Enough with Basic Income

There are some good points in here. However, what I think the author misses is that we are within reach of a post-scarcity economy, at which point all of those historical economic references go out the window (since nearly all economic theory assumes scarcity). That possibility makes a UBI experiment very worthwhile to me.

I don't think we're there today or anything like that, but it may be within our lifetimes that we're seriously approaching post-scarcity. Renewables are getting cheaper, for instance, which may bring about nearly limitless cheap energy. I won't assume mass scale fusion, but we may tackle the energy issue in other ways (this is my handwaving). Food security is already within reach - most of the issues around it are political (meaning kids in Africa aren't starving because we don't have enough food). The main threats are overpopulation and politics, as tech seems to be ticking along quite nicely.

I am obviously an optimist, oversimplifying a lot, and believe that we won't nuke ourselves into oblivion. I also think that we'll eventually solve our political problems - many of which are based on energy issues. Even if I'm wrong, though, I don't see an issue with UBI experiments and seeing how it goes. We shouldn't use economic theory as a reason to not try something radically different, as economic theory is wrong often enough to warrant the experiment. It may be worth a look at UBI to look at behavior on a macro level, since I think we're eventually going to get there globally and we'll need to know what the hell to do to occupy ourselves in some way that is still productive in that context.

I don’t have data on that but I believe it destroys more jobs than it creates, and this is a good thing. What’s the point of automating our lives if in the end people still have to work?

Just because it creates jobs doesn't mean it does not also destroy them. There are lots of jobs technology via automation has 'destroyed'. Some new ones were created however to write the software to automate those processes. The important thing is whether it is replacing jobs at the same rate that it is destroying them.

> You have to fill in many papers, prove that you don’t have sufficient income or any valuable property, go through many humiliating and intrusive controls. If you want to earn (a small amount of) money without working, then you must endure it all. In most cases it is necessary to seek the help of a social worker to carry out the procedure in its entirety.

Funny how the article zeroes in on this as a criticism of basic income, even though it describes the biggest way France's system is totally different from what basic income advocates are talking about.

> The leading argument is that there won’t be any jobs left anyway, and that meanwhile technology will bring all the costs down.

Oh there will be many jobs left but they will all require a certain level of education, let's call that university degree for the sake of simplicity. Also people will need to have some degree of mental capacity to attain this level. It is pretty much natural to presume not everyone will have this mental capacity. Already this is showing everywhere. What will society do with those who have the physical capability but not the mental to work? BI is one of the answers. It may not be the best answer but do have a better one? We need an answer right effin' now because long range trucking will be automated away Real Soon Now(TM) and that's (at least in Canada) is one of the most populated occupation and society level answers are never reached quick.