Quote:
|
It, being jobs. The idea that we should be planning for a world with a shortage of jobs in the next 20-40 years is not supported by evidence.
|
It is, though.
Quote:
|
Well they never ran out of jobs to do in the past 300k either.
|
The point I was making is that the rate of technological advancement in the past 300 years (and especially in the past 50 years) has been many orders of magnitude faster than the rate of advancement in the prior 300k. The trend is only going to continue. With new technology comes job losses, that much is established beyond any reasonable doubt. The big question is whether or not there will be new jobs added
at the same pace or faster than jobs lost, and I haven't seen any solid case made that this will in fact be what takes place. It's easy to look at a token example of a company adding jobs and say "Hey look over here! Jobs are being created!"... it's another thing to actually show that jobs in the economy are being added, at minimum, the same pace as they're being eliminated. Which brings us to...
Quote:
|
I would agree that tracing people for these jobs and transitioning people whose jobs have become obsolete to new jobs will (and always has been) challenging.
|
And is therefore a major problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Era
|
And yet, there really is nothing positive that these programs accomplish that UBI wouldn't. If you're really concerned about crippling poverty, I would think that you'd be in favor of a program that eliminates it directly, while at the same time eliminating a lot of bureaucratic bloat.
You mentioned upward mobility. I think there's too much preoccupation in today's society with upward mobility. However, people attaining new knowledge/skills is always a good thing, and should always be encouraged. I don't know if there's anything more obstructive to personal development than people being trapped menial, draining, drudgerous jobs that they aren't interested in.