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.
so... they can afford to live in the rural area but they choose to go to high col where they can get paid more?
exactly how is this different than what they do today? it isn't like they can't afford to live in the rural areas, but they choose not to
it isn't "expensive" to live today in low col areas, people do it on social security, about $1200-1500... they can make that on the current minimum wage
ubi didn't do anything to change their desire of high living in the big city
alot of people don't go to suburb or rural areas b/c there aren't enough jobs.
While I'm sympathetic to some kind of mandatory "community service," UBI isn't about that at all, and to tie UBI to that rather defeats the whole point of UBI.
No it doesn't. What point does it defeat?
To guarantee a minimum level of income? A community service element doesn't change that. Check.
To free people from "mind-numbing soul-crushing work"? A small community service requirement leaves them free 6-1/2 days of the week to be creative and philosophical. Check.
There would obviously be exceptions for those medically unable to do anything. And the service might even include taking a college course. The point being that everyone has to contribute in some way to be a member of society in good standing.
You act as if people are moral. You act as if people follow the words of Jesus Christ. They aren't and they don't.
You act as if "the words of Jesus Christ" and "moral" are synonymous. History has shown conflicting ideals with religion have gotten VERY bloody.
.
You also act like the people who would benefit from UBI are the only ones who are not moral.
I think the Soviets, Chinese, and others tried this. Also slavery usually involves basic living standards.
Here is the clincher to all you would be socialist who love this concept. Google "elite quotes population reduction" or similar. Interesting what the "thinkers" really think. You think the men behind the curtain will just float millions of people out of the goodness of their hearts? They are already talking about how there are too many people on the earth. Your basic income will come with ever growing attachments involved if you intend to live off solely that. Certain behaviors limited. Growing demands to become more and more of a better "citizen" or "global citizen" by things like not having kids and not exceeding your daily calorie and electricity rations.
You can get a free lunch, but it might cost you your soul in the end. Better to get a skill and stay free, and to encourage people who don't have skills in demand that they are mistaken if the powers that be will be happy to float them forever.
Automation coming into play does not mean instant post-scarcity economics. No, it means many's labor will we be redundant, and as resources continue to become strained guess who loses...
Robots can grow food, but it doesn't necessarily mean the instant creation of more arable land. Increased efficiency from automation does mean increased production for less, but it doesn't automatically mean more things like rare earths are instantly created to fuel production booms. Automation means efficiency and less labor. It does not mean it will auto keep up with demand for goods. And, as fewer and fewer people own production, their priorities of what to produce may not be yours nor for the benefit of the greater good.
Sure the powers that be will be happy to buy your votes off with "basic income"...that is until their power becomes solidified and they no longer need you. Then an army of dupes becomes a herd of "useless eaters" as they refer to you. If you have a farm and your farm animals are no longer good for milking or eating what do you do with them? And the elite of the world absolutely view the world as "their farm" and you being an animal.
Don't let smooth worlds and promises of easy street cause you to sell yourself or your descendants out to a new form of slavery that eventual death for a free phone, section 8 housing, and access to easy drugs that just happen to be available almost everywhere even though the government is waging a "war" against drugs in the tune of billions of dollars each year.
Think.
The problem is that US common folk aren't going to be consulted or asked permission to do this. This is going to be mandated by the powers that be. Sure, there may be "voting" on this issue, but the outcome of the voting will of course be predetermined. Like Soviet Communist Joseph Stalin said "the ones that have the power are not the ones who cast the votes, but the ones that count the votes." This can happen under either a Capitalist or Communist regime. It is a cynical but realistic scenario.
Machines Will Have ALL the Jobs and Will Do ALL the Labor
Quote:
Originally Posted by MLSFan
automation eliminates labor not jobs... learn how to work using automation as a tool
if they can find work for their pleasure without doing labor, they can do it today already
the poor artist that cant sing because he needs food, he wont be singing after ubi because he still isnt good and no one would listen to him regardless. if he were good, people would pay him today for his songs
I don't understand your reasoning. Full Automation will eliminate all jobs for all people. Machines now help people in doing their jobs (some jobs for people have been permanently automated already) but will take over all peoples jobs later. The machines are the ones that will have the jobs and do the labor, not people. People's labor will no longer be required. The planned end result of automation, as automation experts agree, is to have the machines do the work, not people. The reason for this is that the machines can do the work better, faster, more efficiently, and cheaper than using people. People get left behind and just can't compete. People could still work if they wanted to, but only for pleasure because no one would pay them for the work because anything you might need will be provided by a machine. The free market is based on competition. People will simply not be able to compete for jobs against a machine.
