Universal basic income to be trialled

FoxEye said:
We're talking about a total paradigm change for our entire civilisation, from the only one we've ever known for thousands of years, to something entirely different.
Click to expand...

Like the horse to the internal combustion engine, a paradigm shift from what we've known for thousands of years.

From a log dugout canoe to the space shuttle or more generally flight. A paradigm shift...

It's what humans do. Never sit still, it is our best trait and our worst.
 
Hagar said:
Like the horse to the internal combustion engine, a paradigm shift from what we've known for thousands of years.

From a log dugout canoe to the space shuttle or more generally flight. A paradigm shift...

It's what humans do. Never sit still, it is our best trait and our worst.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's even in the same ball park.

Imagine, for one second, the impact of not having money. I'm not saying that's inevitable, but bear in mind AI don't need to get paid nor do robots.

What the rich might want to do is convert all of their money under this paradigm to assets and resources in the next.

What happens to governments? What motivates the rich/the powerful to support the governments? What motivates the governments to support the people?

Everything that we think we know about how society works, could be in for a massive overhaul and change in direction.
 
dLockers said:
Yes - but some random posters sweep in to call everyone dumb and say that isn't how it works; then offer nothing in the way of an explanation.
Click to expand...

I also think the trial is flawed, of course the mental well-being of the group receiving £1600/month extra is going to improve relative to the group not receiving it! However, it's not representative because if every person in the country received the payment, inflation will run rampant and £1,600 combined with a low paid job will become the new 'low paid'. Surely this is economics 101? This 'experiment' is a complete waste of money because it's not considering the macro effects on the economy. If it's this easy, why not give every person in the UK a billion pounds, then we can all live like Jeff and Elon, amiright?
 
Last edited:
AI may be universal and produce huge change. UBI as a response to AI probably won't as each jurisdiction will offer its own solutions.
Nothing will happen overnight to could be a generation or more away. That is the sort of planning timescale I would suggest. Meanwhile don't panic and carry on carrying on.
:D
 
And yeah, I know the rich don't hoard cash, they invest in assets today. But the motivation behind that is often to receive a return on their investment to make them... richer!

When you boil it down, I guess our primary "worth" and currency is human ingenuity, research, development, learning, advancement. Our intelligence. If AI can match or exceed us in that department, all bets are off.

But that also means that when all process jobs are automated, our only net worth is our capability to advance society. If we're not a intellectual or an artist, etc, then what worth do we have?

I don't know. I'm not close to smart enough to gaze into this particular abyss without going completely madder :p
 
Hagar said:
AI may be universal and produce huge change. UBI as a response to AI probably won't as each jurisdiction will offer its own solutions.
Nothing will happen overnight to could be a generation or more away. That is the sort of planning timescale I would suggest. Meanwhile don't panic and carry on carrying on.
:D
Click to expand...
tax-free income allowance will be erased.
 
Not this nonsense again... UBI is total fantasy, pie in the sky wish thinking!

I ran the figures a few years back to show how stupid an idea this is

Minimum wage for an adult over 25 is £7.83 that equates to an annual salary of £16,286.40 for a full time worker....

If you wanted to pay that to the 81.1‰ if the population that are adults (2016 figures) (that's circa 53.7 million people) that would mean annual payments of circa 874.5 billion pounds annually..


Total government spending in 2016 on everything, including existing welfare was 762.3 billion

And of course UBI could not 'universally' replace all existing welfare payments either as extra payments would still be required for families with lots of children and certain disabled people for example.....

UBI would overnight more double governmental spending therby requiring massive, unprecedented changes to taxation. It would cause a whole host of issues, including but not limited to: increasing immigration of those seeking UBI, increasing emigration of higher paid/skilled workers who would have to pay considerably higher taxes to support UBI payments, incentivising people to stay away from regular employment with a bit of work in the 'untaxed' part of the economy being preferable and causing massive problems with inflation and ensuring UBI remained enough to be considered a 'basic income' ... Hell why not just go a bit more Socialist and bring in prices controls as well whilst you are at it?

The belief that it would be desirable to more than double government spending (and therefore taxation even if it is just partially taxing back what is handed out) is lunacy, especially if done unilaterally as a country with already high rates of immigration.

And as ever its cheerleaded by the likes of D.P., who was educated at great expense in the UK before he went to work and live in a renowned tax haven, had to be 'hounded by the SLC to pay back the money he had borrowed, and who now works for one of the many multinationals in Switzerland who are primarily based there as it offers them a way to launder most of their profits out of the areas they are actually making money in by employing scams like basing their 'intellectual assets' in tax havens and then 'charging' their subsidiaries in other countries a fee to 'use' them ensuring little if any profit is declared in those countries!

