My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
The Throbber is already depressed about half the time.
Porn helps.
You watched that porn because you think there's still hope. But Throbber, the only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead, and the sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a MAGAmerican's supposed to function. Without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All Republican economic policy depends on it.
I appreciate the theory behind it, and I think it properly recognizes the role technology has and continues to play in wrecking a lot of our middle class. But I'm generally against a no strings attached handout, and I think the disincentives that come with a free $12k/year are pretty damn high. I'd like to see that money spent on some sort of "re-education" (bad choice of words) or free vocational training for those who won't have a place in the new economy, similar to what the Throbber is saying. Daycare vouchers or other forms of assistance for struggling parents would also be more effective IMO. I honestly don't trust the group that needs the UBI the most to effectively spend that money in a way that truly helps them. I think daddy government still needs to play a role in helping them help themselves.
I appreciate the theory behind it, and I think it properly recognizes the role technology has and continues to play in wrecking a lot of our middle class. But I'm generally against a no strings attached handout, and I think the disincentives that come with a free $12k/year are pretty damn high. I'd like to see that money spent on some sort of "re-education" (bad choice of words) or free vocational training for those who won't have a place in the new economy, similar to what the Throbber is saying. Daycare vouchers or other forms of assistance for struggling parents would also be more effective IMO. I honestly don't trust the group that needs the UBI the most to effectively spend that money in a way that truly helps them. I think daddy government still needs to play a role in helping them help themselves.
I'll give you respect for at least admitting it. There are large amounts of people that need to be managed by the government in your view.
I'd argue that line of thinking has very similar negative outcomes to a simple free handout.
Let's be clear as well, I'm not talking about the minority of people with mental health issues that need help managing them.
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
The difference is that his incorporate a healthy dose of AI at all, which has a much further possible automation reach industry wise than robots/manufacturing jobs. He also doesn’t believe you can simply just retrain everybody efficiently and realistically.
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
Past revolutions have increased productivity in certain sectors (agriculture, manufacturing) to the point where much fewer people are required for them. Past revolutions have tended to create more jobs than they displace - people migrated from farms and rural areas to cities and got jobs in manufacturing, and as manufacturing has become more efficient people have migrated to more service-sector jobs. The concern is that the current/future AI/automation revolution will not create as many jobs as it displaces. What will people do and where will they get their money then become big problems/questions
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
Very little IMO. I think offshoring has done far worse to our labor force than automation is likely to do. If you want some further in depth reading I could probably dig some articles up but I think it falls into the same fallacious arguments previous generations had about automation. Could you imagine explaining to someone from the 50's that professional video game players would be a fairly accessible job in the future?
There's an argument to be made that the RATE of automation will increase and create a structural gap of employment. I think we should address that but in a short term fashion.
All that said, I'm still a proponent of UBI as a replacement of welfare.
Ignoring the impact of legal chain migration and illegal immigration. That has had a huge impact on US wages. Roofing hasn't had much automation. Roofers make far less in 2019 than in 1969. Inflation adjusted.
My two concerns with UBI are that it may have the unintended consequences of raising inflation and depressing wages
I mean, do you care about how current welfare systems do that?
Define current welfare systems, then I can ansewer you're querey
Sure, food stamps, housing assistance, medicaid, etc.
All those things that get called corporate welfare when working people use them.
OK, now that we've defined terms a bit, I can respond.
The list you provided is a reactive set of welfare systems - people aren't getting what they need, so the govt. helps them. Yang's proposal is proactive, giving everybody something whether or not they need it. I see it as a much bigger pump-priming than the current systems, which stands to put a shitload more money in consumers' hands, which might stimulate inflation. Employers across all sectors might see that people have a minimum UBI and factor that into their wage scales. Nothing approaching this kind of UBI has ever been attempted on this scale, and I'm not sure we know how the actors in the system will respond to the new rules. By itself, UBI may end up causing some behaviors and outcomes that are neither desired not intended, which is why it would probably have to be accompanied by an attendant set of rules to make sure that people are actually being helped instead of having their purchasing power eroded by other means.
My eyes glazed over at previous discussions of UBI but since Yang is standing out as a potential contender someone give me the dumbed down hondo ready version of why I should want UBI please.
I'm thinking I can't live on a thousand a month and who the fuck can? What does this do? Does it replace all aid programs?
I heard him say he'd make Amazon pay for it since they don't pay federal tax. I'm pretty sure Amazon spends a shit ton of money to build the evil empire and for years they didn't make any money. They may still not. Bezo's wealth is the paper value of Amazon stock
My eyes glazed over at previous discussions of UBI but since Yang is standing out as a potential contender someone give me the dumbed down hondo ready version of why I should want UBI please.
I'm thinking I can't live on a thousand a month and who the fuck can? What does this do? Does it replace all aid programs?
