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.
A utopia would be where we don't have to work at what we don't want to do, or at least not work more than 20-25 hours a week which is how much humans in hunter-gatherer bands work at procuring food. That's what humans would "naturally" do.
There are not enough jobs for everyone. There are certainly not enough full time, well paying jobs for everyone. There never have been and there never will be.
We have this cultural trope that everyone must work full time or else they are worthless. Why? What is it about working 40 or 60 hours a week that makes someone a better person? For the majority of us, we don't even like our work and we know it's pointless. We work because we think we have to, even though the world would keep going if most of didn't do whatever bean-counting we're paid to do.
The basic problem with basic income is basic math. We still have to pay for it. We can’t all sit around meditating while robots light scented candles. Only dreamers see basic income as a resolution to technologies that will make certain workers obsolete. Would they rather we "progress" as a people, why not go back to the days before us. I'm sure many jobs became obsolete due to changes.
Hardly a poverty-eradicating master plan, that’s because it would remove existing policies that help low earners: personal allowances and working tax credits, which are a version of Friedman’s negative income tax for workers.
I am guessing you didn't wade through the long article on basic wage. The math works. I am not saying it is a perfect plan; there are still a few small holes (like making sure money is spent on food and what to do if it isn't) but math isn't one of them. The holes it has can be solved; it's a matter of what the policy would be for open questions than solving some impossible riddle (like at what point concentration of wealth causes socioeconomic collapse).
I am guessing you didn't wade through the long article on basic wage. The math works. I am not saying it is a perfect plan; there are still a few small holes (like making sure money is spent on food and what to do if it isn't) but math isn't one of them. The holes it has can be solved; it's a matter of what the policy would be for open questions than solving some impossible riddle (like at what point concentration of wealth causes socioeconomic collapse).
Hey if someone wants to work, pay high taxes so they can send me a monthly check while I relax and sit by the pool, go for it.
A utopia would be where we don't have to work at what we don't want to do, or at least not work more than 20-25 hours a week which is how much humans in hunter-gatherer bands work at procuring food. That's what humans would "naturally" do.
There are not enough jobs for everyone. There are certainly not enough full time, well paying jobs for everyone. There never have been and there never will be.
We have this cultural trope that everyone must work full time or else they are worthless. Why? What is it about working 40 or 60 hours a week that makes someone a better person? For the majority of us, we don't even like our work and we know it's pointless. We work because we think we have to, even though the world would keep going if most of didn't do whatever bean-counting we're paid to do.
I do agree that working 40, especially 60 is way too much. So what we did is keep expenses down, don't buy stupid stuff, our rule was no OT (what for? they would just take more money from us anyway) and I learned to live on less so I could put money away too. Turns out the more I paid attention to money, the more I made an effort to learn about finance the better I did without working more. Going as planned for many years and life's been pretty damn good.
Most of this discussion has been way off course; reading the recently linked articles on robotics and automation would bring back the context for those interested. If there is only work for half the population, how would we address that without a socialistic approach? Part time work with job sharing would be a possibility for a lot of jobs, but then we would have to make sure that even part time wages are enough to live on.
Most of this discussion has been way off course; reading the recently linked articles on robotics and automation would bring back the context for those interested. If there is only work for half the population, how would we address that without a socialistic approach? Part time work with job sharing would be a possibility for a lot of jobs, but then we would have to make sure that even part time wages are enough to live on.
LOL, business can pay rocket scientist wages. People like you think money grows on trees. Look Beach, you have a unicorn in your front yard.
LOL, business can pay rocket scientist wages. People like you think money grows on trees. Look Beach, you have a unicorn in your front yard.
So what do you think will happen if automation eliminates half the jobs?
Another one got out? I have got to repair that corral...
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.
