Jump to content

Bender

Senior Members
  • Posts

    1307
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Posts posted by Bender

  1. Basic income for farmers runs into the same problems you pose for UBI: when is someone a farmer? Who is eligible? How many carrots do I have to grow in my back yard? Do I have to sell them? But what if my crop fails?

    It is already conditional, so what is stopping anyone from adding the other conditions, such as origin or criminal record?

  2. 1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

    The tend I see is one where the citizens eligible for benefits enjoy highly mobility and flexible lifestyles which is made possible on the backs of thus forced to be their servant. 

    Nobody is forcing them to come. The fact that they do indicates that the new situation of "servitude" is more desirable than their old situation.

    The length can be debated, but if after that period they get the same rights, that doesn't seem too unreasonable. At least with UBI, they are protected from discrimination afterwards.

  3. 22 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    I addressed this in the Automation taking jobs threads.

    No you didn't. Your data predates the decoupling and doesn't address more recent and upcoming evolutions at all.

    I understand that your main objection to unconditional basic income is that it wouldn't be unconditional. What about European countries that have no republican party. Any reasons why we shouldn't implement it? Perhaps if it works in other countries, those republican conservatives would be less of a hindrance?

    1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

    It should be about freedom but on a philosophical level I feel money as a mechanism to manage resources restricts freedom. Giving people money doesn't make them free. Banks, or high overlords,  can always manipulate policy to devalue or inflate money. That is a conversation for another thread though. 

    For me, I would like solutions which best deliver. Depending on the mental and physical help of an individual homeless person I suspect being provided a home and food would be best initially with the option to trade it in for cash once they felt ready might work better than just cash up front. I don't think any such programs are possible until taxes are increased and significant immigration and criminal justice reform are passed. 

    Perhaps some people do need guidance, but the main problem of poor people is not that they have no guidance -there is already plenty of that- but that they have no money.

    I am more inclined to empower the individual than to rely on some officials to decide what is best for them.

  4. 7 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    Really?

    Yes. Your survey shows that 65% of the right and even 28% of the extreme right supports it.

     

    7 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    I addressed this in the Automation taking jobs thread

    I'm only following this one. Where can I find it?

    6 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    Soc Sec is an earned program we know works

    No it doesn't. Even European countries with the best social sec have problems with poverty.

    The Soc Sec I know relies on lots of control and actively discourages people to work because even a small part time job will loose them their benefits while now they have to pay for transportation and day care. Starting a business with initially small and uncertain revenue is completely out of the question.

    Moreover, our Soc Sec system pushes millions of people in useless jobs, some of which were created specifically to keep them occupied, and have an excuse for paying them. It also gives employers the power to exploit people and unions the power to screw everyone. 

    My approach to UBI is from the right: more freedom to quit an abusive job, and less government control.

  5. 22 hours ago, ALine said:

     

    So the united states and the rest of the world is headed toward a hive mind then. You are saying that every society and form of government is just destined to head toward a hive mind. That every form of law is just one hive mind.

    You want everyone to eventually become a hive mind society then? 

    So everyone in the US agrees? I must have missed something...

    I thought it was obvious that I dislike the idea of a hive mind, although I must admit anecdotes in fiction often describe the experience as blissful. 

  6. 2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    If BUI were to be pursued I think we all know it would be exclusively from the left.

    Utter nonsense.

    It was Nixon who came closest to implementing a BI. There was also a republican major (I forgot which city) who built free appartments for all homeless.

    The funny thing about UBI is that the idea finds support and opposition across the entire political spectrum.

    While I agree with you that you raise important questions and that UBI on its own won't solve the problems of our current system, you left an important issue unanswered. I provided data that there is a decoupling between productivity and job creation and gave examples of why I think that will get worse in the future. How do you suggest we deal with a job shortage in a system that requires people to have one to live a decent life?

  7. 5 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    Correct, it is already a reality. I rather see criminal justice reform a d immigration reform passed to scale it back than UBI pass to strengthen it. 

    Those aren't exclusive. I would also like a justice reform.

    8 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    @Bender who will receive UBI? Please don't just respond by saying everyone because that obviously isn't accurate less everyone one with a tourist, student, work and etc visas (millions of people) would be receiving it.

    How would it be paid for? You insist it handle large unemployment yet taxes on employment is where the govt gets the bulk of it's money. Less employment equals less federal tax revenue. 

    Everyone adult citizen. Immigration is obviously an issue, but not more than it is now.

    As for the cost: a major tax reform would be required. Taxing employment and added value is convenient, but not really what you want if you want people to work or to add value.