I heard him say he'd make Amazon pay for it since they don't pay federal tax. I'm pretty sure Amazon spends a shit ton of money to build the evil empire and for years they didn't make any money. They may still not. Bezo's wealth is the paper value of Amazon stock
What does UBI do for America? Thanks in advance
It seems to work in Alaska. A red state.
Structurally different I think. Best as I know, Alaskan's payments are a dividend on oil & gas royalties. Alaska owns the mineral rights, citizens are treated as shareholders of the state, shareholders get a portion of revenues generated by purchase of rights.
The problem with UBI is that it will/would never be replacement for other welfare programs and combined with both the Chamber of Commerce and the leftards love of open borders you can imagine the attraction for an illegal family of 6 to get to the US for $72k a year plus free medical. Giving a meth head or heroin addict $1,000 is just stoking an out of control fire with gasoline and expecting a good result. Hell, if we let employees hire full time employees then at $10 an hour working 4 40 hour weeks a month gets you $1,600. And yet we hear that we need more illegals because $10 an hour jobs aren’t being filled. It shouldn’t be acceptable that able bodied US residents can collect a ton of money for Section 8 housing, Medicaid, free education, food stamps and obamaphones with no work requirements. Then toss in the massive fraud associated with the federal earned income tax credit.
See my rant about tying to performance.
Pee in a bottle - $1500.
Don't pee in a bottle - $250.
#racistimsure
Will the throbber watch to enforce no use of whizinator?
I appreciate the theory behind it, and I think it properly recognizes the role technology has and continues to play in wrecking a lot of our middle class. But I'm generally against a no strings attached handout, and I think the disincentives that come with a free $12k/year are pretty damn high. I'd like to see that money spent on some sort of "re-education" (bad choice of words) or free vocational training for those who won't have a place in the new economy, similar to what the Throbber is saying. Daycare vouchers or other forms of assistance for struggling parents would also be more effective IMO. I honestly don't trust the group that needs the UBI the most to effectively spend that money in a way that truly helps them. I think daddy government still needs to play a role in helping them help themselves.
Naval's concern is that the next presidential nominee will fight for $1500 a month if ubi is implemented.
He would rather see free cellphone and transportation?
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
AI and robotics is going incredible transformation. Cannot be compared to a printing press.
Old school UBI'ists view UBI as a moar better replacement for all of our bureaucratic welfare programs.
Yang does not view it as a "replacement" so it will never happen. Then again, it will never happen as a replacement either. Too many entrenched interests.
Yang does view it as a replacement for everything but SS and Vets benefits, not sure where youre seeing that. Under his idea, you can’t get both and he theorizes that eventually the vast majority of people would take UBI because there are no preconditions.
Hmmm interesting. I watched interviews with him before and he skirted "replacement" of existing benefits. It looks like he's bit the bullet on that and is attempting to sell it as a replacement. *applause
If he drops the gun control pandering I might be on the Yangtrain.
The problem is you cannot run as pro 2nd Amendment in the modern Democratic Party. There is no place for you. One of their 25 ideological purity tests. So I do find him to be interesting and way more on top of his positions than any other candidate they have trotted out, but he is still DOA to me.
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
AI and robotics is going incredible transformation. Cannot be compared to a printing press.
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
AI and robotics is going incredible transformation. Cannot be compared to a printing press.
I've not dug into the AI/automation thing much at all, and this is a sincere question. What makes Yang's economic-technologic predictions different than those that have come before?
AI and robotics is going incredible transformation. Cannot be compared to a printing press.
It's the pace at which transformation is happening. Printing...yeah...but that took maybe a century to take off. Same with the steam engine -several decades to really take hold. Now, things happen in months and years, if that.
Comments
I'd argue that line of thinking has very similar negative outcomes to a simple free handout.
Let's be clear as well, I'm not talking about the minority of people with mental health issues that need help managing them.
All those things that get called corporate welfare when working people use them.
There's an argument to be made that the RATE of automation will increase and create a structural gap of employment. I think we should address that but in a short term fashion.
All that said, I'm still a proponent of UBI as a replacement of welfare.
The list you provided is a reactive set of welfare systems - people aren't getting what they need, so the govt. helps them. Yang's proposal is proactive, giving everybody something whether or not they need it. I see it as a much bigger pump-priming than the current systems, which stands to put a shitload more money in consumers' hands, which might stimulate inflation. Employers across all sectors might see that people have a minimum UBI and factor that into their wage scales. Nothing approaching this kind of UBI has ever been attempted on this scale, and I'm not sure we know how the actors in the system will respond to the new rules. By itself, UBI may end up causing some behaviors and outcomes that are neither desired not intended, which is why it would probably have to be accompanied by an attendant set of rules to make sure that people are actually being helped instead of having their purchasing power eroded by other means.
He would rather see free cellphone and transportation?