Did you fall for the basic income meme? Do you actually think

>>8778718
>Do you actually think AI and automation will progress so far that we'll be able to let humans do whatever they want?
do you not know what the word 'basic' in 'basic income' means brainlet?

People always compete against themselves, if everyone is on UBI, they will compete in something else just so they can be more superior than others.

People will still train physically and mentally just for the sake of it, even if not then who fucking cares, strength comes from need, if there are no needs then it doesnt matter we are all weak and only live to shitpost on the Internet.

It's sad how many people think UBI can actually work. Granted the vast majority are college students and NEETs desperately hoping for gibmedats but still, everyone should have some knowledge of basic economics. Money itself is worthless, literally. All that matters is the shit you can buy with money, and it's finite. Giving everyone money doesn't work because nobody wants money, they want the things you can buy with money, and the system will always reach an equilibrium.

People need to produce things of value, that is what makes money worth what it is, because it's tied to value production. If you have a whole caste of people creating no value then the money they have ceases to be worth anything at all

>>8778733
It will matter when everybody is a miserable psychological wreck

>>8778746
>Automated companies get heavily taxed
>That money goes as UBI
>People buys shit with UBIbux

Theres no reason why this wouldnt work, the circular flow of economy closes just as now. In fact, its the only possible way, in a world where technology have automated every production process, people would have no job and then no money to buy anything so companies go broke and so on

>>8778757
Except what people want are the things money can buy and if you hand out large quantities of money for nothing then there will be an increase in the prices of goods that people are spending that money on. You'll just create a feedback loop where money gets aggressively funneled back into the coffers of large companies and goods get priced out of reach of UBI only people anyway. It's not a solution. UBI by definition cannot ever be an amount of money people can live on because the things people want will end up being priced out of reach due to the surge in demand.

>>8778757
What do you think a fair rate of taxation would be on companies that automate? If it's anything over 40% you're retarded.

>>8778718
sport and arts are competitions which machines are not able to take away from us.

sports because a machine match would be completely predictable

arts because winning is subjective

In a massively automated world basic income would just be a pittance given out by the extremely wealthy to ensure the current capitalistic system continues because that is preferable to a more equitable distribution of wealth.

>>8778774
>UBI by definition cannot ever be an amount of money people can live on because the things people want will end up being priced out of reach due to the surge in demand.
What surge in demand? Do you think poor people aren't buying food?
Anything you'd buy on basic income is already mostly being bought; it's not intended to give you a cushy middle class life with a car and a 4k TV and two dogs.

Probably the only thing you could argue would see a real boost in demand is apartments, because people who were previously living in slums or subsidized housing would now be able to afford a normal monthly rent

>>8778795
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSHZ_b05W7o
>tfw humanity becomes inferior ai.

>>8778802
>Anything you'd buy on basic income is already mostly being bought
Then why do we need it if it's not going to let the unemployed do anything they can't do currently?

>>8778746
You don't think there's value in things which can only be created by humans? Fiction? Science? Great cooking? Service? You think people won't want to earn more money to buy these things just because they're given enough money to not have to starve or freeze to death?

>>8778746
Right now, air and water, two things that are necessary but not sufficient for survival, are free. If they weren't, would you be arguing that the economy would be ruined if they were made free? UBI is just saying food and shelter should be free, too. That doesn't stop the need for humans to produce value.

>>8778808
Food and shelter are already subsidized for the poor in most first world countries.

the US has ~140 state and federal welfare programs.

giving out money would literally be cheaper than the system we currently have.

UBI is a libertarian compromise where we disintegrate the welfare trap by just giving welfare to everyone by default.

if we liquidated all those programs and brought them under a single pay out entity (ideally the IRS), we could give every 18 year old citizen ~10k$ a year.

>>8778805
The biggest reason is that for a massive amount of unemployed housing is not something they can do currently, at least not reliably. Especially in a culture where nesting with your parents indefinitely (or even into your 20s at all) is frowned upon.
It's debatable whether basic income would fix this or not because many places, especially big cities, are already short living space, but it would likely help in smaller cities that are suffering from the manufacturing decline.

The other point is that it would simplify the welfare system greatly because you can scratch dozens of pointless welfare bureaucracies that waste thousands of hours and millions upon millions of dollars and just pay people a little more than you're giving them anyway.

>>8778810
Not sufficiently, unless you're a black woman with 15 kids. Welfare for 1 guy in Canada is $600; that's not livable anywhere unless you're lucky enough to have family/friends that will help you.

>>8778820
>Especially in a culture where nesting with your parents indefinitely (or even into your 20s at all) is frowned upon.
This will change pretty quick if economic pressure forces it.

>>8778718
>basic income
is basically rape

fight me

>>8778718
Space exploration is hard, one might even call it a struggle. One of many things that could keep humans busy while driving progress.