    Other options would be to tax eg luxury, resources, real estate, dead money... Denmark IIRC taxes SUV's 180%.

  8. 9 minutes ago, ALine said:

    No, I do not, I have never made this claim nor have I ever stated that this was my primary objective.

    You want everyone to agree about everything so the entire collective can make unanimous decisions in minutes. Personal preferences are out of the question, because with slightly different preferences, people will never reach the same rational conclusions.

    Sounds like a description of a hive mind to me.

  9. 8 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    What does this have to do with BUI? 

     

    14 hours ago, Bender said:

    Our current economic model cannot handle a large unemployment rates, UBI can, by rendering the concept of unemployment meaningless.

     

  10. 13 hours ago, ALine said:

    it is designed to make everyone THINK together as a collective versus everything thinking by themselves.

    You want a hive mind. Your "utopia" would seriously be a good start for the Borg collective. The only difference is that they replaced the test with forced assimilation, which is a lot more reliable. It would be perfectly rational to eliminate everyone who is not part of the collective.

    You claim it would be based on morality, but morality is subjective. How can you expect to ever reach total agreement on subjective questions without total indoctrination? 

  11. 5 minutes ago, ALine said:

     

    tumblr_m9pignsNcP1rxcv2jo1_500.gif

    So you agree that you Utopia is a horrible place?

    7 hours ago, Ken Fabian said:

    Absence of poverty does look like a key element of any quest for utopia but I have long thought independent courts and Common Law type systems have been important to the success of modern "western" nation states. As messy and subject to corruption these often are in practice they do there does seem to be a self-correcting, corruption resisting element in them and they don't get as messy and corrupt as nations that do not have them.  If their partial success makes such a difference, maybe better legal systems are going to be a key ingredient for a healthier society.

    Just as access to basic living needs would need to be universal, I suggest affordable access to not-corrupt courts, justice and legal redress would also need to be universal.

     Yes, and our justice system can still use improvement. We should stop training criminals and terrorists in prisons.

     

  12. 6 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    Humanity as a whole is having a great run. 

    Less people are living in poverty, not more. Where is the evidence of a turning pointing where automation diminishes human opportunity? 

    I never said there is an increase in poverty. I suggested job creation is no longer keeping up with technology and provided examples of why this will get worse in the future. See this graph.

    Our current economic model cannot handle a large unemployment rates, UBI can, by rendering the concept of unemployment meaningless.

  13. 5 hours ago, ALine said:

    Yes, and I believe that I have addressed this issue, that being the separation of families as you can see below.

    Families would be allowed to stay together. This is due to the adults having an influence on the children. So if the adults pass the test then their children can go as well. It is an all or nothing deal. 

    We are the Borg. You will be assimilated. Resistance is futile.

    What if a child decides to rebel against their indoctrinated parents/the hive mind? Does it get kicked out. Why would the perfectly rational parents even care about their imperfect children being kicked out?

  14. 1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

    This was my point regarding people having jobs today that did not exist 50yrs ago. Every job becomes obsolete. That has always been the case. 

    We appear to be reaching a stage where jobs become obsolete faster than they are created. Eg: once self-driving cars are a fact, they will replace human drivers at an enormous rate, rendering a large percentage of taxi drivers, truck drivers, etc unemployed in a matter of years.

    Administration is also automated everywhere, although the government is now keeping that "problem" at bay by creating more arbitrary administration.

    4 hours ago, ALine said:

    All of this while the population would be growing due to an increase in health services due to anyone being able to have access to health tips and medication, assuming UBI would be able to handle the price difference.

    1) there is a strong correlation between better health care and population decrease. Rich people who have better access also have less children. 

    2) apart from the decrease in population, health care costs would decrease dramatically due to a drop in stress or poverty induced health problems.

  15. On 1/7/2018 at 12:59 PM, Ten oz said:

    Certainly women using BUI to get from certain men would become one of the loudest criticisms against BUI, especially in the Evangelical community. 

    It was. Nixon would have implemented a kind of basic income if it wasn't for the fear of empowering women.

    On 1/7/2018 at 12:59 PM, Ten oz said:

    To @fiveworlds point citizens in those countries have no incentive to work.

    Those aren't exactly free countries, so there are other factors at work (pun not intended).

    Experiments in Namibia and Canada show only 10% of the population stopped working. That's not too bad considering the amount of useless jobs that only exist to keep people busy and justifying paying them.

    There was also a significant increase in entrepreneurship.

