Is a Universal Basic Income Inevitable ?

in #life7 years ago

People often talk about the rise of machines and the mass automation movement as some far off distant thing, but the reality is that in a few decades, the amount of jobs replaced by machines will leave our economy unable to function. In the past when you created a new industry it would often mean that you needed a higher amount of people for the new jobs that were created, but this is no longer the case. The jobs that are being created today are primarily programming jobs and far fewer are needed than before. If our population continues to grow there will literally no longer be any jobs for children of the next generation.

Having an unemployment rate higher than 25% is not an option as we have seen in many countries post war or most recently Greece after their collapse. There will literally be rioting in the streets and people who cant feed their families. So what should we do in order to make sure this doesn’t happen, because not having riots in the street is good for your country as a whole. So it seems like we will either have two options, the first of which is have the government make it mandatory to have a worker tied to a robot ( probably not going to happen in the long run) or to create some sort of universal basic income system in order to take care of everyone.

The problem with a universal basic income is not only selling an entire country on the idea, especially a country like the United States, but also figuring out the economics of such a system. We would literally be throwing away hundreds of years of economic theory for a system that is untested and untried, unless we were to roll out small test beds for the system, like some countries in Europe have. In addition you would have to sell an entire country on the idea and with countries like the United States, where many people have big problems with handouts, it would probably be a very hard topic to sell. In the long run I would probably expect the federal government to take a step back to see states be the ones who make the decisions.

Another huge problem with a basic universal income is where do you actually get the money to distribute to the public? One easy way is to tax the companies that are producing the goods in the territory of the people living there, but that might just force companies to move elsewhere. You could also put heavy sales tax on items , but that will just cause the price of the goods to go up and have the buyer eat the burden. Hopefully in the future what will end up happening is there are so many competitors and the cost to make the goods is so cheap that it will force goods to a point where anyone could afford them.

Perhaps one of the most overlooked problems a universal income might cause is that it gives human beings no purpose in life. Many people relate to their job as their purpose and those who don’t have one become lost. I could imagine a world where people just get high and do nothing all day because they simply don’t need to. Is this really living? There are many more important questions that would need to be addressed before such a drastic economic policy would be adopted, but I do think that at some point we will need to seriously look at adopting a basic universal income. What are your opinions?

Sort:  

✋️👋 you hit the majors ones in my opinion.

Where does it come from? As taxation is theft 😎

Additionally, it is completely possible that people would lack purpose and become depressed and/or more lazy. It's on them in the end, but we end up back to how we got the currency for the UBI in the first place?

I think in theory it would be great!!! Big party for all 🎉
Tell me where it would come from though. If it involves government and/or taxation it has already failed.

Peace ✌️

I agree with you completely, Taxation is Theft.

I think Crypto UBI has a place, I don't even think it necessarily even needs anything more complex than bitcoin.

The best way to growth the cryptocurrency space is to increase adoption.

You literally give away the crypto, I think you can even make the case for a selfish incentive to do so to increase adoption and value of the currency.

You build a system to fairly distribute a pot of money, and I think the money will come.

The hard part is preventing abuse:

Crypto has made a bunch of anarchist/libertarian leaning people much wealthier than they previously imagined, if the crypto community can voluntarily supplant and eventually replace the welfare state it will help us to destroy any and all justification for the warfare state that it is attached to.

I put a lot of thought and experimentation into this back before I got wary of reddit's censorship:

https://www.reddit.com/r/FairShare/top/

https://fair-share.github.io/#/about

https://www.reddit.com/r/FairShare/wiki/voluntarystatelessdistributed

I want to look into rebuilding this idea in Ethereum soon, but I will need to find a good oracle that can be trusted to limit signups somehow.

I like it.

As you say and with anything, the preventing abuse will be the hard part.
Can be worked out though. ;-)

It does meet the two criteria I made mention of.
It is not Government being voluntaryist/anrchist in nature.
And it is not happening/alive via taxation but via code and I imagine the work to make that coin/currency come into reality.

Open to it and interested in knowing more. I'll check out the reddit post. Thank you!

