What's your position on a universal minimum income?

[CultureCitizen]

Many economists ( Steeve Keen, Milton Friedman ) as well as some institutions (singularity university) and busienssmen (Elon Musk) advocate for a universal minimum income.

What's your position regarding this policy?
References:
Universal minimum income to be above poverty line ( about $11 per day)
Minimum wage ( about $57 per day)
Median individual income ( about $88 per day)

Addendum :the singularity university is dedicated to solving big problems using AI. Elon musk is concerned about the role of man in an increasingly aoutomated world.

Basic income - Wikipedia

 

[Never3ndr]

Many economists ( Steeve Keen, Milton Friedman ) as well as some institutions (singularity university) and busienssmen (Elon Musk) advocate for a universal minimum income.

What's your position regarding this policy?
References:
Universal minimum income to be above poverty line ( about $11 per day)
Minimum wage ( about $57 per day)
Median individual income ( about $88 per day)

Basic income - Wikipedia

I'm assuming you to mean universal in the sense of being global (most people simply associate it with just across the states).

If this is what you mean, I am strictly against this notion. The only way for some nations to really compete with developed economies is with their ultra cheap labor force. If you instill a universal minimum wage (which is noted to encourage unemployment, if the wage is above the equilibrium point of labor supply and demand for it), then you are likely to increase the gap between the industrialized world and emerging economies (thereby increasing human suffering) rather than healing that gap.

This isn't even getting into more technical issues such as our exchange rates, how different governments handle their currency, social support issues, etc.

 

[1stRambo]

Yo, how about just getting an EDUCATION, FOOLS!!!

"GTP"

 

[CultureCitizen]

Many economists ( Steeve Keen, Milton Friedman ) as well as some institutions (singularity university) and busienssmen (Elon Musk) advocate for a universal minimum income.

What's your position regarding this policy?
References:
Universal minimum income to be above poverty line ( about $11 per day)
Minimum wage ( about $57 per day)
Median individual income ( about $88 per day)

Basic income - Wikipedia

I'm assuming you to mean universal in the sense of being global (most people simply associate it with just across the states).

If this is what you mean, I am strictly against this notion. The only way for some nations to really compete with developed economies is with their ultra cheap labor force. If you instill a universal minimum wage (which is noted to encourage unemployment, if the wage is above the equilibrium point of labor supply and demand for it), then you are likely to increase the gap between the industrialized world and emerging economies (thereby increasing human suffering) rather than healing that gap.

This isn't even getting into more technical issues such as our exchange rates, how different governments handle their currency, social support issues, etc.

Well , I was only considering it for the US. If it was adopted on a universal scale we would need a global currency.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I've always thought it was an interesting concept. Not sure if it would work in practicality. Given the rapidly increasing advances in technology more and more jobs done by humans are going to become obsolete. Down the road we may not have a choice.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Yo, how about just getting an EDUCATION, FOOLS!!!

"GTP"
View attachment 112925

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

 

[Iceweasel]

I'm all for it if you pick up the bill.

 

[TNHarley]

No fucking way. Who will be the ones to handle this? Who will be the ones to decide? Are we going to start getting taxed by the NWO?
There is no plausible way to do that without losing our sovereignty and giving authority to a world wide central power.
You never know, maybe one day we will HAVE to do it if everything goes the way of the robot. Or we could just have the robot give us everything we need and no need for money. who knows.

 

[Iceweasel]

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Jobs have always been destroyed. Not too many ice or milk men these days.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Jobs have always been destroyed. Not too many ice or milk men these days.

Agreed, but then never have so many jobs been destroyed at the rate they are being destroyed now. The level of employment in the US peaked in the 2000s and hasn't ever recovered. It is only a 5% decrease ... but I doubt it will ever reach 65% again.
US Employment Population Ratio

Have you read Stiglitz's article on the great depression?
Joseph Stiglitz: “A Banking System is Supposed to Serve Society, Not the Other Way Around”

 

[1stRambo]

Yo, how about just getting an EDUCATION, FOOLS!!!

"GTP"
View attachment 112925

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Yo, if you`re concerned about your future? I suggest you start getting into another job now, you can start driving a Big Rig, cost you nothing, join a trucking company who will pay for your training, and you can make more or the same as you`re making now! People need to use their GOD giving Brain, simple!!!