    Surveys of people who win "win for life" where you get 1000-2000 € each month also show that nearly none of them stop working.

    Rutger Bregman wrote some interesting books on the subject with lots of examples. Here is one of his texts in English.

  16. 1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

    Because bang bang is good enough and a lot cheaper.

    Exactly.

    Although I must admit that if I had to judge a science project, I would be impressed with a 14 year old successfully implementing the PID, even if using one didn't really make sense.

    1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

    All the deceit furnaces I have seen have PID controllers- but (obviously) no active cooling.

    How are they heated and where are the sensors positioned?  How important are the I a D actions?

    I have seen a PID in an industrial machine as well, but only for the primary control with hot or cold water. The water itself was still heated with bang-bang.

    (What is a "deceit furnace"? Google didn't provide a useful translation.)

    Edit: another application of PID in temperature control would be for controlling the temperature of a continuous flow.

  17. For linear applications where you can control in both directions, the sensor are sufficiently reliable (in case of the D-action) and the potentially added accuracy is actually worth it.

    Position and implementation of sensor and heating element will have a bigger influence here than the choice between controllers.

    To reverse the question : if PID controllers are so great at controlling temperature, why don't room thermostats use them?

  18. No offense, ALine, but your Utopia sounds like horrible place with little freedom, no privacy and lots of judgement.

    The idea of a morality test is rather "utopian". Having people redo a test as often as they like makes it completely pointless,  and a psychopath could pass simply by lying.

  19. 4 hours ago, fiveworlds said:

    Gives the government unprecedented control over people. (eg. If you want to keep you BUI you must attend course a or b and achieve minimum grade y)

    This an example of where the details matter. In the unconditional variant, the government has no control at all.

    49 minutes ago, iNow said:

    A handful of people would abuse the system. Classic free rider problem. 

    That is not a problem, but a feature. The concept of "free riding" would no longer exist.

    49 minutes ago, iNow said:

    Fiscal deficits. We keep stupidly cutting taxes for the already Uber wealthy and can barely pay for Medicare, let alone Medicare for all, social security, infrastructure, and UBI. 

    While definitely an issue, it is hard to predict the long term financial effect. In some implementations, it could replace social security.

    49 minutes ago, iNow said:

    It would further accelerate the takeover of AI, ML, and related robots and further reduce the need for human labor, thus further cutting the funding the funding required to support it.

    Drop the AI takeover and and this is a big advantage. Everyone could work less and pursue other interests, if they want to. It is ridiculous that we stop technological progress out of fear of losing jobs.

    Obviously the tax system would need to change drastically. Currently we mainly tax labour and added value, which is a very stupid thing to do if you want people to work and add value. 

    I could go on about this for quite a while, so I'll add only one pro and con.

    Pro: freedom of work. Currently most people do not feel free in one of the most important aspects of their lives.

    Con: the transition period will be hard while companies and institutions addapt. It could last several electoral cycles before the benefits become apparent.

  20. Is there a specific implementation you want to limit the discussion to? BUI has been used for different systems. My personal preference goes to the unconditional variant, where everyone gets it.

    Do you also want to discuss feasibility?

  21. 16 hours ago, Pembroke said:

    Why the brain would favour irrational choices seems more difficult to grasp.

    I would guess for the same reason that my Gps keeps asking me to take a U-turn long after I decided to take a shortcut. It is computationally a lot easier to stick to a known path and only deviate slightly rather than calculate a completely new path. Our brain has the additional "problem" that it reinforces used connections in the brain, so once a certain irrational connection is made, it will be favoured in the future, or analogies are drawn too quickly.

  22. 11 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    UBI won't make people happy. Countless studies have been done and there are many philosophical theories out there about.

    Citation required. The studies I read about come to different conclusions.

    11 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    What I think can be definitively stated is that there is no empirical link between income and happiness.

    Yes there is. It just flattens out after the basic needs are covered.

    11 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    It is not the board majority of people I am referencing as liars and cheats. Rather it is just a small minority just as today only a small minority are billionaires. Look at the level of manipulation and control that small minority has though. Again, I believe any number of economic and governance systems could work. Communism could work, Socialism could work, a Monarchy could work, a Theocracy could work, and etc. What undermines all systems is the corruption and loathing towards each other. Reinventing the bucket won't fix a sinking ship. 

    Evil corporations will have a hard time exploiting people and making them unhappy when they can simply quit their job without risk.

    9 hours ago, Ten oz said:

    Far as I can tell it is seldom the vulnerable who are violent.

    Then why are our prisons filled with poor and/or dumb people?

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.