What's pitiful is that people feel they need to depend on drugs -- so much so as to not even put that SugarHoneyIcedTea away for a living!
Really, it's sad mind-altering substances are so sought-after. I see this in the homeless shelters all the time...morons don't have enough for socks or underwear but somehow are able to make sure they have their weed/smack/nicotine/caffeine/sugar/WorldHipHopStar....
So yeah, I keep wondering about the "freeloaders," as I call them, in UBI...such folks will wreck UBI, I'm afraid -- they're going to smoke their UBI up and still be on the streets stinking up the subways and being a nuisance whining about just needing "a chance" and just wanting money for "coffee"...really, what's to be done about the morons in our midst?? They'll just blow their UBI money and still be homeless and drug-addled....
As sad as it is, under UBI, I'd say that if you use up all your funds for the month, you are just SOL until you get your next payment the next month. I imagine private charities will make a comeback.
The point of UBI is it will allow people to live modestly plus a little extra so long as they are just enjoying the basic bare necessities in life. I say enough to pay for a dignified basic living PLUS a little extra, so shrewd people who aren't able to work for some reason will be able to save up and maybe get job training in something useful after a couple of years of saving.
There could be double UBI if you are certified 100% disabled, but otherwise, the point of UBI is it gets you by without you having to worry if making more money will make you lose everything.
I wouldn't mind a "Basic Income" however, the condition is "Help the community" go help clean up a park, rake leaves or help in a volunteer position. In a animal shelter, food distribution center....20 hrs a week. That way, they get an income and the public also benefits.
I'm with you on this.. also, universal basic income needs to replace unemployment benefits and welfare or at least drastically reduce the latter benefits.
I don't understand your reasoning. Full Automation will eliminate all jobs for all people. Machines now help people in doing their jobs (some jobs for people have been permanently automated already) but will take over all peoples jobs later. The machines are the ones that will have the jobs and do the labor, not people. People's labor will no longer be required. The planned end result of automation, as automation experts agree, is to have the machines do the work, not people. The reason for this is that the machines can do the work better, faster, more efficiently, and cheaper than using people. People get left behind and just can't compete. People could still work if they wanted to, but only for pleasure because no one would pay them for the work because anything you might need will be provided by a machine. The free market is based on competition. People will simply not be able to compete for jobs against a machine.
Once all the jobs are replace by machine, then what is a person going to do to survive? You can have every person working on them, but their cost in wages will cheap as supply vs demand will not be a affected tool. Got to draw the line some where, "that automation is done here but not in this field"
Once all the jobs are replace by machine, then what is a person going to do to survive? You can have every person working on them, but their cost in wages will cheap as supply vs demand will not be a affected tool. Got to draw the line some where, "that automation is done here but not in this field"
That is exactly the problem with full automation. Once all jobs are taken by the machines (machines will service, support, and repair other machines), people won't have jobs or money to buy anything that the machines produce. So the system will collapse on itself.
The government and the people will have to devise solutions to overcome this problem. One solution is for the government to nationalize the industries and produce the goods and services and give them to the people for free. Many people don't like that solution because that is a government handout for "entitled" people. Another solution is to outlaw the machines, smash them up, and then declare that only people can have jobs. Still another solution is to go with the first one of having the machines produce everything for free, but put a fig leaf on the "entitlement" problem by giving people government "make work" fake jobs much like George Jetson on "The Jetsons" where he pushes a button and all the work is done for him. That would ease the consciences of many people by allowing them to think that they are still contributing to society and are not entitled (clever psyops), where they really are.
It is difficult to predict what scenario would happen, but I'm sure that we are in for a bumpy ride.
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.
Counting Votes
