Live data from Hacker News

A nation of slaves

antipope.org

151–160 of 258 posts

Re: A nation of slaves

#151
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to hold you to task, here: what exactly constitutes "flourishing"? I'd bet you mean something other than mindless growth and expansion--just want to make sure.

What I mean to say is that if the need to produce material things vanishes, people don't replace that need by producing art and culture and placing increased emphasis on family, friends and community. By "flourishing," I don't refer to material production, but social prosperity. Having seen both, a ghetto in a U.S. inner city is objectively much more materially prosperous, partly thanks to government support, than a…

The picture you seem to be drawing of ghettos doesn't much resemble American ghettos as I know them.

American ghettos are not places where unemployed people have all their needs provided for them and live in carefree leisure. Ghettos are places where society's traditional support structures have failed and, in order to stay afloat, a significant portion of the populace has turned to jobs so heinous and net-negative to society that they would be repellent in any other context. They're some of the first victims of the "bad jobs" that Stross warned in the OP that people would be forced to take in the face of poor employment prospects. Ghettos are a prime example of the harm that comes from our dependence on conditional money to live.

As a counterexample, retirement communities are generally much nicer than ghettos — even though gainful employment in those communities is even lower than in ghettos. This is because the people in retirement communities aren't desperate. They don't have infinite money, but they generally don't need to worry too much about money. So what do these people do when they are relieved of the need to work for a living? Oh, they work on personal projects and put an increased emphasis on family, friends and community.

I do think you're bringing up an important point. Most people haven't considered the social implications well enough, and there is a somewhat unsupported assumption that it would go smoothly. But I don't think ghettos are all the relevant, because financial independence is very much not the big problem there. And I also think you're glossing over the point that the employment crisis Stross mentions in the OP will cause major societal changes whether or not we institute a basic income — I just think the changes will look a lot more like a ghetto and less like a retirement community if we don't have something like a basic income in place.

Re: A nation of slaves

#152
post #100

An unconditional basic income[1] would speed up a paradigm shift from the current "work or starve" society. Maybe our grandchildren will look back to this time and make funny jokes about digging and filling holes... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

FYI, I created an infographic recently that teaches people all the details they need to know about basic income: http://i.imgur.com/eRuO1ix.png

Hardly. Communism is a system in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs. (It's more complicated than that, but y'know...)

A Basic Income policy is totally Socialism, which is a system in which the economy is cooperatively managed. (Again, more complicated really.)

But there's nothing wrong with Socialism. It's a bad word in America, for historical reasons, despite being fairly widely implemented within that country.

Re: A nation of slaves

#153
post #111

An unconditional basic income[1] would speed up a paradigm shift from the current "work or starve" society. Maybe our grandchildren will look back to this time and make funny jokes about digging and filling holes... [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income

How would that work from a free market standpoint? What I mean is, when everyone has a baseline amount of money, the relative scarcity is diminished and the market prices will inflate as the value of money(real & perceived) decreases. I cannot recall the historical character at the moment, but I recall reading of a benevolent king(central or south american?) who give all his subjects generous amounts of gold to the e…

>What I mean is, when everyone has a baseline amount of money, the relative scarcity is diminished and the market prices will inflate as the value of money(real & perceived) decreases.

"Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon"?

Re: A nation of slaves

#154
post #84

This article is predicated on the idea that, because we're more efficient today than 1930, we should be able to work less and live the same lifestyle. Well, in fact, we can. But you can't ignore those last three words: you have to live the same lifestyle as a typical 1930s person. * No internet. * No TV. * No air conditioning. * No cell phone. * No car. * Bunk beds for your kids. * One bathroom for the whole house. *…

I aint ignoring it. Because Global Warming?

Re: A nation of slaves

#155
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why patents ought to be property in the same sense that land or leases are property, and the govt. ought to be able to use eminent domain on them. Pay Mr. Myne a lot for his contribution to society, but then make sure that even the least-well-off can take advantage of this newfound material wealth without exploitation.

Patents are property which is automatically taken by eminent domain when the patent term expires.

The legal protection is rescinded, not taken.

(People have some sort of natural right to ideas that they never share, beyond that it's all protection granted by society. I guess it's a minor distinction.)

