South Korea is giving its entire population free access to AI, no token limits

[hahahanoobs]

I haven't read the comments section so someone might have said this already, but I'm not sure if this is good thing or a bad thing or maybe in between. People will become way to reliant on AI to the point where they can't do anything without it.

Like cars? Computers? The Internet?

 

[gamerk2]

According to the laws of ecomomics and accounting I know this may not be true. A resource is only valuable if it is rare enough to be so. The problem is pricing and inflation. You can print so much money or make so much cryptocurrency that the inflationary model makes it virually worthless per unit. Remember the Weimar Republic in Europe prior to WWII. They flooded the market with so much currency that they had to weigh out bales of money to buy a loaf of bread, about one million marks for a loaf .Haven't you heard of the woes of the Euro in recent times. Paper currency failure could be the key to a conspiracy of govenrment leaders and elite to control the entire world's monetary supply, iincluding cryptocurrency. BTW, they also already have control of real wealth today, Gold, platinum, silver and just about anything of real wealth..

False associations much?

First off, the Weimar inflation was caused mainly by the country debt; they borrowed money during the first World War, and didn't raise taxes to cover the borrowing. Combine that with the need to print money to cover the reparations, plus paying workers who were left out of work following the occupation of the Ruhr, and you had the combination of high debt and high spending, which is the problem, not printing money (which is perfectly *fine* as long as you keep debt under control).

The Euro more or less went through the same issue to a lesser extent, once again the issue wasn't spending, it was debt. Ironically, austerity made the problem worse since it hit the tax base, making the debt problem worse. Ireland showed the *correct* solution: Increase spending, but focus it on areas that actually drive growth, while stopping wasteful spending elsewhere.

Secondly, physical assets only have value for the same reason as paper currency: Because society assigns it a value.

 

[Aolish]

South Korea is taxing its citizens to pay for unlimited AI for all even though 75% don’t use it.
Fixed your headline.
That AI certainly isn’t free.

This sounds very familiar to what is happening here in NY. Free buses, free trains, free healthcare (even though we never got them), freeze rent, free groceries, tax the rich their evil even though the top 1% already pay half the taxes, they move out (which is happening right now in NY), then those huge taxes that the rich were paying get put onto us now. Now we have bigger problems than before.

 

[BadThad]

The last thing any society wants is a more invasive government. They all are already too bloated and sucking the life out of people. The SK government will use the "free" AI for surveillance, repression of freedom and the persecution of the populace.

 

[Mark Fuller]

False associations much?

First off, the Weimar inflation was caused mainly by the country debt; they borrowed money during the first World War, and didn't raise taxes to cover the borrowing. Combine that with the need to print money to cover the reparations, plus paying workers who were left out of work following the occupation of the Ruhr, and you had the combination of high debt and high spending, which is the problem, not printing money (which is perfectly *fine* as long as you keep debt under control).

The Euro more or less went through the same issue to a lesser extent, once again the issue wasn't spending, it was debt. Ironically, austerity made the problem worse since it hit the tax base, making the debt problem worse. Ireland showed the *correct* solution: Increase spending, but focus it on areas that actually drive growth, while stopping wasteful spending elsewhere.

Secondly, physical assets only have value for the same reason as paper currency: Because society assigns it a value.

You just made the perfect point as to why printing too much money is the problem, you already have high debt and spending (which is probably caused by printing the money to spend in the first place). Just try to raise taxes, too, to cover it and see what happens. It only took a one half cent stamp tax to start the American Revolution (and that also to pay war debts). I also disagree that increasing spending is the "correct solution", and that kind of contradicts what you yourself said about too much debt and high spending. How did increasing spending drive growth in Ireland? It can do so I suppose spent on the right things, but increasing spending does not necessarily mean growth.

Physical assets also have much more intrisic value than paper money. Paper money is only as valuable as the economy dictates it is given the amount of it in circulation. The more of it in circulation the less value it has. Paper is not land that can grow crops to feed people nor stategic minerals (gold, platinum, copper, etc.) necessary for manufactruing processes. Paper is manufactured, it does not grow crops nor manufacture anything itself, unless maybe you like oragami or paintings, but that is another subject.

 

[gamerk2]

You just made the perfect point as to why printing too much money is the problem, you already have high debt and spending (which is probably caused by printing the money to spend in the first place). Just try to raise taxes, too, to cover it and see what happens. It only took a one half cent stamp tax to start the American Revolution (and that also to pay war debts)

I note the issue wasn't the tax per-se, but the lack of representation. I also note the stamp tax in particular was onerous. I also also note the UK essentially bankrupted itself during the French and Indian war, which was fought primarily for the colonies benefit.