I am interested in helping with such a coin..... been considering such a thing myself to create... as well as other models in blockchain to help people... for instance charity service/good credits that are tradable among the homeless

Through the chattle bonds which are created when a citizen is born in any country which is supposed to go to infustructure but as we've seen it's been poorly spent other ways. All American citizens have what's called an exemption account associated with a chattle bond worth ten million and the individual is the trustee of that account. Thats why anytime someone gets any type of legal paperwork from the gov the name is in all capitals. Its referencing a different entity but because its under cannon law to move forward it only takes a reply instead of full disclosure by the petitioning party. Where as common law is more common sense, golden rule basically lol.

THere is no taxation. You are just voluntarily paying the amount that gets taxes today because you are a responsible person, aren't you?

If by voluntarily, you mean if we don't pay, large men with guns will come kill or cage you, then yes.

So in other words you don't.

How do magic streets in existence then?

Excuse me? So rather than have a debate you prefer to cast aspersions on me? Classy. Believe it or not, not ONE CENT of your federal income tax in the USA goes to building roads. It all goes to paying interest on the Federal Reserve Debt.

Excuse me?
I asked a question, you not really answered. I tried to quench out your meaning and then you start going around with one certain kind of tax in a far away country.
Why?

Why not instead of concentrate on the problem: If no one is paying for infrastructure, no infrastructure is build.

Actually you made a statement, one insinuating I don't contribute to society, THEN you asked a question...

I can not speak for your country, I can only speak for my own. Conversely systems of taxation are usually similar world wide, and I imagine your own system of taxation is largely focused around paying interest on money printed out of thin air.

To your point, you ASSUME no one will pay for roads... but guess what. Private industry has plenty of incentive to do so own its own. The government does not build roads, contractors do. Furthermore to my point, the majority of taxation simply goes to banks who have the privilege of printing money for nothing, NOT infrastructure.

It is ideal but hardly possible I'm my opinion. The upper class would be sacrifice too much from their point of view and not every rich person had a good heart of healing others. Some places even struggle to set up minimum wage, so universal basic income? Not gonna get enough vote from the upper class

Great idea and inspired blog! Can I resteem? @calaber24p

Most users here are happy to be resteemed, I don't think you need to ask :)

Don't need to ask ;-)

Great article and post, thanks for sharing.

Has anyone told you, you look like Bob Saget?.... Just saying

Another great post once again, thanks for sharing.

Thats SOCIALISM they will control what you eat where you live, what to drive..All aspects of your life will be controlled even worse then it is now!

Keynesian economics doesn't work, never has.

Too bad that it has (New Deal anyone? Saved the US and not least gave it hope), contrary to neolibs ideas (just look at Greece).

A band-aid on a bullet hole might slow down the bleeding, but that doesn't mean it is a fix.

Which is about as understandable as that Gold glitters only at the end of the rainbow.

Actually it makes perfect sense due to the laws of physics and biology. It is called a metaphor. In other words just because there was temporary relief does not make it a functional system.

You still have not explained what you mean with temporary relieve or what (dis)functional system you mean.

Well if you can not follow the simple flow of the comments here I am not sure I can help you.

Universal basic income = Marxism. Once the people depend on the government for survival, there is no freedom and defacto Communism, and no one will question the government for fear of getting cut off. Think about that before you cheer for your "free" stipend.

My solution is fairly simple ...
There is no shortage of work that needs to be done that machines cannot do ..reforestation .. Fish habitat .. Clean up everthing the thousands of old underground gas tanks .......you get the idea the things that are not done as there is no profit in it ..
Alter the monitary system to allow for this. There would be great long term benifit .. So it could be added each year to the countries gdp or how ever they would like to justify it...sorry for the typos on my phone and it is about ten letters behind my finger lol

Why you think machines cannot do this?

Machines are used even today for re (no: for new)forestation. In fucking China, not some high wage area!
Fish habitats... not fully automated, but hydroponics already has fairly automated processes, and tehr eare even plants involved, not only fish.

