Quote:
Originally Posted by iggy_oi
UBI doesn’t work in the long run without a plan to actually fix the problem it is supposed to attempt to mitigate. I’m not sure if knalus’ suggestions are the right solution but there definitely needs to be more done beyond giving people money and accepting they will never have a job.
|
I’ll humour you a bit more than Corsi, as your assertion that UBI doesn’t work because it doesn’t fix the problem and is simply “giving people money and accepting they will never have a job” is wrong.
UBI does not eliminate human ambition or the need for satisfaction beyond the basics required to live, what it does is protect people in careers susceptible to automation (a rapidly growing net of vulnerability). If it were that easy to eliminate those things, you would see an incredibly high rate of satisfaction for people living at the low end of the economic spectrum and very low movement into higher positions.
Oncologists work and train for years to do what they do. Do you think they would simply take the massive pay cut, downgrade their entire life sit on UBI, and never work again? It just wouldn’t happen.
On the other side of the spectrum, you raise up those below the poverty line. A UBI would be incredibly costly, but it’s not without economic gain either as you end up eliminating a lot of the financial resources directed towards low income and no income individuals. You may also see positive impacts as a UBI makes the “stay at home parent” model more attainable, and could roundly improve the life trajectory of future generations.
As far as the “problem” you’re referring to, it’s a very positive one. AI automation will make our world safer and more efficient. We simply can not eliminate innovation and automation, so the solution we’re looking for is one that allows human beings to survive who otherwise count on jobs that would be lost.