P.S. You Might Get Your Hands Dirty, But You Can Pay Your Bills, And Fill Your Stomach!!!

"GTP"

 

[Iceweasel]

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Jobs have always been destroyed. Not too many ice or milk men these days.

Agreed, but then never have so many jobs been destroyed at the rate they are being destroyed now. The level of employment in the US peaked in the 2000s and hasn't ever recovered. It is only a 5% decrease ... but I doubt it will ever reach 65% again.
US Employment Population Ratio

Have you read Stiglitz's article on the great depression?
Joseph Stiglitz: “A Banking System is Supposed to Serve Society, Not the Other Way Around”

Lots of business have died, ain't started up or left. Too much government. Fix that and we'll have better numbers to work with.

 

[Boss]

I've always thought it was an interesting concept. Not sure if it would work in practicality. Given the rapidly increasing advances in technology more and more jobs done by humans are going to become obsolete. Down the road we may not have a choice.

This is the popular argument made by even more conservative economists but I completely disagree with the opinion. We have always had advancement in technology and man always finds new things to do with his time. You will always need people to program the machines which replace humans... or humans to program the machines that program... etc. There will always need to be engineers and technicians, people to do maintenance and installation. Perhaps we will need to become more technically trained in the future... perhaps there will be less need for menial labor. I kind of doubt it, someone will have to load the machines on trucks and put them together at some point. Or they'll have to put together the machines that put the machines together. Some human labor will always be needed.

Even if we carried this to the most extreme example, there will still be a need for humans to create. Machines don't have imaginations. The very thing that makes us humans special will require humans to continually produce and create. While it may be true that the future holds less of a place for strenuous laborious type jobs, that's not different from our past. We don't see gangs of men pounding rail spikes in to build railroads anymore, we have machines to do that now. We've not made work obsolete, we've simply found other things to do and we always will.

Wages should be determined in value by a free market operating on the principles of supply and demand. It is the most fair and equitable system we've ever created.

 

[Defiant1]

It's not needed.

Survival of the fittest and natural selection will take care of everything.

 

[Jomama]

I totally support it. Dismantle the welfare bureaucracy, deal with the robitization of our economy, create an income stream to solve homelessness and other social ills. I see it somewhat like the the Alaska permanent fund dividend and it MUST be tied to capitalistic wealth creation. You lazy f*cks cant just spend your time boycotting my business and expect me to fund your daytime tv habit.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I've always thought it was an interesting concept. Not sure if it would work in practicality. Given the rapidly increasing advances in technology more and more jobs done by humans are going to become obsolete. Down the road we may not have a choice.

This is the popular argument made by even more conservative economists but I completely disagree with the opinion. We have always had advancement in technology and man always finds new things to do with his time. You will always need people to program the machines which replace humans... or humans to program the machines that program... etc. There will always need to be engineers and technicians, people to do maintenance and installation. Perhaps we will need to become more technically trained in the future... perhaps there will be less need for menial labor. I kind of doubt it, someone will have to load the machines on trucks and put them together at some point. Or they'll have to put together the machines that put the machines together. Some human labor will always be needed.

Even if we carried this to the most extreme example, there will still be a need for humans to create. Machines don't have imaginations. The very thing that makes us humans special will require humans to continually produce and create. While it may be true that the future holds less of a place for strenuous laborious type jobs, that's not different from our past. We don't see gangs of men pounding rail spikes in to build railroads anymore, we have machines to do that now. We've not made work obsolete, we've simply found other things to do and we always will.

Wages should be determined in value by a free market operating on the principles of supply and demand. It is the most fair and equitable system we've ever created.

Hi Boss,
I am more concerned by the rate of change than by the actual change:
How many years passed between the wheel and the steam engine? Thousands.. How many passed between the steam engine and the internal combustion engine? A hundred . Then , how many passed between the mainframe and the pc? Thirty. And how many between that and the smartphones: twenty five.
Driverless vehicles and cashier free supermarkets are already here, they are not the norm, and it will still take ten years before every new car is driverless. But then the impact will be huge and sudden, it will not be a slow transition.

 

[CultureCitizen]

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Jobs have always been destroyed. Not too many ice or milk men these days.

