Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article
-
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone.
Automation doesn't "take jobs". It provides more jobs, actually.
Explain what the 25 people working at your local McDonalds will be doing in 10 years when a couple robot burger flippers replace their entire work crew.
Japan already has these.
IIRC McD's was doing some experiments with the employee-less franchise not too long ago.
-
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone.
Automation doesn't "take jobs". It provides more jobs, actually.
Explain what the 25 people working at your local McDonalds will be doing in 10 years when a couple robot burger flippers replace their entire work crew.
I proposed that for fast food in the mid-1990s. Already at that point, it was SO automated already. The humans were working as robots, for all intents and purposes.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone.
Automation doesn't "take jobs". It provides more jobs, actually.
Explain what the 25 people working at your local McDonalds will be doing in 10 years when a couple robot burger flippers replace their entire work crew.
I proposed that for fast food in the mid-1990s. Already at that point, it was SO automated already. The humans were working as robots, for all intents and purposes.
Except you don't get the special sauce without a pissed off human. .
-
@dustinb3403 and I've used the automated cashier stores and I must say, I LOVE going to the McD's that are heavily automated. They are SO nice. Clean, efficient, simple.
-
@coliver said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone.
Automation doesn't "take jobs". It provides more jobs, actually.
That's not really true anymore. NYT had a big article on this when I was in college. Basically we hit the threshold in that year where automation was replacing more jobs then it was creating.
My line of thought came from this video:
-
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@coliver said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@obsolesce said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone.
Automation doesn't "take jobs". It provides more jobs, actually.
That's not really true anymore. NYT had a big article on this when I was in college. Basically we hit the threshold in that year where automation was replacing more jobs then it was creating.
My line of thought came from this video:
Automation does create jobs. Ones that are often much hiring paying then the ones they replace. But the rate of it doesn't out pace the jobs lost to automaton at this point. I didn't watch the video just surmised the content from the title.
-
@obsolesce I don't know about big level numbers. But it's certainly true that automation takes X jobs. And automation creates Y jobs. In theory, the goal is to remove many low paying X jobs and replace them with higher paying, but fewer Y jobs. If the Y number is too high, no one would automate. The benefit to automation is that the total cost of the overall system is lower.
Automation isn't free, so the cost of the people has to be reduced enough to more than cover the equipment.
-
Automation is better in general. It advances society in more ways than just "automation". It requires tech inventions and innovation, pushes society to greater heights and strengthens it significantly. Why do you think Europe and other areas are much more technically advanced than the U.S., happier, healthier, etc.?
-
@penguinwrangler I mostly agree with that. We have a welding department here where people routinely don't finish because they already found a job paying 50k-70k. The director and I are friends and he tells me about it. I made more money logging in KY than I made anywhere else, including IT. I have a friend who was a teacher that went into his local hvac program and now makes 60k a year after he graduated and found a job. So it seems like jobs are bs if you have to actually work. Thats my take away
-
@momurda said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
Taxes are similar. Tax reporting could be standardized and made automatic. Tell the government your details, pay your taxes. Same for everyone. But that would destroy an industry. So they don't, they make taxes convoluted so that people essentially have to either buy software or pay accountants to do work that shouldn't exist. It's all busy work just to create jobs.
Sure there are industries that will fade away, happens all the time. To think that the economy won't come up with jobs that don't even exist right now to fill the void is a little ludicrous. I mean Information Technology didn't exist when my parents were in school.
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone. That is millions of jobs just in the US. Fast food workers, gone in ten years. You arent replacing hundreds of millions of trucking and McDs and other manufacturing jobs with 'robot repairman' jobs. Especially since the robots will likely be throwaway cheap disposable like ipads and cell phones.
Like you say, many of these types of people dont want to learn anything, ever, like your dad(your words). Youd rather have those people starving in the streets with no income and no home?Never said my Dad didn't want to learn anything, he just didn't want to go to college and learn in that way. Honestly, I could probably quit my job now and make handmade furniture that is beautiful and make as much money as I make now. Which would be something that won't be replaced by automation because it is an art form. From which my Dad taught me how to do.
