The economics of Universal Income

[task0778]

I am tired

2.4 Trillion and then 288 trillion a year


still higher than either of us could find out about welfare.

Very much so. My initial assessment was for a month and I forgot to multiple times 12 for the whole year.

Do not really see any way to make it work in a country as large as the US, which could be a problem in the future.

as more jobs get automated, but still some people are working, I see real, serious, no ******* around, problems.

and I don't think it's more than 20 years away.

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

That would surprise me, I think people are going to buy the cheapest stuff they can if it's serviceable enough. Just like today when people buy foreign made products instead of American made, you gotta stretch your money for your family.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Very much so. My initial assessment was for a month and I forgot to multiple times 12 for the whole year.

Do not really see any way to make it work in a country as large as the US, which could be a problem in the future.

as more jobs get automated, but still some people are working, I see real, serious, no ******* around, problems.

and I don't think it's more than 20 years away.

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

That would surprise me, I think people are going to buy the cheapest stuff they can if it's serviceable enough. Just like today when people buy foreign made products instead of American made, you gotta stretch your money for your family.

I think it's the fact that we have more stuff to buy today.

Thinking back when I was a 70's teen, what did our household have? We had a color television set with rabbit ears; a roof antenna if you were doing good. We had a stereo and an 8 track player. We had one landline telephone that the family shared. We had furniture.

Fast food was a twice a year treat. If you had the money to see a movie, everybody got in the one family car, went to the drive-in, and sat in that car for three hours. A vacation was going camping to a resort about two hours from home.

Compare that to what we spend our money on today: Internet, cable television, family cell phone plan, three video game systems plus cartridges, pay-per-view, computers, a car for every member of the family, big screen televisions for every room, college funds for the kids.........

Good or bad? I don't know. But what I do know from paying my own bills is we spend a ton of money on things today that we didn't have years ago; much of it entertainment and things that make our life easier.

 

[Slyhunter]

I am tired

2.4 Trillion and then 288 trillion a year


still higher than either of us could find out about welfare.

Very much so. My initial assessment was for a month and I forgot to multiple times 12 for the whole year.

Do not really see any way to make it work in a country as large as the US, which could be a problem in the future.

as more jobs get automated, but still some people are working, I see real, serious, no ******* around, problems.

and I don't think it's more than 20 years away.

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

Nope, poor buy cheap stuff and use Walmarts self checkout lanes. Because they can afford better stuff than buying at an all American place, Made in America, with American Cashiers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Very much so. My initial assessment was for a month and I forgot to multiple times 12 for the whole year.

Do not really see any way to make it work in a country as large as the US, which could be a problem in the future.

as more jobs get automated, but still some people are working, I see real, serious, no ******* around, problems.

and I don't think it's more than 20 years away.

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

Nope, poor buy cheap stuff and use Walmarts self checkout lanes. Because they can afford better stuff than buying at an all American place, Made in America, with American Cashiers.

I would just be happy with human cashiers to be honest.

 

[Slyhunter]

as more jobs get automated, but still some people are working, I see real, serious, no ******* around, problems.

and I don't think it's more than 20 years away.

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

Nope, poor buy cheap stuff and use Walmarts self checkout lanes. Because they can afford better stuff than buying at an all American place, Made in America, with American Cashiers.

I would just be happy with human cashiers to be honest.

They got a new gadget at Walmart now. You pick it up at the door and scan your stuff as you put it in the cart. You turn the gadget in at the door and your cc pays in full. No more checkout stands.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I good reason to continue to bring in millions of legal and illegal people into a population that is going to have a serious job problem in a few short years.

By the turn of the next century, all production and distribution will be accomplished by robots. Humans in these highly developed areas will need no jobs or income because everything you want will be free. We will find it amazing how little people actually want when they can have anything they want at any time they want it.

I think we're going to have to attack the problem of unemployment by making it much cheaper to live, and that is the upside to replacing humans with robots. Things like food, shelter, Heating/AC, transportation, clothing, etc. will be so much cheaper, partly due to less human labor costs and possibly cheaper materials and energy. Maybe instead of a 40 hour work week it gets reduced to 20 or whatever; maybe people get the first $1600 in exchange for 12 hours of labor doing something and then after that you can earn more money for more work. Spitballing here, it's going to take some time to get to that situation from where we are now and some things are going to have to change: our education system, health care, law enforcement, housing. We won't be making houses out of wood, we'll be using other products that are cheaper and more fire resistant; won't be any more gas powered vehicles either, some other form of energy will be employed.