'Cisco urges shareholders to reject tax transparency proposal'

cictar.org

The Big Mac of tax avoidance — Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research

The most expensive thing in a McDonald’s Big Mac is not the patty or the labour cost, but the intellectual property that McDonald’s uses to minimise its tax in Australia. Callum Foote reports on one of the methods the multinationals use to shift profit to tax havens and the government’s respons
cictar.org cictar.org

Oracle, Dell, CSC, Xerox, Symantec accused of paying ZERO UK tax

MPs reel off more 'unethical' titans 'avoiding bills on industrial scale'
www.theregister.com www.theregister.com

It would be much more productive to see more international cooperation on cracking down on these sorts of shenanigans then more failed attempts at trialling UBI
 
Last edited:
FoxEye said:
We're talking about a total paradigm change for our entire civilisation, from the only one we've ever known for thousands of years, to something entirely different.

The idea that any of us can predict how we'll get there, how turbulent it might be, and what kind of trauma we might go through in the process, is for the birds.

Today we are all interdependent. In future we might not be, at all. It's staggeringly difficult even to comprehend.
Click to expand...
No different to to 1700's and the thought of flight was considered alien technology. The process is slow and gradual, we'll figure it out ok (generally speaking)
 
Stretch said:
There will no doubt be a demand for tradespeople. But only a fraction of what it was. There will also be a lots of people looking for work who could also be tradespeople.
Click to expand...
So what happens when your boiler goes down or you need electrical work done in your house. You have no choice but to call in a tradesman. Demand might be lower but demand will always be there.

What are you doing with your cars? Need tyres fitting, need it mot’d, diagnosed and repaired.

Maybe some will have a shock to the system, but as I said I’ve grown up on council estates all my life so no one really earns big bucks, they still use tradesmen, they still function and contribute in the economy. You don’t need to be in a well paid job to have a decent standard of living.
 
Doobedoo said:
Maybe some will have a shock to the system, but as I said I’ve grown up on council estates all my life so no one really earns big bucks, they still use tradesmen, they still function and contribute in the economy. You don’t need to be in a well paid job to have a decent standard of living.
Click to expand...
Well of course they could afford tradies and have a good standard of life; they get their wages subsidised and their rent/housing subsidised. Most made a bag on equity when they were given the right to buy, too.
 
adam cool dude said:
Exactly the way I see it is when AI becomes good enough to replace humans is the time currency becomes irrelevant. You do what you want to do because AI robots will do everything for you.

You raise children, enjoy them without the worry or need for money. Enjoy nature, become an astronaut, go race the Monte Carlo, ride a camel through the Sahara. The list would be Endless.
Click to expand...

It's very true, currency does become less important when all our basic needs are met. We'll always need a unit of account (currency) but other traits might become more desirable other than the ability to make money.
 
Doobedoo said:
So what happens when your boiler goes down or you need electrical work done in your house. You have no choice but to call in a tradesman. Demand might be lower but demand will always be there.

What are you doing with your cars? Need tyres fitting, need it mot’d, diagnosed and repaired.

Maybe some will have a shock to the system, but as I said I’ve grown up on council estates all my life so no one really earns big bucks, they still use tradesmen, they still function and contribute in the economy. You don’t need to be in a well paid job to have a decent standard of living.
Click to expand...

What jobs are these people going to do, even if not well paid?

The vast majority of the money I've spent of tradepeople in my life (80% +) was not crtitcal, and even of the stuff I paid money for I could have done most of it myself, espcially if I didn't work or worked less and had less money.
 
Last edited:
Stretch said:
What jobs are these people going to do, even if not well paid?

The vast majority of the money I've spent of tradepeople in my life (80% +) was not crtitcal, and even of the stuff I paid money for I could have done most of it myself, espcially if I didn't work or worked less and had less money.
Click to expand...
Great.
 
Trusty said:
No different to to 1700's and the thought of flight was considered alien technology. The process is slow and gradual, we'll figure it out ok (generally speaking)
Click to expand...
No it very much is different. We're not talking about replacing horses with cars, or homing pigeons with GPS drones.

We're talking - potentially - about a total rethink about a) what we do with our lives b) what we value in life and c) how we view others.

The reason this is not similar is because this is many, many times more *fundamental* to our basic world view. Who we are, what our place in the world is, what we do, and why...
 
throwaway4372 said:
Hard to see how it doesn't end up with even more power in even fewer hands.
Click to expand...
What does that even look like?

Thinking about money again... the people at ground level might well still have use for currency. We're talking those who are subsisting. Growing their own veg and trading for something else, goods or services. They don't have very much. The don't use AI or robots.

The people at the top, they genuinely have no need for money. Everything they need can be sourced by machines under their control. The machines create and repair the machines. They have all the energy they need.

So, who are those people? How do they keep the peasants from their gates?

Do these people actively despise the peasants and want rid of them? There is literally nothing they need from the rest of us.

What would be the point, for these people, in bringing everyone up to their level, even if they could? What's in it for them?

Is this too pessimistic? If so, why is a utopian outcome more likely?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom