I guess the debate is whether UBI is a good idea or not. I say no.
These don’t seem like a UBI to me, especially if the benefits are tied to being physically on the reservation in the first instance. They seem more like the classic “welfare cliff” in that you are not free to find full-time, well-paying employment or your benefits will cease entirely. UBI doesn’t have these kind of strings attached, so people are free to pursue any sort of job they want.
Which doesn’t prove that it works, just that it is different from your examples in important ways.
Worked in what sense?It has worked in the sense that it has not run out of money, but the poverty rates in Alaska are not appreciably better than those of the rest of the country.
Unemployment rates for Alaska are also higher than the national average, no doubt for a number of reasons. But lower workforce participation is an expected outcome of UBI as well, as seems to have happened in the famous SIME/DIME project.
Regards,
Shodan
That seems self-evident. The more you pay people to do nothing, the less they are going to work.
This may or may not be true with a UBI, but Alaska does not pay enough to allow people not to work at all. I think the cases where that extra $1200 was enough to allow them to not work must be so small that they wouldn’t even show up in the statistical noise. I myself am a full-time employed single guy living in a low cost of living state, with a non-minuscule nest egg, and I would not be able to quit my job if I were given a measly $1200 per year for free.
Sure, I agree. That’s why I said “The more you pay someone…” $1200 per year? Probably everyone is going to keep working if they can. $25,000 a year? People are going to stop working.
Has remained solvent (as far as I know). No it doesn’t pay a living wage but I don’t think it’s intended to do so.
Oh, I’m sorry, I had no idea a broch was the only kind of house possible. Or “house”, if you prefer.
You realize *billions *of people live in houses without “plumbing, electrical and HVAC system”, right? But nevertheless they’re still houses, not “houses”. Also, I never said we’re at the be-all and end-all of 3D house printing, just that we can already print something that qualifies as a house, and not just a “dollhouse”.
And 12-24 hours tops “in a few days”.
I tend to agree with you, but the op was terribly constructed.
UBI may work if we ever get fully automated and bring population growth under control, but until then it is a pipe dream. Which come to think of it is appropriate for today.
You’re right, of course, that houses come in more than one size and the ability to cheaply and quickly build a livable dwelling is really cool. But discussions take place within a context provided by their participants, so it strikes me as somewhat beside the point originally made – that there’s a whole heaping crapload of stuff people want that technology isn’t anywhere near ready to churn out of a printer.
This is undoubtedly so. But I’m definitely in favor of more research in this area, because unless we blow ourselves either up or into the stone age, we’ll eventually we’ll hit the point where machines can do anything we can but better. Maybe it’s centuries away, but maybe the futurists are right and it’s only decades.
It does seem clear to me that (at least prior to the point that Skynet blows up the job market) any UBI scheme will have to be very carefully designed in order to be affordable and to mitigate effects on labor supply. I don’t see how means testing of some sort can be avoided… though that even further discourages employment as well as introducing enforcement costs.
As an economist-by-training I probably have a little bit of a classical liberal bias here, but I would love to see practical experiments of how replacing all benefits with simple direct cash transfers would work out. I suspect a better safety net would need to be in place first, though.
These two things appear to be incompatible with each other. Could you try to explain this a bit more?
It’s addressing the point it addresses - that some jobs (like construction) aren’t up for replacement by automation (with the very on-topic implication being “there’s no need for a UBI, there’ll always be manual jobs for uneducated peons”, I guess) That isn’t always going to be the case, is what I’m saying. There are very, very few jobs that couldn’t be automated or sidelined by automation.
I come down heavily in favour of a UBI (South Africa already provides a whole spread of government grants, UBI would be a logical end-goal of that system) but I look forward to a world where it won’t be all that necessary - where the basics of living (food, clothing, shelter, education, communication) can be sourced for free because of pervasive automated production and cheap renewable energy.