I think what's going to have to happen is solidarity between consumers and workers. Eventually it will come to a point where people will refuse to buy products or use services that have eliminated humans partly or all together.

Nope, poor buy cheap stuff and use Walmarts self checkout lanes. Because they can afford better stuff than buying at an all American place, Made in America, with American Cashiers.

I would just be happy with human cashiers to be honest.

They got a new gadget at Walmart now. You pick it up at the door and scan your stuff as you put it in the cart. You turn the gadget in at the door and your cc pays in full. No more checkout stands.

Same thing at Sam's Club. You scan the items and it's added to your account. When you get to the cashier, you just hand her your Sam's club card and the balance is on there.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yet handing over trillions of dollars of taxpayer's money to the wealthy is cheered by cons.

You mean the bank bailout you voted for?

 

[FA_Q2]

But as a professional driver for the last few decades, I can assure you that you won't be seeing manless semi's anytime in the near future. The only vehicles they have now cost nearly a million dollars, and you still need a licensed driver in case the unit stops. A computer cannot navigate main roads or side streets. It can't calculate turns or give emergency vehicles right of way. It can't listen to directions by a road crew worker in construction zones. A computer will never be able to back a trailer into a dock. It just isn't feasible.

It takes more than just driving to safely pilot a tractor-trailer. You need instinct and experience. For instance when I see an asshole on the highway weaving in and out of traffic, I have to back down if he gets near me because he's liable to cutoff my safety distance and hit the brakes. A computer could never calculate assholes. If I hear something fall over in the trailer, I have the ability to stop and see what happened and correct the problem. A manless truck would keep on going which would be dangerous because at times, we haul carts that are on wheels. A cart that broke free of load locks or straps could easily bust through the back doors of the trailer. And even if there was some miraculous way to address those concerns, there is an insurance issue to consider. Insurance premiums are huge for trucks unlike cars. Insurance would be unaffordable for a manless truck. But I digress:

I would disagree completely. Not only will driverless vehicles take over transportation in general over the next decade or two IMO but they will do a FAR better job. A driverless vehicle makes up a TON of productivity because it does not sleep and I guarantee that it very well can take that 'asshole' into account and even more - it can do so faster while considering millions of different possibilities in the time that it takes a person to blink. Backing up will be a simple task - I do not see why you think that a computer could not take basic physics into account to back a trailer up. That is an extremely simple task for a machine and many machines do far more precise movements with much more complex maneuvers. There are many other tasks that are far more complected than that.

They certainly do not cost a million each and, more importantly, THEY ARE ALREADY HERE in a commercial capacity:
Google's Waymo is launching competely driverless taxis this year

Every major automaker is unveiling a concept car this year as well that literally has no controls. No steering wheel or pedals to speak of.

The reason that drivers are required so far is not because of the technological barriers - google has already proven the concept by driving millions of miles with a single fender bender - but because regulation is always slow to respond to quickly moving industries. Now that the law is getting on board, you will see things move faster and the tech will become cheaper as it grows.

But it's not going to happen in our lifetime, trust me.

Driverless vehicles have been on the table for over two decades, yet when put to the real test, they fail all the time.

But even if they ever could perfect the driverless cars, it would easily take at least another 20 years for trucks to follow.

Uber suspends self-driving car program after Arizona crash

Here's what happens when a self-driving Uber fails

It reminds me when I got my first computer and I bought a dummy's book. The author advised never buy new software for your computer. Don't buy version 4.0, because 4.0 doesn't have the bugs worked out yet. Wait a while for version 4.2 or 4.4 to come out, because those are the versions with the necessary adjustments and repairs.

Software works great when you pass it around to a few thousand people. When you pass it out to millions, that's when the problems arise.

So even when cars (or trucks) come out, we won't know the results until millions of people have them. In the meantime, trucks can cause serious damage and multiple deaths in a severe accident. The insurance to cover those vehicles will probably cost more than laying off ten drivers.

Considering that it is already here the only way it is not going to happen in our lifetime is if you are 80.

You do not really sound any different than those that thought the car was never going to replace the carriage.

Just think for a min - do you remember where technology was just a short 15 years ago? hell, computers were not even a thing 30 years ago. Now they run EVERYTHING. And it is a fact that technology evolves faster as more of it accumulates. Right now those cars are off the drawing boards and in the refining stage.

 

[JoeNormal]

But as a professional driver for the last few decades, I can assure you that you won't be seeing manless semi's anytime in the near future. The only vehicles they have now cost nearly a million dollars, and you still need a licensed driver in case the unit stops. A computer cannot navigate main roads or side streets. It can't calculate turns or give emergency vehicles right of way. It can't listen to directions by a road crew worker in construction zones. A computer will never be able to back a trailer into a dock. It just isn't feasible.