I also disagree that increasing spending is the "correct solution", and that kind of contradicts what you yourself said about too much debt and high spending. How did increasing spending drive growth in Ireland? It can do so I suppose spent on the right things, but increasing spending does not necessarily mean growth.

What you are *supposed* to do is raise spending during bad economic times, to prevent the floor from collapsing. If you don't, you end up with more job losses, meaning less economic growth, meaning more debt. You are then supposed to stop spending after the economy recovers and get out of the way.

The problem in the US, is after Bush (41) got pummeled for letting the Raegan tax breaks expire, that Congress learned it's better to cut taxes and keep them permanent rather then actually pay for their spending. Because it's less politically bad.

But yes: It is objectively correct to raise spending during bad economic times (again: See Ireland). The problem is that taxes are simply far too low to sustain current spending levels, which is a choice Congress made a generation ago. And very soon the bill is going to come due, and every attempt to cut spending will just make the economic freefall worse.

Frankly, I doubt the US survives once the bottom falls out, given the current political climate.

Physical assets also have much more intrisic value than paper money. Paper money is only as valuable as the economy dictates it is given the amount of it in circulation. The more of it in circulation the less value it has. Paper is not land that can grow crops to feed people nor stategic minerals (gold, platinum, copper, etc.) necessary for manufactruing processes. Paper is manufactured, it does not grow crops nor manufacture anything itself, unless maybe you like oragami or paintings, but that is another subject.

Gold and Silver are really the only two that matter so far as currency goes, and both are FAR too rare to sustain the current world economy on their own. Its simple: Just take the current US Gold/Silver stockpile, convert to dollars at current market rates, and see how badly the US's shortfall is; everyone would instantly be over 50% poorer if the gold standard was re-instituted.

 

[Mark Fuller]

I note the issue wasn't the tax per-se, but the lack of representation. I also note the stamp tax in particular was onerous. I also also note the UK essentially bankrupted itself during the French and Indian war, which was fought primarily for the colonies benefit.


What you are *supposed* to do is raise spending during bad economic times, to prevent the floor from collapsing. If you don't, you end up with more job losses, meaning less economic growth, meaning more debt. You are then supposed to stop spending after the economy recovers and get out of the way.

The problem in the US, is after Bush (41) got pummeled for letting the Raegan tax breaks expire, that Congress learned it's better to cut taxes and keep them permanent rather then actually pay for their spending. Because it's less politically bad.

But yes: It is objectively correct to raise spending during bad economic times (again: See Ireland). The problem is that taxes are simply far too low to sustain current spending levels, which is a choice Congress made a generation ago. And very soon the bill is going to come due, and every attempt to cut spending will just make the economic freefall worse.

Frankly, I doubt the US survives once the bottom falls out, given the current political climate.


Gold and Silver are really the only two that matter so far as currency goes, and both are FAR too rare to sustain the current world economy on their own. Its simple: Just take the current US Gold/Silver stockpile, convert to dollars at current market rates, and see how badly the US's shortfall is; everyone would instantly be over 50% poorer if the gold standard was re-instituted.

I see your point, but what I really think is needed is of course to stop spending for frivolities like ball rooms etc. Of course mankind's wants are insatiable according to the present day economic philosopy and I really think that is what leads to the problem. The system is set up to pamper the celebrities, superstart athletes, politicians and whatever priviciged character decides to make a cause for himself. And, I think that in fact there would be enough gold, siver, etc. if it were not for all of the excess that is not necessary that has already been made and paid for.

 

[gamerk2]

I see your point, but what I really think is needed is of course to stop spending for frivolities like ball rooms etc. Of course mankind's wants are insatiable according to the present day economic philosopy and I really think that is what leads to the problem. The system is set up to pamper the celebrities, superstart athletes, politicians and whatever priviciged character decides to make a cause for himself. And, I think that in fact there would be enough gold, siver, etc. if it were not for all of the excess that is not necessary that has already been made and paid for.

But Capitalism!

But yes, you are seeing the decline of America front and center, and eventually it's all going to come crashing down. Anyone who can't see it happening is, frankly, blind.

 

[Mark Fuller]

But Capitalism!

But yes, you are seeing the decline of America front and center, and eventually it's all going to come crashing down. Anyone who can't see it happening is, frankly, blind.

Parallels to ancient Rome and all the rest who got it. If they don't stop the decline it can't do anything but crash. It' not capitalism, its greed.

 

[gamerk2]

Parallels to ancient Rome and all the rest who got it. If they don't stop the decline it can't do anything but crash. It' not capitalism, its greed.

We're currently in the Sulla period; he was the one who showed the Republic could be broken. And we all know who came just a generation later...