As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income • Hacker News Board

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#121

Post by Tycho » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:29 PM UTC

ZenoArrow wrote: post #79

yummyfajitas wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Domestic labor for highly productive individuals. If you are a high productivity software engineer, trader or doctor, there is no reason any of your time should be devoted to driving, doing laundry or cleaning your bathroom. Also, I'm not sure where your "160-250 million people" comes from. That's exactly how many workers there are today, many of whom are in no danger of having their jobs automated.

> "driving, doing laundry or cleaning your bathroom." All of which can be automated. Furthermore... > "highly productive individuals. If you are a high productivity software engineer, trader or doctor" None of those jobs are safe from automation either. Your personal productivity means diddly squat compared to fast automated interconnected machines that can teach themselves. Engineers and traders are just as expendab…

Today a middle class person will have a doctor, a dentist, an accountant, and a lawyer. That list could extend to include personal trainer, geneticist, travel agent, dermatologist... The list is endless. Some things will allow people to monetise talents that previously were not easily monetised (imagine having a "sense of humour" coach), others will be highly specialised requiring years of education, others will be more like trades which a large percentage of the population could learn with adequate training.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#122

Post by rhino369 » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:31 PM UTC

cmurf wrote: post #80

anovikov wrote: post #3

I seriously doubt it could be realistically implemented. More probable outcome is ballooning law enforcement costs due to significant fraction of population becoming unemployable and resorting to crime, and almost endless, Japan-style economic stagnation in all developed countries. Sorry for sounding pessimist. This time it gets serious and software is going to really eat the world. By the way in some countries (like…

Really? You think that's more realistic than just taking it from the top 0.1%? There was a time in this country for nearly 40 years where the top tax bracket was above 75%, and for quite a while it was 91%, and for a short while it was 94%. Basically it was a policy of not letting a small number of people take all of the marbles. There is, in fact, a way to avoid that tax, it's called start a new business or expand o…

Those sky high tax rates were only applied to earned income. Capital gains was never anywhere near that high. All that means is the owners of capital stay rich and nobody can earn their way into being rich. You have to invest or already be rich.

If you tried taxing capital that much they'd flee the country.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#123

Post by tlb » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:32 PM UTC

duaneb wrote: post #109

chimeracoder wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This I don't get -- why are rich savers bad? How can a large number in some bank account possibly affect anyone else's life in any tangible way? Quite the opposite - savings are integral to a healthy economy. Investment (in an aggregate economy) must equal savings; this is an identity, not an equation. Any money that is invested (whether loaned to private individuals to buy a house or car, or whether invested by th…

Uninvested cash does nobody good.

Not true. When you put it in a bank, the bank loans it out (usually at a multiple). Even if you put stacks of bills under your mattress, you're effectively making a loan to the mint to fund government operations.

Some invested money is bad, though. Investment in many businesses is bad for the world: cigarette companies, casinos, monopolistic roll-up companies.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#124

Post by ZenoArrow » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:33 PM UTC

h4nkoslo wrote: post #101

ZenoArrow wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This time it's different. Our most valuable asset as workers is our minds, if AI can make inroads into white-collar work as well as blue-collar and pink-collar work, what will be left for humans to do? We're not just talking about low-skilled workers losing their jobs, we're also looking at previously safe jobs like doctors, lawyers, accountants, etc... due to be facing very strong competition from the growth of AI (…

A peasant's most valuable asset was his mind as well; you have to go pretty far down the curve before you find a worker's manual labor power output to be their most valuable asset (oxen are usually cheaper) or where obvious mental retardation isn't a disadvantage. The historical solution (eg in the context of manorialism) was that if you couldn't afford to have a family, you didn't (and if you did, the kid got shunte…

> "A peasant's most valuable asset was his mind as well"

All jobs require a certain level of intelligence to do, that much is true, but the call for creative thinking does vary from job to job, and there are plenty of jobs that are largely repetitive.

As for the historical solution, I'm sure UBI and population control aren't mutually exclusive, though I don't think it'll ever fly that population control only applies to the poor, if it's going to happen it should be applied across the board (i.e. to the rich too). This has the added benefit of making it in everyone's interests to find better solutions to overpopulation than forcing people not to have kids (it should ideally be voluntary if it's ever needed).

