Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 213 posts

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

#101

Post by h4nkoslo »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #30
h4nkoslo wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gregory Clark's work on tracking English class mobility in the 1700s-1900 (The Son Also Rises & A Farewell to Alms) indicates that this isn't the first time this has happened (ie, the obsolescence of a large portion of the labor force), and that it's possible to manage the transition with a fairly minimal amount of law enforcement resources.

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 shunted into a monastery or the equivalent and was prevented from reproducing), so the "surplus" peasant population effectively shrank, and the English lower classes ended up being the descendants of downwardly-mobile gentry, who mostly found employment in different sectors.

That solution breaks down in the context of modern welfare systems.

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

#102

Post by Mendenhall »

My issue is the power over the people that the Basic Income would give the government. "Vote for me and basic income goes up!!" and the ways it will be manipulated by those in government in 10,20,100 years. Sounds good, but I can think of a million ways this can easily be abused.

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

#103

Post by enraged_camel »

endswapper wrote: post #12
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…

I disagree it is more probable that, "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." Generally, crime is on the decline, even as we see technology and economies evolve to include more automation and less human labor: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-…

Actually, the decrease in crime can largely be attributed to the the decrease in atmospheric lead (coming from lead-based gasoline and paint), which was proven to interact with children's brain chemistry such that it resulted in hyperactivity and behavioral problems later in life.

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/02/lead-exposure...

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

#104

Post by shkkmo »

platz wrote: post #98
shkkmo wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Varoufakis' argument is that since the state has been taxing the productive to fund research, that gives it a moral right to tax the productive some more. Regardless of if the research done prior to WW2 was funded privately or publicly, that knowledge is part of our shared culture heritage. The fact is, regardless of how well they run their hotels, the Hiltons could not be where they are without the travelers who p…

one note about Taxation. He's careful about using that word because he doesn't want the money to go federal coffers that the state can spend as they see fit. It almost has to be a side-channel that doesn't use the normal tax machinery - which is the talk of 'dividends' and such.

That is a solid point. The institution should definitely be more akin to the Federal Reserve than to the congressional budget process.

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

#105

Post by Animats »

ZenoArrow wrote: post #54
Animats wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. Look at the history of big housing projects in the days of generous welfare payments. Food, clothing, shelter, and some spending money were provided. Huge crime rate.

> "generous welfare payments" Welfare programs in the past may be relatively generous compared to today, but I'd be interested to know when this golden era of welfare payments was, which era did you have in mind? Also, it takes more than money alone to make people happy. It's possible to be financially comfortable but still live in a ugly, uninspiring place with very little that's enjoyable to do. I'd much rather be…

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/01/13/magazine/four-generations-...

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

#106

Post by chimeracoder »

svantana wrote: post #94
cmurf wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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? The way I see it, the 'problem' with rich folks is when they use up a disproportionate amount of resources without creating any value, e.g. buying land, houses, cars and employing people to do their pointless (from society's perspective) bidding. I.e. spending money.

> 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 the state into public infrastructure) - all that requires others' savings in order to happen.

For some reason, people get mad when they think of other people "hoarding" money. But in reality, there's no such thing as "hoarding" money. You can hoard a rivalrous resource, but you can't hoard fiat money.

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

#107

Post by lastyearman »

Animats wrote: post #42
zorpner wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

where one finds high unemployment, they are almost certain to find crime, drugs, gangs, single mothers This is because of poverty, not idle hands.

Nope. Look at the history of big housing projects in the days of generous welfare payments. Food, clothing, shelter, and some spending money were provided. Huge crime rate.

Look at Scandinavia. Generous welfare, not exactly known for high crime.

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

#108

Post by zajd »

Mendenhall wrote: post #102

My issue is the power over the people that the Basic Income would give the government. "Vote for me and basic income goes up!!" and the ways it will be manipulated by those in government in 10,20,100 years. Sounds good, but I can think of a million ways this can easily be abused.

How is this any different from "Vote for me and taxes go down!!"? At least we'd have a different choice.

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

#109

Post by duaneb »

chimeracoder wrote: post #106
svantana wrote: post #94

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? The way I see it, the 'problem' with rich folks is when they use up a disproportionate amount of resources without creating any value, e.g. buying land, houses, cars and employing people to do their pointless (from society's perspective) bidding. I.e. spending money.

> 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.

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

#110

Post by levelist_com »

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 to stop rents/mortgages from increasing, cost of goods increasing, basically the cost of everything going up b/c a) people have guaranteed money and demand more goods, and b) simple greed? In my mind it wont be long before that "basic income" isn't enough live on at all. Now I know this seems to be a difficult problem to solve, but I don't think throwing "free" currency at it is going to do anything but drive the value of that currency and it's buying power way down. Im most likely very wrong ( i have zero knowledge sady enough of money and how markets and economies work) - I would just love someone to explain to me how this is even an option - I want to understand?!
Post reply on HN