As though there are changes worth making that aren’t easier said than done and don’t require feasible plans?
Yes, I obviously favor a fairly radical change to the current power structure. Worthwhile change starts with asking what should be and then working toward it. In this case, accepting monetary worth as the metric of human worth could only result in a society ruled by and for the benefit of wealth. Yeah, that takes some changes, but can’t win, don’t try never accomplished anything.
3 Likes
Would we become a nation of scholars, or artisans, or couch potatoes?
It’s funny that we already have professional video game players. A generation ago they would have been called couch potatoes.
2 Likes
I prefer the lobster-lover referencing variant: “Fully Automated Lamprey Communism”.
4 Likes
That’s clear; but aside from the easiest first step of recognizing the problem, what’s your plan for actually instituting such ‘radical change?’
1 Like
7 Likes
Who would have guessed that the most inaccurate part of that comic would be the newspaper?
21 Likes
1 Like
Anyone with aspirations or needs that are more than ‘basic’. What the basic level to sustain life is, would be a political hot potato for ever more.
1 Like
The Communist regimes (like the one I grew up in) had job guarantees. For that matter you didn’t always have to work particularly hard either, but you had to be in one. That’s why there were no homeless on the streets.
Of course people could get by, but trying to get anything of decent quality good luck, People got used to carrying mesh bags and queuing up whenever they saw a line.
2 Likes
I agree, sadly. It seems the real choices we Americans would get from either proposal would be guaranteed jobs designed to be as stultifying and low paid as possible in order to return the “dead weight” to the discipline of the private sector labor market, or a parsimonious UBI under constant pressure to reduce the benefit, in order to return the “dead weight” to the discipline of the private sector labor market.
1 Like
I would really like to see a form of UBI where everyone gets a check from the government, each month, for the same amount. Yep, taxes would have to be increased, which would wash it out after a certain point. Obviously, we would also need to balance Universal Health Care in too.
Also, eliminate minimum wages, and re-write all laws to eliminate the difference between full time and part time. If a full time employee gets a benefit, a 30-hour a week employee gets 3/4th of it; everything is based on hours worked.
My guess is that it would create an explosion of economic output as people were more willing to take risks and try riskier economic things. I imagine wages would push up, and be more contractish. Casual employment would rise.
Yes, some people would become artists and poets and stuff without day jobs because they won’t starve to death; some people will become professional vagabonds. These are plusses, not minuses.
The mind astounds at how much this could change the economic landscape; how will McDonald’s survive when it can’t get people to cook because they will starve otherwise but when they only have “but you can work and get cool stuff”? My guess is that the businesses who can adapt to either casual employment will thrive, and some things will get more expensive and others less expensive.
8 Likes
“four decades of demand-side Reaganomics”
We’ve had four decades of supply side Reaganomics. We’ve lacked the demand side (except debt based demand)
5 Likes
pardon me, but that’s not accurate.
and I could go on.
Naysayers gonna say “Nay!”
7 Likes
There’s probably a job market for that. A niche, but still a market.
3 Likes
Elect this guy for president Andy Yang
he is interviewed on Sam Harris
and gives a good explanation of how to go about funding it. (Ie of the estimated $1.3 trillion cost
it would be funded by a federal vat (value added) sales tax about 50% of what it is in Europe.
there would be savings on reducing other social expenditures, as well as a multiplier spending effect.
ie $1000 per month, for everyone, no needs testing as it is universal
(it also allows people to save up to move if need be) Unlike say disability benefits
on which something like 25% of older males end up when mills and factories close
there is no disincentive to work for fear of losing the income.
it is also opt-in so people can choose not to take it.
Given that Alaska a deeply red state has had an oil dividend going out to every citizen
brought in by a conservative Governor nearly thirty years ago. It is not as much as Andy Yang
proposes however for a family of four it may be around $8000 a year and so far no one is complaining about receiving it.
Right now, Iran has brought in a Universal Basic Income for all citizens as well.
1 Like
Well if you have a guaranteed job isn’t that basically the government getting something in return for guaranteed salaries? UBI without a need for bartered work in return seems not as good for country. That said, hopefully that doesn’t mean the government has to make up stuff for us to do, like make big infrastructure projects no one needs ( like the entire sets of ghost cities in China that have no residents).
Well, there is always the question of whether any given employee’s labor actually produces rather than destroy’s value. For most people, the answer is yes, but then, most people get jobs today. What jobs can government universally supply to everyone who can’t or won’t get employed in current jobs, such that that population will produce value that exceeds what it costs to run the jobs program?
My grandfather was part of the Civilian Conservation Corps in the 1930s. This was a program that paid unemployed people to do things like make trails and shelters in parks. I remember him showing me a bridge in a nearby hiking trail that he helped build. At least for him it was way better than a handout.
7 Likes
Don’t know that one. Thanks. I’ll definitely check it out
1 Like
its readable, but dense and a bit academic at times. Amazing that it’s from the 19th century. His predictions about stuff like streaming music and on-demand warehousing is prescient.