Agreed, but then never have so many jobs been destroyed at the rate they are being destroyed now. The level of employment in the US peaked in the 2000s and hasn't ever recovered. It is only a 5% decrease ... but I doubt it will ever reach 65% again.
US Employment Population Ratio

Have you read Stiglitz's article on the great depression?
Joseph Stiglitz: “A Banking System is Supposed to Serve Society, Not the Other Way Around”

Lots of business have died, ain't started up or left. Too much government. Fix that and we'll have better numbers to work with.

Well , I assume you are a republican ... you ( republicans now have the upper hand ). Time to see if republican policies work ... or not.

 

[Iceweasel]

I have been getting an education every single day of my life: I am a computer scientist, and I am actually very concerned about the advances in AI, many jobs are going to be destroyed in the next 20 years, it is going to be very hard for people to retool for the kind jobs that will be needed .

Jobs have always been destroyed. Not too many ice or milk men these days.

Agreed, but then never have so many jobs been destroyed at the rate they are being destroyed now. The level of employment in the US peaked in the 2000s and hasn't ever recovered. It is only a 5% decrease ... but I doubt it will ever reach 65% again.
US Employment Population Ratio

Have you read Stiglitz's article on the great depression?
Joseph Stiglitz: “A Banking System is Supposed to Serve Society, Not the Other Way Around”

Lots of business have died, ain't started up or left. Too much government. Fix that and we'll have better numbers to work with.

Well , I assume you are a republican ... you ( republicans now have the upper hand ). Time to see if republican policies work ... or not.

I'm not a party member type. I vote that way if I vote. But it would be hard to do worse, the economy has been on life support for a long time.

 

[Boss]

I've always thought it was an interesting concept. Not sure if it would work in practicality. Given the rapidly increasing advances in technology more and more jobs done by humans are going to become obsolete. Down the road we may not have a choice.

This is the popular argument made by even more conservative economists but I completely disagree with the opinion. We have always had advancement in technology and man always finds new things to do with his time. You will always need people to program the machines which replace humans... or humans to program the machines that program... etc. There will always need to be engineers and technicians, people to do maintenance and installation. Perhaps we will need to become more technically trained in the future... perhaps there will be less need for menial labor. I kind of doubt it, someone will have to load the machines on trucks and put them together at some point. Or they'll have to put together the machines that put the machines together. Some human labor will always be needed.

Even if we carried this to the most extreme example, there will still be a need for humans to create. Machines don't have imaginations. The very thing that makes us humans special will require humans to continually produce and create. While it may be true that the future holds less of a place for strenuous laborious type jobs, that's not different from our past. We don't see gangs of men pounding rail spikes in to build railroads anymore, we have machines to do that now. We've not made work obsolete, we've simply found other things to do and we always will.

Wages should be determined in value by a free market operating on the principles of supply and demand. It is the most fair and equitable system we've ever created.

Hi Boss,
I am more concerned by the rate of change than by the actual change:
How many years passed between the wheel and the steam engine? Thousands.. How many passed between the steam engine and the internal combustion engine? A hundred . Then , how many passed between the mainframe and the pc? Thirty. And how many between that and the smartphones: twenty five.
Driverless vehicles and cashier free supermarkets are already here, they are not the norm, and it will still take ten years before every new car is driverless. But then the impact will be huge and sudden, it will not be a slow transition.

Nevertheless, we've always adapted. Humans always find new ways to spend their time. It's hard for us to even fathom what life for a typical housewife was just 70-80 years ago. Are housewives obsolete or did they find new things to do with their time?

I understand the argument you're making but I think humans will always find new things to do with their time, like they always have. Now, I can't tell you all about what those things are because we're not there yet. Those things haven't yet been imagined because there isn't a necessity as of yet. But, just as we found new things to do rather than take care of our horses and chop the wood... hunt for meat... sew our kid's clothing... harvest our crops... etc., etc., etc., we WILL find new things to do to replace the things we no longer have to do. Why? Because we always have.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Yo, how about just getting an EDUCATION, FOOLS!!!

"GTP"
View attachment 112925

If We Have to Do It on Our Own, So Must They. They Don't, So We Shouldn't.

If you teach a man to fish, he'll starve to death before he learns how. The plutocrats who mandate this better give the few who belong in college the same adult allowance and paid-up tuition they give their sons, or true democrats should make sure those spoiled pukes never graduate.