this would make any kind of economic sense is if the labor of the AGI is so superior to the human that it effectively creates additional value that compensates for the friction of having both the working AGI and the compensated, but non-working human. And in that case you need to start factoring in all of the externalities (including psychological welfare of the jobless human). Edit to add: If an AGI is so good, can't it come up with productive jobs that are better done by humans than by it? Or is this kind of like the "can god make a mountain that he can't lift?" question?

pibechorro 4y ago

Extracting money violently from people to give it free to others creates a whole subculture of people who will do the very minimum and be totally dependent on the state. we saw it during the pandemic how many people refused to work. A bare bones safety net so people don't starve makes sense, but full lifestyle subcidies do not. It rots society and its theft from those who are productive.

spamizbad 4y ago
There's no supporting evidence things like Superdole contributed to the COVID labor shortage. What actually happened was a ton of low-wage workers were laid-off, found jobs elsewhere, and their employers struggled to find people willing to work low-wage jobs when everyone else was paying more.
qualudeheart 4y ago
That would be correct if we lived in a twentieth century communist society in which the local spectrum of Mittelstand, to Petite Bourgeoisie to Bourgeoisie consisted of humans with moral rights. I would not advocate for this in a society with twentieth century conditions. I am advocating for this in a twenty-first century economy in which most wealth will be controlled by corporations and artificial intelligences. In another comment in another thread I’ve also stated that private entities like Jeff Bezos would operate their own welfare programs. Black celebrities in particular are known to reinvest in the neighborhoods they grew up in. I predict that the State will provide the basic necessities and that private entities will provide comparatively more luxurious goods to those willing to their loyal patrons. Should the investment portfolio which me and my girlfriend have been building from our salaries as elite embedded systems engineers grow as I think it will, I would provide such a welfare system to those close to my heart. As a good citizen I consider that a civic duty. I believe that your libertarianism should be compatible with either of these forms of welfare.

chollida1 4y ago

Can you explain what the "the post AGI full UBI era" means? I assume AGI refers to the company that got bailed out in 2008. I'm less clear on who is getting full UBI? I have yet to find a person or company that is getting full UBI.

qualudeheart 4y ago
You would do well to browse the threads discussing advanced forms of artificial intelligence. Artificial General Intelligence, AGI, is artificial intelligence that can perform any cognitive task that humans can perform at a human level or higher. It’s commonly predicted by people like Robin Hanson and Elon Musk that such intelligences would dominate the workforce. Most people will eventually become unemployable as it is always possible for a machine to perform their job cheaper. I’ve predicted that the State and private entities will build welfare programs or UBI. This will be done for political reasons, as the most probable alternative would be civilization scale chaos on par with any Communist revolution of the last century. Such programs will also allow those with power to cement their power further, as the recipients of welfare could not afford to bite the hand that feeds them.
- chollida1 4y ago
  Ha, as the other commenter pointed out, I was way off and misread the Acronym. I appreciate the time you took to educate me:)
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  > always possible for a machine to perform their job cheaper. > the State and private entities will build welfare programs or UBI. These two things don't seem to add up. If you're paying the person anyway why not have them do a job? It's not as if the labor of the AGI is free. The only way this would make any kind of economic sense is if the labor of the AGI is so superior to the human that it effectively creates additional value that compensates for the friction of having both the working AGI and the compensated, but non-working human. And in that case you need to start factoring in all of the externalities (including psychological welfare of the jobless human). Edit to add: If an AGI is so good, can't it come up with productive jobs that are better done by humans than by it? Or is this kind of like the "can god make a mountain that he can't lift?" question?