3 ms·

This does imply some innovation is needed in how taxation happens. That is also something Sam Altman agreed with in his piece. This is an easy and simple proble

This does imply some innovation is needed in how taxation happens. That is also something Sam Altman agreed with in his piece. This is an easy and simple problem to solve and all the leadership at that level has agreed on the spirit of the query as far as I've seen in their commentaries. I highly recommend it if you haven't read it yet, it's really good: https://moores.samaltman.com/ https://moores.samaltman.com/ I think once tens of millions of jobs are going away and everyone needs to retrain into the types of work that are still available, we'll pretty seamlessly be able to transition into a UBI model where everyone affected becomes a college student or learns a trade or craft again, with UBI making it a graceful and exciting Great Reset without anyone falling by the wayside. Because at that point, the real economic efficiency gains still exist except at a marginal cost of effectively 0. This means that with automation you can just print what you need and everyone's standard of living skyrockets. This is because commodities are plentiful on a big planet like this one and others. I think the "BS jobs" concept is missing the mark a little. Those aren't BS jobs. They're just the jobs that have been most visibly automated the fastest. They may still retain, say, 25% of the useful and necessary functions that those roles require. But because of how culture and legislation lag behind technology in rate of adoption, people still feel the need to put up with appearances of working a specific amount of time or quota in order to placate someone who only counts the beans so to speak. Tens of millions of people enjoying a Great Reset is a beautiful and achievable outcome if we do it properly. When everyone is affected, we will just work on art, music, self-improvement, learning for joy, and spending time with loved ones. And making more loved ones. This will happen.

javajosh 3y ago
I should have been clearer. BS jobs had to be created. They had to be created as a kind of UBI that can exist without challenging neoliberal economic orthodoxy. If that is the case, then increasing those worker's productivity is actually counter-productive! You've destroyed the value of redistribution-under-a-fig-leaf that those jobs represented. And you've traded the current mostly working solution for the political difficulty of getting UBI done. People aren't rational, especially in today's radicalized political zeitgeist. I wish it weren't so. Heck, only 1 in 5 GOPers think climate change is real. UBI will be fought, perhaps with violence, as a form of socialism.

javajosh 3y ago

I should have been clearer. BS jobs had to be created. They had to be created as a kind of UBI that can exist without challenging neoliberal economic orthodoxy. If that is the case, then increasing those worker's productivity is actually counter-productive! You've destroyed the value of redistribution-under-a-fig-leaf that those jobs represented. And you've traded the current mostly working solution for the political difficulty of getting UBI done. People aren't rational, especially in today's radicalized political zeitgeist. I wish it weren't so. Heck, only 1 in 5 GOPers think climate change is real. UBI will be fought, perhaps with violence, as a form of socialism.