It takes more than just driving to safely pilot a tractor-trailer. You need instinct and experience. For instance when I see an asshole on the highway weaving in and out of traffic, I have to back down if he gets near me because he's liable to cutoff my safety distance and hit the brakes. A computer could never calculate assholes. If I hear something fall over in the trailer, I have the ability to stop and see what happened and correct the problem. A manless truck would keep on going which would be dangerous because at times, we haul carts that are on wheels. A cart that broke free of load locks or straps could easily bust through the back doors of the trailer. And even if there was some miraculous way to address those concerns, there is an insurance issue to consider. Insurance premiums are huge for trucks unlike cars. Insurance would be unaffordable for a manless truck. But I digress:

I would disagree completely. Not only will driverless vehicles take over transportation in general over the next decade or two IMO but they will do a FAR better job. A driverless vehicle makes up a TON of productivity because it does not sleep and I guarantee that it very well can take that 'asshole' into account and even more - it can do so faster while considering millions of different possibilities in the time that it takes a person to blink. Backing up will be a simple task - I do not see why you think that a computer could not take basic physics into account to back a trailer up. That is an extremely simple task for a machine and many machines do far more precise movements with much more complex maneuvers. There are many other tasks that are far more complected than that.

They certainly do not cost a million each and, more importantly, THEY ARE ALREADY HERE in a commercial capacity:
Google's Waymo is launching competely driverless taxis this year

Every major automaker is unveiling a concept car this year as well that literally has no controls. No steering wheel or pedals to speak of.

The reason that drivers are required so far is not because of the technological barriers - google has already proven the concept by driving millions of miles with a single fender bender - but because regulation is always slow to respond to quickly moving industries. Now that the law is getting on board, you will see things move faster and the tech will become cheaper as it grows.

But it's not going to happen in our lifetime, trust me.

Driverless vehicles have been on the table for over two decades, yet when put to the real test, they fail all the time.

But even if they ever could perfect the driverless cars, it would easily take at least another 20 years for trucks to follow.

Uber suspends self-driving car program after Arizona crash

Here's what happens when a self-driving Uber fails

It reminds me when I got my first computer and I bought a dummy's book. The author advised never buy new software for your computer. Don't buy version 4.0, because 4.0 doesn't have the bugs worked out yet. Wait a while for version 4.2 or 4.4 to come out, because those are the versions with the necessary adjustments and repairs.

Software works great when you pass it around to a few thousand people. When you pass it out to millions, that's when the problems arise.

So even when cars (or trucks) come out, we won't know the results until millions of people have them. In the meantime, trucks can cause serious damage and multiple deaths in a severe accident. The insurance to cover those vehicles will probably cost more than laying off ten drivers.

I wouldn't get too complacent. Self driving vehicles will be twice as good in a year, four times as good in two years, eight times as good in three years...

If that were true, we would have had manless vehicles fifteen years ago.

I think that if they could possibly perfect the driverless car, it would save lives. In spite of our great success in the reduction of impaired drivers on the road, there are still millions more out there. In the future, if a person wants to go to a party or a bar, they could drive their own vehicle their destination, punch in the coordinates, and simply get in their car at the end of the night and let the vehicle take them home.

As for trucks, it's a different ball game. They have been installing more and more technology in trucks the last ten years or so, mostly due to pollution crap. Now these things break down all the time and it gets costly because it's all electronic stuff. I have the newest tractor in the fleet. It has 12,000 miles on it. It's already been in the repair shop twice, and once somebody had to come out to get it started. 12,000 miles for a truck is like 1,000 miles for a car. Imagine how pissed off you would be if you had to take your brand new car in twice in under a thousand miles.

The experimental vehicles they are screwing around with now can only do one thing, and that is go straight on a highway. Technology? Hell, we can't even find a GPS that can lead you to your stop using truck routes only. Often they F-up and take you down a truck restricted road, or lead you down a road that has a low bridge that you can't pass. I don't even use the damn things. Too untrustworthy.

So we are a lifetime away from total manless trucks; not that I'm worried, I'll be retired in five years from now. But I just don't see it with the experience that I have. There are just too many human calculations that have to be made on a daily basis to pilot a tractor-trailer that computers could never do. And remember, automation is only good if it's cheaper and just as dependable as human labor.

