Robot tax. Fund basic income on the basis whereby every job that is replaced by automation, a tax must be paid by a company with more than 1000 employees.
Basic Income Research Proposal
371–380 of 427 posts
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fighting the minimum wage is a political dead end. People won't vote for that, since they believe people who work a full week should have a decent standard of living. That's the case in Australia, at least.
In practice hardly anyone believes people who work a full week should have a decent standard of living. If people actually believed that, then no one would purchase goods manufactured in Mexico, China, etc. Instead, it's more accurate to say that people don't want the inconvenience of actually seeing poor people.
I guess this is the usual "hate the game not the player" situation. I wish there was more local products. I'm willing to make sacrifices and vote with my wallet to make that happen. (And I do when it's a realistic alternative) But I can't do that naked - and living in a smallish town, I'd be surprised if I could buy a full set of clothes here which is not produced in China/India/Pakistan/Thailand. (Without going a few hours to the nearest city)
Yes, everybody who works full week should earn enough to make a living. The fact that I'm wearing a t-shirt made in China is mixed up in this in complex ways, but it doesn't change my position.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#373Earlier quoted context omitted.
One party's platform is built on the fear of socialism - they will most definitely oppose this and use it to get votes, but by egging it publicly.
If we're living in a world where BI is a reality, it will be embraced. Once social programs are implemented, they're nearly impossible to remove -- see ObamaCare. Republicans have given up on going back to the old system and have, well, embraced a tweaked ObamaCare under a new name. They'd do the same with BI. "Democrats promising $30K BI? Well we're gonna do $35K!"
The irony of course being that all the existing social programs which are "nearly impossible to remove" will have to be removed to fund the BI.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#374Earlier quoted context omitted.
It wouldn't work, almost nothing people want to do with smart contract can actually work because those people tend not to actually understand what a smart contract is or what it can actually do and what it can't do. Virtually every smart contract proposal is DOA due to a misunderstanding of their nature.
What's missing from your claim is any justification for it all. You're just claiming, on zero authority, that it's not possible. So enlighten us. Why do you think it's impossible to encode the mechanics of a pension in a smart contract-based system?
I didn't need to, the comment I replied to already addressed a valid why. Smart contracts can't enforce access to funds without locking the funds up from other use, and that's not how things work in the real world. Pensions aren't savings accounts where funds are locked up ready to be used in a black box. They can't interact with the real world without trusted oracles, but we already have that in the real world and they're only real use is when they can do something deterministic on chain. In short, they're largely hype without a real problem to solve... so far.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#375This is a test of charity, not UBI. 1. The money involved is voluntarily donated, not confiscated from taxpayers - an essential difference between tax-funded vs charity. 2. 3000 recipients is vanishingly small on a state or federal level. When everyone gets their monthly $UBI check, supply-and-demand dictates that "free money" will be duly devalued, with prices of low-end essential goods/services rising to match (say…
I can't wait for UBI. I have a six figure income, but I'll quit the moment I get UBI, move into a tiny apartment and then spend the remainder of my days happily reading library books.
Can't tell whether serious or sarcastic... If sarcastic, I'll take your point to mean that people already doing well in life are not likely to give up the trappings to go into UBI-funded early retirement.
If serious, look into ChooseFI, the FIRE community, etc. It's totally possible to self-fund the transition from your current lifestyle to the one you're describing.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations, you've just invented the IRA.
It's not completely private if bureaucrats tell you what you can or cannot do with it, as well as when you may do it, stealing from you if you step outside of their rules.
Completely private accounts are called savings accounts; governments aren't telling you what to do with your money, they're telling you what you have to do in order to avoid that money being taxed, IRA's offer you a benefit, that benefit isn't without strings. Smart contracts offer nothing here you can't already do easier.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#377Basic Income is often proposed in conjunction with cutting basic social services & welfare payments, thus achieving a net gain for the government. This seems to make it attractive to both the neoliberals and the neosocialismés, but I believe this is a terrible mistake that will have the exact opposite effect to what its supporters intend - there will be more poverty and debt slavery, not less. (Methodology debates as…
> Make free public housing that all citizens have a right to ask for. Median rent in the US is $934 thus this one benefit costs the US goverment as much as this proposed BI would. Unless we are talking about housing where people aren't which is likely a non-starter for a slue of reasons.
