• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Would a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income Reduce Class Warfare?

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
Jeebers, I hate explaining these things. First, I suck at it. Second, a few seconds on Google gets folks a better explanation than I could ever come up with. Still, here goes...

A Universal Guaranteed Basic Income would work pretty much along these lines: Suppose the Federal Government decided to start making monthly payments to every person in the United States 18 or older with no strings attached and the Feds kept it up for the life of the individual. To be sure, the checks would go out to everyone regardless of the usual suspect categories. e.g. sex, race, religion, ethnic group, politics, and so forth.

Next, people getting the checks would have the option of working if they wanted to, and could find a job. The checks would be for 'get-by' sums. Enough to cover living expenses and maybe a little bit more for a movie, game, or book now and then. Say, $2000 per month in the U.S. these days.

Essentially, that's the idea of a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income. Naturally, the details could vary.

The idea has been around for years, but recently gained a boost in recognition when Andrew Yang made it the core of his policy platform in the 2019 primaries. It has been endorsed by a whole lot of people, such as Bill Gates, but who for the most part are not politicians, nor billionaires.

The usual reason economists, futurists, political scientists, policy wonks, and even Gates get behind it is because it is hoped that a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income will prevent Gotterdammerung. I doubt most people are plugged in to the news about our approaching Gotterdammerung, so I'll explain.

It's largely the consensus view these days that sometime within the next few decades robots and artificial intelligences will leave tens of millions of people without a job in the U.S. alone. Billions of people around the world. No one really thinks that is unlikely to happen. I guess robots and AI are pretty certain to be our future now. Here, there, everywhere in the end.

Billions of out of work people present a problem, naturally. People like to eat, they like clothing, they like to have a roof over their heads, and other things too, such as health care. From a political standpoint, the worst part of that is, people notice when they do not have those things, and cannot have those things. Such will become the reality in, say, 30 years at the most, but most likely sooner.

Gotterdammerung is a word borrowed from Norse/German mythology, and nowadays is sometimes used to mean a violent and catastrophic collapse of civilization. It originates in mythology, but if you listen to people who have spent some time looking into these things, it's a genuine down the road threat to sooner or later every nation on the planet. Again, if a third or more of your working age adults are starving, you have a problem.

There have already been experiments with UBGI. Whole towns in places like Canada, the Netherlands, and elsewhere have been placed on it for periods of up to five years to see what happens.

One big concern that is now laid to rest. Most people do not become lazy, as just about everyone feared at first. Some do. But somewhere around 90% or more of them use their new found time available to them to do anything they want to do by seeking out one of the few remaining jobs, going back to school to learn more, taking up a serious hobby, volunteering at a nonprofit organization, etc. Its shocking, but it seems most people like to work. Especially if they get to pick what kind of work they do.

How would they be paid for? Best idea I've heard is what Gates came up. Tax the robots. That is, send a tax bill to the owners of robots, taxing them on a per robot basis.

So? What do you make of it all?



Either you need a commodity of unchanging value or free production.

It would work if the money supply were based on something with an unchanging value. Our monetary unit is flexible, so its value goes up and down. Giving out money decreases its value, which means people stop being motivated to produce, to invest, to try. If you were to give everyone a minimum of something that would always be in demand then I could see it working. What would that be? Cocaine maybe? What commodity is in such demand? Figure that out, and you have found a way to manage a universal basic income.

There is another possibility with robots. Without something like the above commodity of unchanging value the problem is keeping production going, but if production is free then you can keep it going. There would be many details to work out but it could work.

In the past countries employed huge armies or enslaved extra people. That was how they kept employment up. I don't suggest this alternative.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Jeebers, I hate explaining these things. First, I suck at it. Second, a few seconds on Google gets folks a better explanation than I could ever come up with. Still, here goes...

A Universal Guaranteed Basic Income would work pretty much along these lines: Suppose the Federal Government decided to start making monthly payments to every person in the United States 18 or older with no strings attached and the Feds kept it up for the life of the individual. To be sure, the checks would go out to everyone regardless of the usual suspect categories. e.g. sex, race, religion, ethnic group, politics, and so forth.

Next, people getting the checks would have the option of working if they wanted to, and could find a job. The checks would be for 'get-by' sums. Enough to cover living expenses and maybe a little bit more for a movie, game, or book now and then. Say, $2000 per month in the U.S. these days.

Essentially, that's the idea of a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income. Naturally, the details could vary.

The idea has been around for years, but recently gained a boost in recognition when Andrew Yang made it the core of his policy platform in the 2019 primaries. It has been endorsed by a whole lot of people, such as Bill Gates, but who for the most part are not politicians, nor billionaires.

The usual reason economists, futurists, political scientists, policy wonks, and even Gates get behind it is because it is hoped that a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income will prevent Gotterdammerung. I doubt most people are plugged in to the news about our approaching Gotterdammerung, so I'll explain.

It's largely the consensus view these days that sometime within the next few decades robots and artificial intelligences will leave tens of millions of people without a job in the U.S. alone. Billions of people around the world. No one really thinks that is unlikely to happen. I guess robots and AI are pretty certain to be our future now. Here, there, everywhere in the end.

Billions of out of work people present a problem, naturally. People like to eat, they like clothing, they like to have a roof over their heads, and other things too, such as health care. From a political standpoint, the worst part of that is, people notice when they do not have those things, and cannot have those things. Such will become the reality in, say, 30 years at the most, but most likely sooner.

Gotterdammerung is a word borrowed from Norse/German mythology, and nowadays is sometimes used to mean a violent and catastrophic collapse of civilization. It originates in mythology, but if you listen to people who have spent some time looking into these things, it's a genuine down the road threat to sooner or later every nation on the planet. Again, if a third or more of your working age adults are starving, you have a problem.

There have already been experiments with UBGI. Whole towns in places like Canada, the Netherlands, and elsewhere have been placed on it for periods of up to five years to see what happens.

One big concern that is now laid to rest. Most people do not become lazy, as just about everyone feared at first. Some do. But somewhere around 90% or more of them use their new found time available to them to do anything they want to do by seeking out one of the few remaining jobs, going back to school to learn more, taking up a serious hobby, volunteering at a nonprofit organization, etc. Its shocking, but it seems most people like to work. Especially if they get to pick what kind of work they do.

How would they be paid for? Best idea I've heard is what Gates came up. Tax the robots. That is, send a tax bill to the owners of robots, taxing them on a per robot basis.

So? What do you make of it all?



Terrible idea! Idealist always underestimate human nature.

While it’s true that technology will consolidate the labor force, the remedy should be a larger localized public works industrial complex which provides self respecting work for that $2000+ salary.
 

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
a violent and catastrophic collapse of civilization. It originates in mythology, but if you listen to people who have spent some time looking into these things, it's a genuine down the road threat to sooner or later every nation on the planet.

I was recently reading of such a thing. Historically, it's a common ending - surprisingly quick (and violent). Civilisations that, until very near the collapse begins, still seem stable to the general population.
- Are we on the road to civilisation collapse?
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
I was recently reading of such a thing. Historically, it's a common ending - surprisingly quick (and violent). Civilisations that, until very near the collapse begins, still seem stable to the general population.
- Are we on the road to civilisation collapse?

This is a good resource. I scratched my head as the opening post cited a robot takeover when by far the more pressing issue globally is the dysfunctional relationship humans have with the rest of the world. The global-scale ecological genocide humans have inflicted is the real issue. There's no solution to that any humans will accept on the needed scale; human greed is too reliable for UBI to fix that looming issue. In addition to UBI, there would need to be fixed consumption of resources per human (ending rampant consumerism and materialism) as well as fixed breeding rates (ending human overpopulation) and abolishment or strict regulation of inappropriate technology (ending resource-intensive unnecessaries). Nobody is going to do any of that. Hardly anyone even proposes any of that. Collapse is pretty much inevitable; the universe operates in cycles of creation/destruction.
 

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
This is a good resource. I scratched my head as the opening post cited a robot takeover when by far the more pressing issue globally is the dysfunctional relationship humans have with the rest of the world. The global-scale ecological genocide humans have inflicted is the real issue. There's no solution to that any humans will accept on the needed scale; human greed is too reliable for UBI to fix that looming issue. In addition to UBI, there would need to be fixed consumption of resources per human (ending rampant consumerism and materialism) as well as fixed breeding rates (ending human overpopulation) and abolishment or strict regulation of inappropriate technology (ending resource-intensive unnecessaries). Nobody is going to do any of that. Hardly anyone even proposes any of that. Collapse is pretty much inevitable; the universe operates in cycles of creation/destruction.
Unfortunately for the planet (in the short term) I agree with every word.
 

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Unfortunately for the planet (in the short term) I agree with every word.