Yes, that was rather badly written. I mean that I’m curious whether most in kind benefits such as housing assistance, SNAP, or employment training could be replaced with cash transfers. But I think there are markets that don’t function particularly well when left alone – the big one I’m thinking of is health care. Before going to a mostly cash only scheme I’d want to codify something closer to universal health care.
It may be at some point in the future, UBI becomes more practical that expanding the convoluted bureaucracy needed to support an expanding patchwork of social safety nets. But for now, it seems to me that money is better spent on more targeted programs.
I, for one, don’t see UBI as a good thing. Not because it couldn’t work. But because I think it will have a profoundly negative effect on society to create a vast underclass of people who, quite honestly, won’t have much to do.
Certainly there will always be jobs for humans to do. Even if financial incentives are removed or even vastly reduced, there will still be people who want to design things, express creativity, lead people or make decisions on how the world should run.
But with extensive automation, much of the “grunt work” that was typically performed by low level employees that was instrumental for them to learn their job will have disappeared. And society only needs so many lawyers or engineers or accountants. A job that might have been performed by a senior engineer or lawyer and a staff of a dozen might only need one person supported by AI.
What I envision is a worlds where you have a relatively small number of very talented people or people in very senior administrative roles. But competition for those jobs will be severe. Even relatively low level jobs service like waitress or bartender will have much higher competition when your pool of applicants increases dramatically and those are the only unskilled jobs available.
And because AI will have largely removed the intellectual component of most jobs, I would suspect that the criteria for many, if not most, jobs becomes more superficial. Hiring an engineer based on “attractiveness”, “popularity” or “entertainment value” rather than their skill at engineering.
Imagine the hiring process for nearly every respectable job to look something like a reality show competition.
You would then have this vast group of people, sustained by UBI, with little to no hope of achieving, anything really. Maybe you have a lot of people blogging or creating content on whatever passes for YouTube in the future. But I suspect most people would just be content to be passive content consumers.
Basically what I see is something like an Idiocracy:
Large, mostly automated, corporations and government institutions that control most of the resources and capital, employing vapid overeducated idiots with the right look and background. Most of them not really doing anything but pontificating about various managerial and business philosophies while automated decision support systems make most of the real business decisions faster and better than any human.
The bulk of society a bunch of unthinking morons eating processed food, printing out crap to display their “individuality” (which looks just like everyone else’s) and perpetually glued to a constant stream of targeted media designed to outrage them just enough to keep watching (but not so much as to create civil strife).
Maybe you have a middle class of frustrated people with some degree of intelligence, talent and motivation to do something other than sit on their ass all day, but with not a lot of outlets for that talent and motivation.
I don’t know about the future, but that sounds like the present.
Uh … interesting? Can you give us some examples of progressive programs which you think are politically feasible at the national level in today’s America?
So you think the extensive automation won’t happen if we don’t have UBI? More likely we’d have a vast non-consuming and restive underclass.
UBI in a low employment high automation society would be a means of transferring money from those who own the automation and make big profits from it to those hurt by the automation. The alternative is giving up automation which hurts productivity.
There will still be plenty of jobs in the service sector, like in health care and nursing homes, but these have been traditionally low paid. We can also look at UBI as a way of subsidizing these jobs so people who do them don’t have to live in poverty.
You must be thinking of Chinese factories making iPhones with cheap labor. But there is not a lot of labor in a fab per million dollars of product produced. The control needed to make ICs is beyond what people can do on a lot by lot basis.
American manufacturing employment is down while manufacturing output is up. That’s due to automation. We’re not talking lights out factories, just factories that can produce more with fewer people.
That’s true even in software. When I started writing code there were few if any libraries - now you can grab lots of code chunks which you can assemble which lets you do a lot more with fewer people. I taught sorting when I taught data structures - who writes a sort these days? We might have more programmers, but there are hardly any when you consider the amount of code being churned out.
And that is an area where general intelligence is required. Lots of jobs don’t need it. I had a job one summer almost 50 years ago filing. Not a lot of general intelligence needed for that job. And it almost certainly no longer exists.