Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think a basic income would be a lot cheaper than the current welfare system. And don't forget an the money the government gives as corporate welfare to subsidize the wages, for example like Walmart workers who cost the taxpayer billions a year. That's why I'm not even bothering to vote in this year's elections. I see none of the candidates discussing the future of technology and what to do with the eventual millions of displaced workers. They seem stuck in a 20th century mindset.
The business's upon hearing of the Obamacare rules and now most recent increased taxes on business. has resorted to them using the PT work as a work around.
Business's DO NOT want taxed and will severe its work force to thwart off the taxation and requirements under obamacare.
A former business I worked for installed automated systems...it was our bread and butter. Never mind that in our business quotes on cost savings, we were able to say to our clients: By integrating this into your business module, you will have released over $400,000 tied up in your employee labor over a 2 year period.
Business's were chomping at the bits to get this system. We profited off of Obamacare...
The downside was....it cost money to service these systems and keep them running 24/7. So our business projected a minimum service contract would run 50k a year. They were happy, we were happy.
The employees who got canned. Not happy at all.
I would eventually be one of them replaced by technology.
Currently in my area, PT is becoming the norm. So working two jobs has become standard. Which has set up its own challenges as non competes are being required and longer travel time to various assignments has shorten a life away from work.
Location: MA/ME (the way life should not be / the way it should be)
1,266 posts, read 1,387,424 times
Reputation: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by chacho_keva
Are you saying that the greater number of PT jobs are a result of Obamacare? In face-to-face conversation about this topic with someone today, I was lead to believe the opposite. I was told that Obamacare was implemented precisely because many people happen to work PT jobs which disqualify them for health benefits.
If the ACA was to insure PT people, then they would require it for all jobs say over 20 hours per week (half time), instead of requiring it for anything just over a few hours under 40 a week.
Personally, subsidizing the cost of medicine, and preventing people from hiking life saving medications cost by the 100s of the percent, would make it much more available to anyone.
I think it was Obamacare that made less 40 hour work weeks more common. They did exist beforehand, but the number is on the rise now.
My spit-balling opinion is that Trump is just the symptom of what everyone previously in this thread has observed. Think of Trump as "the boy with his finger in the ****," who to make America Great Again, wants to get back to the basics and undo years of wrong headed social and economic reform.
Is that possible? Yes, for a time. AS long as the **** holds. In essence, he is the first of a line of political leaders who will attempt to isolate the USA from, for example, what is now happening in Europe.
It is possible because the USA is, but for the oil lobby, energy independent. We can feed ourselves because we have two growing seasons and an under class of immigrant agricultural workers and food processors along with the technology to feed our own population.
If Trump and his successors reforms global trade agreements, global trade subsidies, and currency plays, brings industry back, and rebuilds our manufacturing capacity, it will work. However, the negative impact on the rest of the world will make America target Number One.
My spit-balling opinion is that Trump is just the symptom of what everyone previously in this thread has observed. Think of Trump as "the boy with his finger in the ****," who to make America Great Again, wants to get back to the basics and undo years of wrong headed social and economic reform.
Is that possible? Yes, for a time. AS long as the **** holds. In essence, he is the first of a line of political leaders who will attempt to isolate the USA from, for example, what is now happening in Europe.
It is possible because the USA is, but for the oil lobby, energy independent. We can feed ourselves because we have two growing seasons and an under class of immigrant agricultural workers and food processors along with the technology to feed our own population.
If Trump and his successors reforms global trade agreements, global trade subsidies, and currency plays, brings industry back, and rebuilds our manufacturing capacity, it will work. However, the negative impact on the rest of the world will make America target Number One.
The thread seems to have moved away from what the OP was concerned about. I.e. how technology/automation/robotics and the evolution of AE will permanently "destroy" the majority of jobs not just here but in every first world country. We're facing an unprecedented paradigm shift.
I'm not sure if I qualify as a "young person," (late 30s) but no, right now I'm not willing to land a "solid, long-lasting, well-paying job." My primary reason is that these solid jobs are not as solid as one might think. Since I'm working for myself, I know that my own best interests are at the forefront of my company. No employer is going to work hard to keep me employed than I am.
Secondly, I enjoy the flexibility and independence that goes along with contracting. If I want to go on vacation, I don't have to get anyone's permission. If I decide to take off a random Tuesday and go to the beach, no problem. I can get my work done whenever and wherever I choose. If I don't want to work with a pain-in-the-hiney client any longer, I just don't. If I want to give myself a raise, I do so.
I think that today's young people know that they can have a lot more autonomy if they go into business on their own. Obviously not all of them are interested in that, and many will still choose to work for another company, which is perfectly fine. But doing things differently than previous generations doesn't mean that today's younger workers are doing things wrong or are lazy or unmotivated. They've simply found a way to make work work for them and the lifestyles they choose to pursue.
Thank you for sharing your POV. For the record, relatively speaking, you are most definitely what I'd consider "A Young Person."
Frankly, "the joys of autonomy" is not something which has entered the discussions I've recently had with people within your age group. Job and wage security appear to rank much higher, and rightfully so.
Nevertheless, if being self employed is affording you a sustainable wage, and if you're not struggling to secure healthcare and retirement benefits, then you are definitely among those few who are doing much better than the average person.
This is a very interesting idea. It would give everyone autonomy. I say this coming from a middle-class entrepreneurial mindset, though... I really don't know how it would work in poverty-stricken areas.
I also like the idea of basic income. It would eliminate all of the nonsense surrounding the current welfare system. If every individual was given $XXXXX per year (whatever the poverty level is, I guess) and no one got any food stamps/cash assistance beyond that/whatever, then people could choose to sit home and just collect their meager income, or they could combine that with their business for a more attractive lifestyle.
(I'm no economist, obviously... I'm a writer. You do the math. I have no idea whether the basic income would work out financially. I will say that I doubt it could ever happen, because the bootstrap people would be livid that everyone got the same amount of money without having to prove how desperate they are....)
How could this be economically sustainable, without heavily taxing those who have higher incomes, which is now politically impossible.
In San Francisco, I have never seen so much homelessness in the last 3 or 4 years. Not the usual druggie types either or those with mental problems, now it is displaced tech workers or just those working people who lost their jobs and no place else to go.
In Golden Gate park, the DPW there now have cut back so much vegetation , the place is beginning to look very bare, as a means of elimination hiding places or sleeping areas for the homeless in the park. Almost like a non stop battle between the park police and homeless now.
Maybe those homeless people have jobs but they cannot afford the $3500/mo rent for a 1BR apartment in San Fran? Even when they can afford the rent they have trouble getting an apartment because the apartments have dozens of applicants and get rented out in the first hour or two
I'm a conservative, and I think we're going to have to go to some form of UBI at some point. I don't know where all this will lead, but people have always defined themselves by work. It's scary to think about.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Pure Speculation
I have no idea whether the basic income would work out financially. I will say that I doubt it could ever happen, because the bootstrap people would be livid that everyone got the same amount of money without having to prove how desperate they are....)