Yes we can automate these things to some point but with 80% of world fish stocks gone we are not doing a very good job ..
There are tons of unprofitable thi gs that need doing and need doing badly that are not ... It would solve the work problem and clean up the planet as it is a bit of a mess.

A lot of people in the US already DO lay around all day and get high, because that's what they want to do. There's actually not a thing actually wrong with that, except a large number of them are ODing, which makes the whole system (largely sponsored AND enforced by the pharma manufacturers (they directly fund a lot of police forces, and the major reason they're pushing Narcan so much is to keep their customer base from drying up due to attrition).
The fact is, HAVING to work just to survive pretty much short-circuits the value of civilization; animal life is restricted to such a paradigm because they do not have civilization (even the ones with sophisticated societies). That's the real end-value of automation (for humans; AI might evaluate it differently), it enables civilization's value to be realized.
Anyone who wants to, though, could pedal some power into the grid, or grow food, or paint, or teach, or haul trash, or... and they would ADD VALUE whatever they do.
We have the server-power to enable appropriate allocation and demand-balancing now.

As a social worker I see those who 1) are hopelessly on the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder and 2) sustain off of gov't resources in such a way that it constricts their freedom and sense of selves. On one hand, I know there is systemic failure when the disabled have nowhere to go and adults are terribly uneducated, even illiterate. On the other hand, they live in a completely controlled environment where the helpless status they are gives them little opportunity to feel good about where they are in life... It is a terrible dichotomy. The purpose/fulfillment one gets from simply being employed (or self-employed) should not be underestimated.
Thank you for the post.

No..No..taxation is the wrong way. We have the tools already. Miner+bot=income for everyone. You can stick a miner in a giant kuka bot or a small 3d printer.

Big Yes. Solution to many problems. There are studying being done this with promising results.

Universal Basic Income is definitely inveitable.

In Economics there a 4 factors of production:
-Labor.
-Land.
-Capital.
-Enterprise.

Technology is replacing human labor, and should be a factor of production.

Therefore, if people can't exchange their labor for money,
Universal Basic Income is a necessity.

And what preserves the value of money if it is just handed out for free? Universal basic income will not work. I explain why here: https://steemit.com/politics/@ericarthurblair/universal-basic-income-slavery

Before the Industrial Revolution close to 99% of people were farmers. I can imagine someone back then telling: "Technology is replacing human labor, farmers cannot exchange their labor for money, UBI is a necessity". Yet here we are now, working billions of jobs not in existence back then.

Im sure people will still find structure and work, but on there own time. More time to do the things you want.

They said that before the PC was mainstream. Meanwhile I get less done in my work day because of all the emails and IMs that I have to respond to.

UBI seems to be a hot topic. Honestly, I feel a little weird about it. I obviously do not want anyone to suffer, but I also want opportunities for everyone to do their "fair share" and be rewarded for efforts. Society would have to find new innovative ways to fill the need in our civilized world. Admittedly, that void could be filled with something, well, more fulfilling :) Thanks for sharing!

I have been aware of this personally for a while and when i try and talk about this to friends, family, or strangers i usually get brushed off or laughed at. Maybe they figure since i have a philosophy and environmental degree im just some crazy cook shouting.
Most people are definitely tied to the idea of work = worth but in the future that idea will radically have to change or like someone said we will have to come up with new ways to give ourselves worth (which i think would be a mirage the truth is we all have intrinsic value like blockchain ;)
Astronomers and physicists predict a sophisticated future where we are exploring and EXTRACTING the solar system. Well actually robots are doing it all for us. But what goal would there be in making sure everyone worked for all eternity ? Especially if very soon all the work won't need to be done by humans. Why have capitalism at all if placing true value on things with intrinsic value is so hard and could possibly be all there is left in a few hundred years. well because people like greed but if we are aiming towards space and mining the solar system that will eventually lead to the end of greed once you the human race is just maxed level grinding gold in the game of life..... sorry done rambling

With the coming of the robots it is only a matter of time that something like this in one shape or another is implemented.

I for one welcome our new robot overlords!

UBI will have to come from the blockchain... Governments are not capable of it.