Re: A nation of slaves

#156
post #98
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basic income mean huge changes: For example, salary may still be partially driven by necessary education / experience, but physical, tiresome or stressfull works would requireask for way higher salaries (because you get up at 4AM to collect garbage when you have no other choice, or when you think it really is worth it, and those jobs would still be necessary) The same way, some companies will have huge problems filli…

"Basic income mean huge changes" I have to admit this alone is enough to give me pause. The logic goes something like: "Our current social system has produced astonishing wealth. We can therefore take this to change our current social system and distribute the wealth more widely. Hooray, we fixed things!" But this amounts to a rewriting of the social system. We have no guarantees that the next social system will prod…

>But this amounts to a rewriting of the social system.

Social systems have been rewritten for a very long time. Colonialism, manifest destiny and whatever else springs to mind.... all of these things rewrite social systems. The new script is the purview of powerful.

Re: A nation of slaves

#157
post #103
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if your grandparents hadn't worked their asses off, you would live in a very different world right now. It's easy to say now that you are in a comfortable place where you can afford everything for almost nothing, but it was a very different world back then. Let's not forget that. And even now, you can afford things because people in China and other countries are working their asses off to make cheap stuff for de…

Your history is just as flawed as your understanding of work, value and progress (in other words, you've been brainwashed). "Hard work" has always been a domain reserved exclusively for the slaves. The "virtue" of hard work is just a shallow manipulation tactic devised by those in power. None of this has changed today. What IS changing, however, is that as knowledge becomes more readily available, fewer and fewer peo…

[deleted]

Re: A nation of slaves

#158
post #103
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well if your grandparents hadn't worked their asses off, you would live in a very different world right now. It's easy to say now that you are in a comfortable place where you can afford everything for almost nothing, but it was a very different world back then. Let's not forget that. And even now, you can afford things because people in China and other countries are working their asses off to make cheap stuff for de…

Your history is just as flawed as your understanding of work, value and progress (in other words, you've been brainwashed). "Hard work" has always been a domain reserved exclusively for the slaves. The "virtue" of hard work is just a shallow manipulation tactic devised by those in power. None of this has changed today. What IS changing, however, is that as knowledge becomes more readily available, fewer and fewer peo…

oh, boy, not sure why I'm getting involved here.

Insight has been a major factor in progress for perhaps the last 100-200 years, and even then for only a small (but increasing!) portion of the population. Brick buildings built through insight are a drawing. Someone has to actually mine the material, create the brick, lay the brick, etc. Those people get paid and then they can afford to buy things.

Absolutes like >> ONLY through insight, not through hard work. show that you are emotionally connected to your line of thought and likely should step back and think through the ratio of insight / work over time.

Re: A nation of slaves

#159
post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the Neo-luddism argument thrown out a lot when discussions pop up around basic income. It's bullshit. Basic Income does not in any way support or suggest opposition to technology. In general, technology has made life better for everyone. It's not an issue that basic income is trying to solve. The problem is that technology within a capitalist system allows automation to concentrate wealth. It's very easy for th…

I think this would be better stated without hostile statements like "It's bullshit." That puts the very people you're trying to convince into a defensive mindset.

You're absolutely correct. The expletives come from constantly have to reject this attack, and personal frustration.

It also comes because many of the people who use the "neo-luddism" grouping are not trying to saliently argue about basic income, or any real policy change (income related or otherwise) but are just looking for an easy way to dismiss the speaker.

Re: A nation of slaves

#160
post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Basic income mean huge changes" I have to admit this alone is enough to give me pause. The logic goes something like: "Our current social system has produced astonishing wealth. We can therefore take this to change our current social system and distribute the wealth more widely. Hooray, we fixed things!" But this amounts to a rewriting of the social system. We have no guarantees that the next social system will prod…

> "Our current social system has produced astonishing wealth. [...]" In Europe the main problem in agriculture is overproduction so farmers sometimes get payed to leave some land uncultivated and hard limits are imposed on the production of milk and on the import of bovine meat. This is not a place where we'll starve because everybody will start painting and sculpting all of a sudden.

Of course we won't starve, but just having enough food to go around is a pretty low bar for a society in which people can live comfortably. The working classes in the developing world today generally don't starve, but no one would say they have particularly comfortable living conditions. What jerf is saying that, in the absence of full robot automation, a society in which we have guaranteed basic income will make us poorer. The question is "how much poorer"?
Post reply on HN