-
@jmoore said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler I mostly agree with that. We have a welding department here where people routinely don't finish because they already found a job paying 50k-70k. The director and I are friends and he tells me about it. I made more money logging in KY than I made anywhere else, including IT. I have a friend who was a teacher that went into his local hvac program and now makes 60k a year after he graduated and found a job. So it seems like jobs are bs if you have to actually work. Thats my take away
A lot comes down to who is willing to do it. I don't want to be logging, but I do want to work in IT. So you'd have to pay me more to be logging. I'd rather teach than do HVAC, so you'd have to pay me more to do HVAC. That market prices are what they are suggests that lots of other people agree with my preferences.
-
That and logging cuts of digits way more often than IT.
-
So how much a year are we talking about? How much would everyone get? What are the general numbers people suggest?
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
So how much a year are we talking about? How much would everyone get? What are the general numbers people suggest?
Number don't really mean much because the economy would shift so much. Money would almost instantly have very different value. And the cost of living would be much lower. Someone earning $40K today shifted to GBI, would only need something like $32K to live at the same level, for example. And that's before we deal with things like inflation or deflation, whatever might occur.
And a lot of things naturally go with GBI, like moving to universal healthcare and education. While not specifically locked conceptually, the only make sense to do together. The cost of healthcare would be expected to be decimated bringing it within global standards. So, again, the cost of living would be far less.
Imagine what you can do with $40K today. Then imagine if healthcare costs almost nothing, and if you didn't need to commute. Now imagine a society that gets far less sick because we've reduced stress and exposure vectors. You need far less money to do just as much.
Now the idea isn't initially to make everyone rich. But only making them "not need to work". And you'd do it by person, not by family. So numbers more like $20K are more likely. But a family would be more like $40K. You don't do GBI and move into the tallest tower on Central Park West. But you can buy a house in a village or get a decent apartment. Enough to feed, cloth, and care for a family.
-
@scottalanmiller lol true
-
One of the big things we expect to happen in the future is the potential to combine things like self driving cars, Uber-style ride sharing, and GBI. Even in America, suddenly you'd not need to own a car any more. Going to work would need to pay for commuting costs, not going to work would save that. So you can imagine how much less money would be needed in an economy with many fewer cars, much less overall driving, less wear and tear on roads (reducing the number of road workers needed), etc. Individuals on GBI would not need to own cars, pay car insurance, or even deal with getting licenses. All things that would be available to them if they wanted, but totally unnecessary. Reducing cost of living even further.
-
Okay, so this is how I see it.
The population of the US over age 18, approximately 252,063,800
The population of the US under age 18 approximately 73,655,378
Source: https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/99-total-population-by-child-and-adult#detailed/1/any/false/871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133,38,35/39,40,41/416,417Social security budget for 2018: $992,500,000,000.00
Medicare Budget for 2018: $588,400,000,000.00
Medicaid Budget for 2018: $551,700,000,000.00
Other Welfare for 2018: $358,900,000,000.00
Total of these benefits: $2,491,500,000,000.00
Source: https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.htmlSo let's say because of GBI you can now live on $25,000.00 a year. plus $500.00 for each child (That is what I pay in child support).
So total cost for GBI for adults and children added together would be $6,336,827,689,000.00
Universal Health Care would have to factor into that. Estimates range from 1.3 Trillion to 2.8 Trillion and higher. So I took the average of 1.3 Trillion (Bernie Sanders' plan estimate) and the higher 2.8 Trillion number that his opponents say is more likely. It comes out to: $2,050,000,000,000.00 just over 2 Trillion dollars.