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#125

Post by Eridrus » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:35 PM UTC

levelist_com wrote: post #110

I'm curious, and this may have been discussed elsewhere, but how would that work in a country like the US (both in terms of size of population and capitalistic greed)? For instance, when student loans became ubiquitous, universities raised their rates. Now there are many theories as to why that was but I feel the simplest explanation is that a) it created greater demand, and b) easy/cheap money (look at ITT). What's…

Basic Income I'd not a solution to housing issues or tertiary education which have a heavy positional/signaling component, so we need reform in both those areas as well as basic income.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#126

Post by levelist_com » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:37 PM UTC

nk1tz wrote: post #118

levelist_com wrote: post #110

I'm curious, and this may have been discussed elsewhere, but how would that work in a country like the US (both in terms of size of population and capitalistic greed)? For instance, when student loans became ubiquitous, universities raised their rates. Now there are many theories as to why that was but I feel the simplest explanation is that a) it created greater demand, and b) easy/cheap money (look at ITT). What's…

If there is demand for cheap food as well as an assure flow of money into the hands of that demand, it seems reasonable to believe the market will address that demand. Am I missing something?

You answered my question with a question? Ok. Yes, in answer to your question, my understanding would be that if there is a market/demand for cheap food, then yes, someone will supply cheap food. However, let's assume for a minute that "cheap food" is a finite resource, and lets assume people are being guaranteed money to purchase the aformentioned "cheap food". Eventually that cheap food becomes more expensive. You know, demand being greater than supply. So someone else comes along and produces cheaper food to address the situation but they face the same eventual problem. Also, its only so cheap you can make food without gov't subsidies b/c a) the cost to produce/distribute and b) gov't regulation on quality. But what we have here, in a sense is artificially created demand b/c of free money, free being money given, not necessarily earned. Again, I know nothing about these things and I want someone who does to actually educate me not give me some bullshit snarky fucking reply.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#127

Post by obmelvin » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:43 PM UTC

sevenless wrote: post #41

cstanley wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could one design economically productive outputs from a video game like playing experience? Thinking something like Ender's game meets Uber drivers...

Already happening: WoW gold farmers.

He obviously means something that is productive to the real world

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#128

Post by pyrale » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:46 PM UTC

nk1tz wrote: post #118

levelist_com wrote: post #110

I'm curious, and this may have been discussed elsewhere, but how would that work in a country like the US (both in terms of size of population and capitalistic greed)? For instance, when student loans became ubiquitous, universities raised their rates. Now there are many theories as to why that was but I feel the simplest explanation is that a) it created greater demand, and b) easy/cheap money (look at ITT). What's…

If there is demand for cheap food as well as an assure flow of money into the hands of that demand, it seems reasonable to believe the market will address that demand. Am I missing something?

Markets have been given almost half a century to solve world problems, and we haven't seen these problems solved.

I understand that one may argue that they didn't get the opportunity. But from macro indicators to flagship cases, what we see is that while market brought us a wealth of new products, they are slow to solve acute problems, especially when these problems are hard to explain to the population.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#129

Post by lastyearman » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:47 PM UTC

levelist_com wrote: post #110

I'm curious, and this may have been discussed elsewhere, but how would that work in a country like the US (both in terms of size of population and capitalistic greed)? For instance, when student loans became ubiquitous, universities raised their rates. Now there are many theories as to why that was but I feel the simplest explanation is that a) it created greater demand, and b) easy/cheap money (look at ITT). What's…

There is no such thing as free money. If you're not creating more work (or more productive work) then it is simply taking from someone and giving to someone else.

However, the point is that through automation we're creating more work and from who we're taking is the robots. If there are no new automation or robots to take from, then it is most likely that we're going to take from middle class, either directly or indirectly.

Re: As Our Jobs Are Automated, Some Say We'll Need a Guaranteed Basic Income

#130

Post by ZenoArrow » Sun, Sep 25, 2016, 8:47 PM UTC

Tycho wrote: post #121

ZenoArrow wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "driving, doing laundry or cleaning your bathroom." All of which can be automated. Furthermore... > "highly productive individuals. If you are a high productivity software engineer, trader or doctor" None of those jobs are safe from automation either. Your personal productivity means diddly squat compared to fast automated interconnected machines that can teach themselves. Engineers and traders are just as expendab…

Today a middle class person will have a doctor, a dentist, an accountant, and a lawyer. That list could extend to include personal trainer, geneticist, travel agent, dermatologist... The list is endless. Some things will allow people to monetise talents that previously were not easily monetised (imagine having a "sense of humour" coach), others will be highly specialised requiring years of education, others will be m…

> "personal trainer, geneticist, travel agent, dermatologist..."

Let me put it like this, why would you pay a human to do those things when a machine could do just as good/a better job? Even if AI-based solutions were still subpar compared to human practitioners of the professions you mention, they only have to be "good enough" to take over the mass market, as they're likely to be far cheaper than the human professional.

However, the lack of job opportunities for humans need not be a problem. There are still plenty of things we enjoy doing, and could continue to enjoy doing on a voluntary basis. That way everyone wins, the machines take away the need to work to earn money, and humans get to spend their time doing things they enjoy. That's part of the reasoning behind UBI, to stop monetary needs getting in the way of making this future a reality.