AI-enabled growth could push universal basic income to $10,000 a month, says former OpenAI researcher

[Gezzer]

Absolutely correct. Humanity was created with the need to work in order to maintain physical, emotional, psychological and spiritual health balance and health. Work is healthy.

Which doesn't negate the need for a UBI. The difference is that with a UBI people will be able to choose their work instead of being force into a hostage situation due to market forces. People should want to work, not need to work...

 

[godrilla]

You just posted for me. TY. I'm so tired of the "production drives the economy" thinking. How?? If you produce a 100,000 products a month and only 100 people have the disposable income to purchase them how does that drive an economy? Really?? Yes, production is the engine that drives an economy, but consumption is the fuel for that engine. It's pretty obvious to me that everyone against the UBI idea are people in the higher tax brackets and only care about their own wealth status.

As for a UBI I'm all for it, a more sane progressive tax system that gets increased revenue from large corporations and the ultra wealthy would easily offset the cost of a UBI. Will it happen? Not a chance IMHO. As this thread clearly illustrates there are way too many conservative manger dogs that only care about themselves and their peers. "Eat the rich"? If the concentration of wealth/capital into fewer and fewer hands accelerates with AI it might become the poor's only option.

Thank God I'll most likely be dead by then. What scares me is I won't be for WW3, which could be looming due to our inability to manage the world in a sane and equitable manner.

This is on the premise that there infinite resources and the growth is exponential with crowd controlled population. Unfortunately resources are finite ( precious metals, energy consumption etc etc) Human population growth is semi- synergistic. Short term there might yield some growth but that will eventually plautau out based on applying calculus on macro level. Obviously the ones paying the higher taxes have bias and history. If we apply the current trend of automation of ai robo taxies to drive growth and replace 16 million workers and their families and the apply the regressive taxes ( called progressive taxes by some) just to feed the same families by a centralized system is asking for disaster imo. While more regressive states/countries ( called progressive) Might implement the beta testing sooner than the red/conservative states/ countries. So is UBI just another virtue signal to make progressives feel all good inside without the addressing the potential blind spots. I guess time will tell.

 

[Hexic]

Which doesn't negate the need for a UBI. The difference is that with a UBI people will be able to choose their work instead of being force into a hostage situation due to market forces. People should want to work, not need to work...

People should both want and need to work, it’s not only a part of human psychology but a societal benefit as well.

Your assumption that individuals who are apart of this theoretical UBI program will -choose- to work is flawed. Why work, if UBI pays for your basic ability to live? Why strive farther if you never have to worry about necessities again?

Sure, some individuals will use it as intended, but what we found out in the late 90’s is that indefinite free money from the government stifles incentive to be productive in any meaningful way. It leads to welfare dependent families, for literal generations - which hurts everyone involved.

Again, sounds really good on a storyboard, but reality and actual history of abuse state otherwise.

 

[BobHome]

How on earth did we forget the simple truth that helicopter money (the literal devaluation of currency) leads to inflation? This isn’t even up for debate!

They want to give everybody an arbitrary amount of money while ignoring the fact that wealth actually comes from the creation of VALUE, not just from having a ton of fiat to spend!

Yeah, Value. Just like crypto, right?
(yeah, sarcasm)

 

[BobHome]

You just posted for me. TY. I'm so tired of the "production drives the economy" thinking. How?? If you produce a 100,000 products a month and only 100 people have the disposable income to purchase them how does that drive an economy? Really?? Yes, production is the engine that drives an economy, but consumption is the fuel for that engine. It's pretty obvious to me that everyone against the UBI idea are people in the higher tax brackets and only care about their own wealth status.

As for a UBI I'm all for it, a more sane progressive tax system that gets increased revenue from large corporations and the ultra wealthy would easily offset the cost of a UBI. Will it happen? Not a chance IMHO. As this thread clearly illustrates there are way too many conservative manger dogs that only care about themselves and their peers. "Eat the rich"? If the concentration of wealth/capital into fewer and fewer hands accelerates with AI it might become the poor's only option.

Thank God I'll most likely be dead by then. What scares me is I won't be for WW3, which could be looming due to our inability to manage the world in a sane and equitable manner.

So you buy the AI-produced goods with the money that AI company gives you. Right???

 

[BobHome]

$10k/month??? What would I do with all that? Wait, maybe buy eggs again.

 

[New Day]

Sighs with the Breath of Brahma.....

Removing the incentive, and therefore someone’s identity to work at whatever given job they’re at will only lead to more people choosing not to contribute to society.

UBI sounds great on paper, but will not work in reality. We have decades of welfare recipient research to solidify this. Supplemental assistance (welfare) is great for a temporary bind (while you’re actively searching the job market), but indefinite payments lead to a slippery slope of permanent dependency.

This all leads to Direct Use of Resources, where things get made by automation, and people order what they wish when they wish, and do as they wish, including at least trying to work at what they wish. Outside of that, genetic amendment or dissolution.

 

[Underdog]

$10k/month??? What would I do with all that? Wait, maybe buy eggs again.

No, silly. Buy a chicken.

 

[bennyg]

The trillionaires of the future who own the means and infrastructure of production can prove their willingness to participate in an UBI scheme by supporting and paying their fair share of tax and fair wages as the billionaires of today

 

[Beerman]

Removing the incentive, and therefore someone’s identity to work at whatever given job they’re at will only lead to more people choosing not to contribute to society.

UBI sounds great on paper, but will not work in reality. We have decades of welfare recipient research to solidify this. Supplemental assistance (welfare) is great for a temporary bind (while you’re actively searching the job market), but indefinite payments lead to a slippery slope of permanent dependency.

Not necessarily. Communities have existed that gave their members free resources without getting rid of working. There's nothing factual about the assertion that one needs to obtain their resources solely by engaging in direct market relations. What about disabled people? What about the type of people who have difficulty associating with common folk?

 

[Gezzer]

Not necessarily. Communities have existed that gave their members free resources without getting rid of working. There's nothing factual about the assertion that one needs to obtain their resources solely by engaging in direct market relations. What about disabled people? What about the type of people who have difficulty associating with common folk?

That's a very good point. There are two more things that detractors aren't considering. First off it's Universal Basic Income, it's meant to cover the basics only and if you want more you have to work. Secondly as I've said before we like more, hell... we love more. So if your basics are covered creating a true non-gate kept safety net for everyone but nothing for "extras" what will be the result? Test case after test case have proved that there's very little loss of willing workers. Yes there's a re-shuffling of priorities and many people will choose a better work-life balance, but that's about it. And when you consider the loomin automation/AI threat that won't be a bad thing IMHO.