There are signs that things are moving in a corrective direction on a large enough scale that there's cause for some optimism. Still, there's general agreement that humanity is past the deadlines, so to speak, on the issue of climate change and mitigating some of its worser effects. If we'd gotten started on it the first time scientists gave notice to humanity, there would have been time. The level of mobilization needed now? Well, we can do it, but we (probably) won't. We'd need to treat it at least as seriously as the pandemic. Political will is often absent for all but immediate and obvious threats, though, and that's part of the problem. Environmental degradation is a slower, gradual process. How would UBI change the equation? It's hard to say.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Would a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income Reduce Class Warfare?
So? What do you make of it all?

Most likely, yes. And that is the reason for which I'd sell it to the billionairs, as a revolution prevention. Wealth and income inequality are rising and they will rise even faster once AIs are taking jobs en masse. The US population may be the most docile and fearful but at one point even they will snap and grab their torches and pitchforks. A (reasonable) UBI could send that time far into the future.
I see a UBI coming in most of Europe. There will be some failed attempts first (too low) but eventually we'll get it. The US may or may not implement it after the revolution.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Middle America would get the money also.
The people could not be taxed for paying this. That would be someone paying to get the same money back. Big businesses would have to pay. The ones who would be depriving people of work because of the robots.
It is good for businesses and the economy however because they need to sell things and to pay tax.
It is good for the poor who would be getting more than they do now.
True it could cause a backlash in America where the work ethic is too high for the good of anyone.
My question would be who is going to stop the cost of everything going up to pay for it all?
If it is explained well to everyone and people start losing jobs because of technological advances, it might be enough to sway people. Esp if they see they can work also or have time to do other things.
I think people could be persuaded in other countries more so than in the US.

Yes I think you cover the issues well. I just think it's a bit of a waste of time trying to analyse, today, how any of this will work out. Society will adapt, as the changes occur, in ways we cannot now foresee.

What I think we would be better focused on today is controlling the existing side-effects of business seeking greater efficiency: the deskilling of labour as manufacturing goes offshore, the growth of low quality distribution chain jobs as retail moves on-line, and the gig economy. It is a scandal that so many of our citizens do not feel they have a secure source of income. This seems to have become far worse in recent decades.

And also, by the way, the growing divide between a plutocrat class of top business managers, on telephone number salaries, stock options etc, while the plebs flatline. This is out of control and has been with us now for about 30 years, getting worse and worse. The trickle-down economy and the Laffer curve have been shown to be largely myths. It is high time for a correction.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Jeebers, I hate explaining these things. First, I suck at it. Second, a few seconds on Google gets folks a better explanation than I could ever come up with. Still, here goes...

A Universal Guaranteed Basic Income would work pretty much along these lines: Suppose the Federal Government decided to start making monthly payments to every person in the United States 18 or older with no strings attached and the Feds kept it up for the life of the individual. To be sure, the checks would go out to everyone regardless of the usual suspect categories. e.g. sex, race, religion, ethnic group, politics, and so forth.

Next, people getting the checks would have the option of working if they wanted to, and could find a job. The checks would be for 'get-by' sums. Enough to cover living expenses and maybe a little bit more for a movie, game, or book now and then. Say, $2000 per month in the U.S. these days.

Essentially, that's the idea of a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income. Naturally, the details could vary.

The idea has been around for years, but recently gained a boost in recognition when Andrew Yang made it the core of his policy platform in the 2019 primaries. It has been endorsed by a whole lot of people, such as Bill Gates, but who for the most part are not politicians, nor billionaires.

The usual reason economists, futurists, political scientists, policy wonks, and even Gates get behind it is because it is hoped that a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income will prevent Gotterdammerung. I doubt most people are plugged in to the news about our approaching Gotterdammerung, so I'll explain.

It's largely the consensus view these days that sometime within the next few decades robots and artificial intelligences will leave tens of millions of people without a job in the U.S. alone. Billions of people around the world. No one really thinks that is unlikely to happen. I guess robots and AI are pretty certain to be our future now. Here, there, everywhere in the end.

Billions of out of work people present a problem, naturally. People like to eat, they like clothing, they like to have a roof over their heads, and other things too, such as health care. From a political standpoint, the worst part of that is, people notice when they do not have those things, and cannot have those things. Such will become the reality in, say, 30 years at the most, but most likely sooner.

Gotterdammerung is a word borrowed from Norse/German mythology, and nowadays is sometimes used to mean a violent and catastrophic collapse of civilization. It originates in mythology, but if you listen to people who have spent some time looking into these things, it's a genuine down the road threat to sooner or later every nation on the planet. Again, if a third or more of your working age adults are starving, you have a problem.