So Adding all this up it comes to:
$6,336,827,689,000.00 Total Money for GBI
$2,050,000,000,000.00 Universal Health Care system
$-992,500,000,000.00 Social Security can be subtracted because everyone would get GBI
$-588,400,000,000.00 Medicaid and Medicare can be subtracted because everyone gets Universal Healthcare
$-551,700,000,000.00 Medicaid and Medicare can be subtracted because everyone gets Universal Healthcare
$-358,900,000,000.00 Other welfare can be eliminated because again everyone gets the GBIWhich leaves a total cost of $5,895,327,689,000.00
Not mentioning any other expenses the Federal government has Military, personnel, etc. which would be:
Military: $866,000,000,000
Other: $766,000,000,000
Source: Source: https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/us_welfare_spending_40.html
Total US Budget would be: $7,527,327,689,000.00Federal revenue for Tax Year 2017 was $3.32 trillion, the savings would have to be astronomical for this to work.
Source: https://www.thebalance.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762Gross Domestic Product for the US in 2017 was $19,485,400,000,000
Assuming it doesn't plummet the tax rate would have to be at 39% or higher to cover the cost. So if the coming job apocalypse happens due to automation, maybe we need to do this, until we have proof I really don't want to throw a wrench into the engine that has moved more people out poverty than any other single thing ever in the history of the world. There are three basic rules in the USA for staying out of poverty that is proven to be true for all people, and races:
- Graduating from high school.
- Waiting to get married until after 21 and do not have children till after being married.
- Having a full-time job.
Doing those three things your chances of falling into poverty is just 2% and you have a 74% chance of being middle class. (Source:http://www.jacksonville.com/opinion/editorials/2012-01-27/story/three-rules-staying-out-poverty) So personal decisions are the biggest factor where you will end up. So if #3 does become a problem we can address and we might very well need to in the future.
However, I also want to point out unless you will be willing to manage people's GBI for them there will be people that won't spend their GBI Money wisely and will still be dirt poor. What do we do then, because the other social welfare programs are now gone. Do we just let them starve to death?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
One of the big things we expect to happen in the future is the potential to combine things like self driving cars, Uber-style ride sharing, and GBI. Even in America, suddenly you'd not need to own a car any more. Going to work would need to pay for commuting costs, not going to work would save that. So you can imagine how much less money would be needed in an economy with many fewer cars, much less overall driving, less wear and tear on roads (reducing the number of road workers needed), etc. Individuals on GBI would not need to own cars, pay car insurance, or even deal with getting licenses. All things that would be available to them if they wanted, but totally unnecessary. Reducing cost of living even further.
I find the "not needing to own a car" to be a little ridiculous especially for people in the rural areas. There won't be any ridesharing happening in the far-flung rural areas. Heck most of them can't even get cable because the cable company doesn't see them as enough of a profit to run the cable out to them.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@scottalanmiller said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
One of the big things we expect to happen in the future is the potential to combine things like self driving cars, Uber-style ride sharing, and GBI. Even in America, suddenly you'd not need to own a car any more. Going to work would need to pay for commuting costs, not going to work would save that. So you can imagine how much less money would be needed in an economy with many fewer cars, much less overall driving, less wear and tear on roads (reducing the number of road workers needed), etc. Individuals on GBI would not need to own cars, pay car insurance, or even deal with getting licenses. All things that would be available to them if they wanted, but totally unnecessary. Reducing cost of living even further.
I find the "not needing to own a car" to be a little ridiculous especially for people in the rural areas. There won't be any ridesharing happening in the far-flung rural areas. Heck most of them can't even get cable because the cable company doesn't see them as enough of a profit to run the cable out to them.
People on GBI probably won't get the luxury of living in isolated areas. At some point, you have to likely compromise somewhere. Or you have to save up and make getting a car a priority. But really, once there are self driving cars, there is no reason that rural areas won't have ride sharing. It's the need for humans, not cars, that keeps that from existing today. Even where I grew up, seven miles from the nearest crossroads and ten miles from a village, it would be obvious that ride sharing would be way cheaper than owning your own car.
Ride sharing cost less than current situations, even in rural areas, unlike cable where it costs far more than current (nothing) scenarios.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Not mentioning any other expenses the Federal government has Military, personnel, etc. which would be:
Military: $866,000,000,000
Other: $766,000,000,000You have overlapping costs here. Most of the cost of military is in salaries. So you are counting all of that twice.