If the government can't afford it then the UBI recipients can't either.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#378Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations, you've just invented the IRA.
It's not completely private if bureaucrats tell you what you can or cannot do with it, as well as when you may do it, stealing from you if you step outside of their rules.
Using a broad definition of theft merely serves to raise the noise floor. Your definition of "completely private" seems like "free markets" or "perfect competition": that is, things which are free from government interference only in misanthropic delusions. As Jefferson explained, stable ownership is not a natural concept; that you are considered to "own" things absent direct physical possession is a function of society. We also collectively agree to believe in this thing called 'money', which is also not an inherent property of mankind. That society can dictate rights and rules about property is inherent to the concept of each.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#379Given the skew of poverty in the USA to black and latin populations you might want to consider hiring several full time people on to the team and leadership who can bring the understanding that can only come from being part of those communities.
Otherwise this can be attacked as being dominated by rich white people. While the intent is clear the execution needs to match the targeted end users.
You may also want to consider the efffect of health care. In other UBI environments free healthcare is a given. In this experiment healthcare costs can easily cripple the impact of the regular income. Control for that by providing health care insurance, or make it two experiments by doing some with and some without. If that doesn’t work maybe consider doing this experiment in another country.
Re: Basic Income Research Proposal
#380Earlier quoted context omitted.
You also have to look at the effect of UBI over generations. Children growing up with UBI may never see people close to them who do actual work. I once had a summer job at a welfare/employment agency. A lot of the people who received welfare in the second or third generation often had no idea how a job works. They were late all the time or just didn't show up for a week. The social worker had to explain to them how a…
I don't completely disagree with you. I personally know two 2nd-generation 'trustfunders' who many would say don't do much. That is, they 'just' do leisure work. One plays poker part time, and he volunteers the rest of his time. The other promotes bands that she likes. But, are they really doing nothing of value? I think many people who meet them are sort of envious: seems like a nice life! I also know more than a fe…
I wish technically-inclined people who could live off their savings would work on FOSS communication tools (e.g. FreedomBox, MatterMost, Matrix.org, Smallest Federated Wiki, or similar) to create viable alternatives to the centralized profit-driven communication and search systems created by venture capitalism. Or do whatever other worthwhile FOSS floats your boat like for educational simulations or whatever to be part of the gift economy. We desperately need alternatives -- and they are mostly not going to come from the surveillance capitalism culture (or its captive governance) which privatizes gains while socializing costs and risks (including costs and risks to privacy and democracy).
And non-technically-inclined people with savings could help by promoting, documenting distributing, training, prettifying, and providing other support for such systems.
And yes, I've put all my spare resources into that kind of FOSS technical work myself (although at the moment I'm once again working for pay to climb out of taking on debt to finish another FOSS project done with my wife -- this one called NarraFirma).
Related by Alan Kay: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15261691 "In the interview -- to say it again -- I'm not calling for the field to implement my vision -- but I am calling for the field to have a larger vision of civilization and how mass media and our tools contribute or detract from it. Thoreau had a good line. He said "We become the tools of our tools" -- meaning, be very careful when you design tools and put them out for use. (Our consumer based technology field is not being at all careful.)"
See also "The Skills of Xanadu":
Printed: https://archive.org/stream/galaxymagazine-1956-07/Galaxy_195...
Audio: https://archive.org/details/pra-BB3830.08
And yes -- a Basic Income would make that possible for everyone someday. But if you can live that way now, why not help create a more joyful and sustainable alternative right now? Isn't it plausible that our direction coming out of any Singularity may have a lot to do with our moral and technical infrastructure going into one?
(Obviously, there are some paying jobs that align more closely with such ideals, but they tend to be few and far between, and if you have savings and take one, you displace someone else who might not have your options.)
Also related by me on basic income: http://www.pdfernhout.net/basic-income-from-a-millionaires-p... http://www.pdfernhout.net/towards-a-post-scarcity-new-york-s...