The biggest assumption is that the amount of human population is going to either stay the same or increase. Birthrates have been decreasing overall for the last several generations with the exception of a few select areas.

There is a segment of the population that really does just need to be maintained. They are not intelligent enough to run a business or engage in management or teach anything. This is not a putdown. these people are invaluable. They are the helpers for everyone else. the extra set of hands and the extra feet. UBI structure for them would be good. It is sort of what we have now with welfare, except they are not working. :>) The farmer and business man are motivated by the results of their work. The government and management live off taxation and the teachers and thinkers of society should also just be maintained. Perhaps a little different UBI structure for them. This leaves them free to explore higher levels of consciousness then simply counting beans or involving in political intrigues. These are natural divisions of human society.

The whole concept is ludicrous. The Federal Reserve prints money to give people free money while devaluing the money being given to the people until the money is worth nothing. Some one once said " a man who does not work should not eat" I think we need to listen to that advice and forget such nonsense.

As long as the governments in place are creating chattle bonds off of the people as well as taxation to "maintain" infustructure it has to happen or they have to stop taxation and acknowledge every single person globally as a sovereign being. ✌peace to all.

Basic income can provide a base for those in need. Perhaps it is time that we challenge many of our assumptions such as if there are fewer jobs why can't we share jobs, work fewer hours, invest ourselves in more co-op type companies to provide incentive for productivity, take 1 out of every 7 years off for raising children, furthering education etc. We work for money but if we simply shared and used more and consumed less there may be more money to go around.

I think robots won't be able to take over because who would have money to buy products so it'll force companies to hire humans

Great minds think alike I wrote on this last week connecting Zuckererg's speech with GrantCoin ( http://www.grantcoin.org/get-grantcoin/basic-income/?referral-code=b7ypy68d78 ).

I think it can be attempted, but not sure it can be perfected under the current nation-state and fiat model.

I wrote an article about why universal basic income is not a viable option for dealing with increasing automation of jobs. Please give it a read. Thank you!

https://steemit.com/politics/@ericarthurblair/universal-basic-income-slavery

Will universal basic income give us no purpose?, i think it is the opposite, it will allow us to have our real purpose other than earning money... Many people (including me) is forced to do things that probably would not do if not in need... If i had a basic income, i could dedicate my life to whatever i want...

Awesome post!

I agree that a form of universal basic income will be essential in the future to maintain some stability. This topic fascinates me and I am lucky enough to have done a couple university projects on it. I have some responses to the problems you mention for basic income projects moving forward.

First, while I agree that these sorts of 'hand-outs would be difficult to introduce to the American public, there's a case to be made that conservative and/or republican voters may like it. Some of the literature on UBIs or Guaranteed Annual Incomes (GAI) suggests removing the welfare state in its entirety and just having a UBI. Removing the bureaucracy reduces cost, and efficiency is increased by providing funding to those that need it quicker, and indiscriminately. It would actually be better than welfare because (at least in the Canadian welfare system) you cannot have any substantial assets while on welfare and you cannot supplement your income. Most cost effective UBIs would be scaled with your wage. You could get rid of social security, disability, etc, and just have a UBI that covers those anyways (and maybe extra income as a result of certain conditions). - - - But ya, it's a leap. Ontario and Finland are piloting basic income projects right now. These are the trailblazers in this policy arena.

For your second problem, I agree, funding is a difficult thing to think about. Jurisdictions will each have to sort it out themselves. These programs will not be cheap, but costs can be reduced through the streamlining of the bureaucracy.

For your third point on lacking purpose in life, I understand the intuition with that problem, however, I've discovered in some literature on Canadian transfer programs and through other sources (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hidden-motives/201510/the-myth-welfare-dependency) that dependency is a statistical myth and that when given the chance to better themselves, most people do that. I know more money for me can easily translate to more time spend on things I would rather be doing. More money for me means I can dedicate more time to making music, or spend more time with important people, or learn a new skill, etc, etc. Granted, some people may waste it, but I think there is a hidden potential that can be unlocked in society when you give everyone the means to participate.