2 ms·
We do not yet have the technological foundation to feasibly implement a Banks'ian Culture-type "hard" UBI, and we barely have the beginning glimmers for even "s
by yourapostasy 13y ago
We do not yet have the technological foundation to feasibly implement a Banks'ian Culture-type "hard" UBI, and we barely have the beginning glimmers for even "soft" UBI like what many are discussing today. We lack energy production and management, AI, and nanotech for even rudimentary hard UBI, and even soft UBI is infeasible due to knock-on effects whose management is poorly-understood. Example: we already have a diabetes epidemic with low socioeconomic groups, and the obesogenic environment is not well studied enough to know if giving those groups more access to free time will improve outcomes. Will those groups on average use a soft UBI to improve their overall health, or will they choose poorly and the benefits of UBI blowback into exploding healthcare costs? No one really knows yet. I would like to believe that soft UBI would lead to better health outcomes, but that might simply be my own socioeconomic background speaking.
The few soft UBI trials commonly found in citations were too short-lived to tell whether we were simply observing a Hawthorne Effect at work or if the outcomes were sustainable.
- loup-vaillant 13y agoFrance's welfare system is already close to ABI. You have to fight bureaucracy, you're not eligible unless you have no revenue, and it's barely enough to survive, you're supposed to be actively looking for work, but it's there. We could start by simplifying the system, and replace that welfare system by an equivalent ABI (the salaries of currently working people will probably need some adjustments). It would be insufficient of course, but that would be a start.