There have already been experiments with UBGI. Whole towns in places like Canada, the Netherlands, and elsewhere have been placed on it for periods of up to five years to see what happens.

One big concern that is now laid to rest. Most people do not become lazy, as just about everyone feared at first. Some do. But somewhere around 90% or more of them use their new found time available to them to do anything they want to do by seeking out one of the few remaining jobs, going back to school to learn more, taking up a serious hobby, volunteering at a nonprofit organization, etc. Its shocking, but it seems most people like to work. Especially if they get to pick what kind of work they do.

How would they be paid for? Best idea I've heard is what Gates came up. Tax the robots. That is, send a tax bill to the owners of robots, taxing them on a per robot basis.

So? What do you make of it all?




I like the idea, and it could work. Society has progressed and technology has advanced to the point where we're in a situation we haven't really faced before. We have more people than needed to actually work to keep society functioning.

Most of the time in human history, it's been just the opposite. Too much work to do and not enough people willing to do it. That's why slavery was invented. A lot of work was very labor intensive, requiring many workers to do things that we have machines to do now.

Lazy people were not looked kindly upon because there was a lot of work to be done, and people were not inclined to tolerate any slacking. Especially when such work was vital to the survival of a family or village.

But we slowly moved away from that kind of society and gradually progressed into what it is now. But I think there are many who still believe that, even despite all the labor-saving devices and machines which can do jobs which were previously done by humans, people still need to do something to be useful - even if it's just low-paid "busywork."

This topic reminds me of Star Trek and the concept of Federation society having no money: "People are no longer obsessed with the accumulation of things. We've eliminated hunger, want, the need for possessions. We have grown out of our infancy."

RALPH: Then what will happen to us? There's no trace of my money. My office is gone. What will I do? How will I live?
PICARD: This is the twenty fourth century. Material needs no longer exist.
RALPH: Then what's the challenge?
PICARD: The challenge, Mister Offenhouse, is to improve yourself. To enrich yourself. Enjoy it.


On some of the Trek fan boards I've been on, there have been heated debates about the Federation's economic system.

But I think there's something to the idea that, if more people were freed from the drudgery of day-to-day busywork just so they can survive, society might ultimately more enriched and advanced. What if the world misses out on the greatest poet or musician because they ended up having to work at Walmart - and lost all their inspiration?

Another Trek example was in "I Mudd," where they were captured by androids who were programmed to serve, and it was quite tempting. McCoy was tempted by their research laboratory which he said he could spend the rest of his life studying. And Scotty was quite impressed with that nanopulse laser thing.

So, even if humans have all their needs met and don't really need to work, they'll still want to study and learn and enrich themselves however they can. That can lead to even greater improvements and advancements for human civilization.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Expropriating wealth from those who control the means of production and redistributing that wealth in an equitable way strikes me as an outstanding, cutting edge idea. I just can't seem to shake the feeling that I've encountered it back in my youth.

Oh? In your youth? Refresh my memory. Was that in Ur or Uruk that you first encountered the idea?
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
This is genuinely worrying to me. Aside from what you've outlined here, the fact that robots doing most of the work would lead to mass poverty reveals just how warped our perception is.

This is the stuff of Sci-Fi Utopian fiction. Robots take care of the necessities of life, leaving humans free to pursue artistic, intellectual and philosophical endeavours along with having ample time for leisure. This should be cause for excitement but the incalculable greed of a tiny minority coupled with the resigned, "this is just how things have to be" attitude of the majority give the whole concept an air of impending doom.

If providing a basic standard of living for people is just too monumental a task in a world of automation, what hope do we have? Universal income isn't just a noble aim, it presents a vital step in rethinking how our society operates. Gotterdammerung is as much about mindset as it is about how we distribute resources and changing peoples' mindset presents the real challenge in my opinion.

If asked, "What's the primary purpose of a business?" the majority of people in my experience answer, "To make a profit." Until we're able to have the majority of people answer, "To provide goods and services" then I don't see much chance of avoiding Gotterdammerung.


Sorry if this all sounds a bit hysterical but I feel that we can't talk about universal income without also talking about societal attitudes. As you said in your post, it has been demonstrated to be effective but there's still strong resistance to it. I would argue this resistance is less about practicality and more about our skewed perception.