I don't know what kind of driverless prototype you are talking about from 15 years ago. Didn't exist in the current form. Also, there have been some incredible breakthroughs in machine learning in the last 5 or 6 years that are game changers. There might be more soon but even if things head in just simple Moore's law direction, the world as we know it won't exist for much longer.

It's not that I'm pulling against you. I think there need to be occupations that pay a decent wage for the common man. But we're on a global freight train that's not slowing down.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

But as a professional driver for the last few decades, I can assure you that you won't be seeing manless semi's anytime in the near future. The only vehicles they have now cost nearly a million dollars, and you still need a licensed driver in case the unit stops. A computer cannot navigate main roads or side streets. It can't calculate turns or give emergency vehicles right of way. It can't listen to directions by a road crew worker in construction zones. A computer will never be able to back a trailer into a dock. It just isn't feasible.

It takes more than just driving to safely pilot a tractor-trailer. You need instinct and experience. For instance when I see an asshole on the highway weaving in and out of traffic, I have to back down if he gets near me because he's liable to cutoff my safety distance and hit the brakes. A computer could never calculate assholes. If I hear something fall over in the trailer, I have the ability to stop and see what happened and correct the problem. A manless truck would keep on going which would be dangerous because at times, we haul carts that are on wheels. A cart that broke free of load locks or straps could easily bust through the back doors of the trailer. And even if there was some miraculous way to address those concerns, there is an insurance issue to consider. Insurance premiums are huge for trucks unlike cars. Insurance would be unaffordable for a manless truck. But I digress:

I would disagree completely. Not only will driverless vehicles take over transportation in general over the next decade or two IMO but they will do a FAR better job. A driverless vehicle makes up a TON of productivity because it does not sleep and I guarantee that it very well can take that 'asshole' into account and even more - it can do so faster while considering millions of different possibilities in the time that it takes a person to blink. Backing up will be a simple task - I do not see why you think that a computer could not take basic physics into account to back a trailer up. That is an extremely simple task for a machine and many machines do far more precise movements with much more complex maneuvers. There are many other tasks that are far more complected than that.

They certainly do not cost a million each and, more importantly, THEY ARE ALREADY HERE in a commercial capacity:
Google's Waymo is launching competely driverless taxis this year

Every major automaker is unveiling a concept car this year as well that literally has no controls. No steering wheel or pedals to speak of.

The reason that drivers are required so far is not because of the technological barriers - google has already proven the concept by driving millions of miles with a single fender bender - but because regulation is always slow to respond to quickly moving industries. Now that the law is getting on board, you will see things move faster and the tech will become cheaper as it grows.

But it's not going to happen in our lifetime, trust me.

Driverless vehicles have been on the table for over two decades, yet when put to the real test, they fail all the time.

But even if they ever could perfect the driverless cars, it would easily take at least another 20 years for trucks to follow.

Uber suspends self-driving car program after Arizona crash

Here's what happens when a self-driving Uber fails

It reminds me when I got my first computer and I bought a dummy's book. The author advised never buy new software for your computer. Don't buy version 4.0, because 4.0 doesn't have the bugs worked out yet. Wait a while for version 4.2 or 4.4 to come out, because those are the versions with the necessary adjustments and repairs.

Software works great when you pass it around to a few thousand people. When you pass it out to millions, that's when the problems arise.

So even when cars (or trucks) come out, we won't know the results until millions of people have them. In the meantime, trucks can cause serious damage and multiple deaths in a severe accident. The insurance to cover those vehicles will probably cost more than laying off ten drivers.

Considering that it is already here the only way it is not going to happen in our lifetime is if you are 80.

You do not really sound any different than those that thought the car was never going to replace the carriage.

Just think for a min - do you remember where technology was just a short 15 years ago? hell, computers were not even a thing 30 years ago. Now they run EVERYTHING. And it is a fact that technology evolves faster as more of it accumulates. Right now those cars are off the drawing boards and in the refining stage.

Yes I have seen the technology the last 15 years, especially in trucks. That's why I don't believe in seeing a driverless tractor-trailer anytime soon.

Right now, we can't find enough over the road drivers. We are short about a good 30,000 of them. So if and when trucks are able to do those jobs, they won't be able to do anything other than go straight on the highway. They will never be able to replace a city driver because you can find city drivers all over the place and it would't be cost effective.

Cars might be a different story, but again, it's still going to take years to get it down to a science. First off one would have to ask who would want a car that drives itself? Where is the demand to pay all that extra money just so you don't have to drive? Well, my mother could use one. She never had a drivers license in her life. But then it would boil down to the reliability of such a car that the law would allow an unlicensed be the only one that operates it.