Superb understanding of the situation, if you ask me. Thanks for sharing that!
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I was recently reading of such a thing. Historically, it's a common ending - surprisingly quick (and violent). Civilisations that, until very near the collapse begins, still seem stable to the general population.
- Are we on the road to civilisation collapse?

You might find Jared Diamond's "Collapse" illuminating. Maybe the best general audience treatment of both why civilizations fail and how they can be rescued that's available. Highly controversial, of course. But what else is new?
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Jeebers, I hate explaining these things. First, I suck at it. Second, a few seconds on Google gets folks a better explanation than I could ever come up with. Still, here goes...

A Universal Guaranteed Basic Income would work pretty much along these lines: Suppose the Federal Government decided to start making monthly payments to every person in the United States 18 or older with no strings attached and the Feds kept it up for the life of the individual. To be sure, the checks would go out to everyone regardless of the usual suspect categories. e.g. sex, race, religion, ethnic group, politics, and so forth.

Next, people getting the checks would have the option of working if they wanted to, and could find a job. The checks would be for 'get-by' sums. Enough to cover living expenses and maybe a little bit more for a movie, game, or book now and then. Say, $2000 per month in the U.S. these days.

Essentially, that's the idea of a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income. Naturally, the details could vary.

The idea has been around for years, but recently gained a boost in recognition when Andrew Yang made it the core of his policy platform in the 2019 primaries. It has been endorsed by a whole lot of people, such as Bill Gates, but who for the most part are not politicians, nor billionaires.

The usual reason economists, futurists, political scientists, policy wonks, and even Gates get behind it is because it is hoped that a Universal Guaranteed Basic Income will prevent Gotterdammerung. I doubt most people are plugged in to the news about our approaching Gotterdammerung, so I'll explain.

It's largely the consensus view these days that sometime within the next few decades robots and artificial intelligences will leave tens of millions of people without a job in the U.S. alone. Billions of people around the world. No one really thinks that is unlikely to happen. I guess robots and AI are pretty certain to be our future now. Here, there, everywhere in the end.

Billions of out of work people present a problem, naturally. People like to eat, they like clothing, they like to have a roof over their heads, and other things too, such as health care. From a political standpoint, the worst part of that is, people notice when they do not have those things, and cannot have those things. Such will become the reality in, say, 30 years at the most, but most likely sooner.

Gotterdammerung is a word borrowed from Norse/German mythology, and nowadays is sometimes used to mean a violent and catastrophic collapse of civilization. It originates in mythology, but if you listen to people who have spent some time looking into these things, it's a genuine down the road threat to sooner or later every nation on the planet. Again, if a third or more of your working age adults are starving, you have a problem.

There have already been experiments with UBGI. Whole towns in places like Canada, the Netherlands, and elsewhere have been placed on it for periods of up to five years to see what happens.

One big concern that is now laid to rest. Most people do not become lazy, as just about everyone feared at first. Some do. But somewhere around 90% or more of them use their new found time available to them to do anything they want to do by seeking out one of the few remaining jobs, going back to school to learn more, taking up a serious hobby, volunteering at a nonprofit organization, etc. Its shocking, but it seems most people like to work. Especially if they get to pick what kind of work they do.

How would they be paid for? Best idea I've heard is what Gates came up. Tax the robots. That is, send a tax bill to the owners of robots, taxing them on a per robot basis.

So? What do you make of it all?



I'm with you on this.

Alan Greenspan, who's a conservative economist, testified in Congress that the greatest single threat to the U.S. is a wide disparity of income with some being in poverty.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
One fascinating take on UGBI that might be gaining popularity is it would amount in the long run to a redistribution or re-tasking of human talents, skills and abilities out of jobs people were less suited for into jobs that better fit them. That is, people who were not forced to take whatever jobs they could get, would be free to take the jobs the were best at. It's argued that would have the potential to lead to some kind of Golden Age of Humanity.

Many of you have noted that. I'm just amplifying.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Agreed, but it's not exactly rocket science is it.

It most certainly is when you toss the idea into the shark infested waters of American politics! By the time the frenzy is only properly starting, the idea is so intentionally maimed and mangled as to be unrecognizable to nearly everyone but forensic scientists.
 

Secret Chief

nirvana is samsara
It most certainly is when you toss the idea into the shark infested waters of American politics! By the time the frenzy is only properly starting, the idea is so intentionally maimed and mangled as to be unrecognizable to nearly everyone but forensic scientists.
I've told you a million times not to exaggerate.
 
Top