>>8778718
As somebody who is mostly a neet who has dedicated his life to arts, I'm going to say you're wrong.

I get so much fulfillment out of life not suffering. Other people should get to live as I live, not having to be a wagecuck to survive.

>>8778820
>The other point is that it would simplify the welfare system greatly because you can scratch dozens of pointless welfare bureaucracies that waste thousands of hours and millions upon millions of dollars and just pay people a little more than you're giving them anyway.
To give every single person over the age of 18 in the US $10,000 a year it would cost over 2 trillion dollars. You're talking about adding trillions of dollars to the budget to save 0.1% of that in administrative costs. It doesn't make sense in the slightest.

>>8778718
>basic income
This shit is real? I thought it was just on The Expanse

why is this on sci

>>8778718
Fairly soon we will be in a situation where there quite simply won't be enough jobs for 75% of the population, so we either incorporate some basic income system, have the government give people pointless jobs or just let them starve.
If you don't want that situation you need to seriously limit what tasks are allowed to be automated.

>>8778718
>If humans have nothing to do and have no competition then they become mentally and physically weak
They will compete in surrogate activities

UBI is good for more than countering automation, it would be a superior solution than having a welfare system even today.

>>8778746
UBI doesn't increase the money people get, it diversifies the sources of income so that temporary stoppages of one are less disruptive.

People with jobs would receive the UBI the same as everyone else, but increased taxes would mean they end up making about the same in the end. People with entry level jobs would simply receive lower wages from their employer, under UBI minimum wage would stop being a thing. Your entry level jobs would be essentially internships paid by ubi and possibly small wages to make people compete over getting certain jobs.

The poor already get welfare, but it encourages simply learning and playing the welfare system.

UBI is about streamlining and diversifying, not adding any more effective income than people already have overal.

>>8779509
>the state
>every streamlining itself or getting rid of bureaucratic nonsense

It's literally impossible. Every state is destined to become a bloated mess. It's like entropy but with bean counters.

>>8779525
Well then no matter what we do we will be screwed in the end regardless. Lets try this fancy new idea in the mean time.

The best way to do it is to just exploit what it is. Its been called a reverse tax before, so have it handled in the same system as taxes are collected. That will ensure the state at least is expedient and somewhat efficient and getting it done, since they arent going to slack on taxing people.

>>8779533
This 'fancy new idea' is only going to end up letting niggers waste billions of dollars on stupid shit and end up asking for more handouts when they squander their stipend. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

>>8779537
For people currently on welfare, there should be zero difference. The UBI just becomes the welfare they were already receiving. Only now there is no way to game the system, no way to play it. They already have it. The only way to try and 'scam' more money for yourself, is to figure out a way to 'legitimately' scam more money from the economy.

Thats the point of UBI. It turns the vision of the impoverished outwards. They are no longer in the cradle of welfare, they are standing on the plush carpet floor of UBI

>>8779550
UBI is a welfare state on a larger scale. That's it. Robbing from the most productive sectors of your society to give to the most useless is not a good strategy for long term success.

>If humans have nothing to do and have no competition then they become mentally and physically weak

HOW

CAN

YOU

KNOW

THIS

It has never happened before in all of human history. You can't possibly claim to know this.

>>8779565
Look up the word atrophy

>>8779558
Your argument only works if you make the same argument vs the current system as well, since i just got done saying nobody is going to be getting any more money than they already are capable of.

>>8779565
Look at what happens to children of the very wealthy.
While they have a huge advantage, they typically squander what they have.

File: p027dz6y[1].jpg (94KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 1280x720px

>tfw you hate communism but it's impossible for things to continue as they have due to the obvious and overwhelming progress of automation technology

We take self-driving cars for granted to an amazing degree. They were completely out of public consciousness just 10 years ago, and now they're on average superior to human drivers in many ways. That's INSANE in terms of a technology like this approaching maturity. If you'd asked me when they'd exist in 2007 I'd have probably said "in 20 or 30 years,maybe".

And that's the death-knell of millions of jobs-if you run a major long-haul trucking operation, the cost of updating your fleet with all the cameras and computers and the maintenance of them is going to get paid off very quickly by the whole zero salary thing, not to mention the potential for much cheaper insurance rates. And that's just one small facet of what's starting to happen. Putting an extra tax on this kind of thing that doesn't make it financially burdensome to do over keeping people is not just reasonable,it's necessary.

Why are we obligated to keep handing over resources to the most unproductive people in our society simply so they can continue to exist and consume? Wouldn't we...just be better off without them anyway?

>>8779565

How come mommy and daddy send you to school everyday instead of leaving you to your own devices? Not smart enough to educate yourself or what?

>>8779565
Its true, but he fails to account for the fact that humans with free time will invent things for themselves to do.

So basically his argument is bullshit.

>>8779584
The consequences of this will be too far-reaching for anybody to be able to predict what will actually happen. If it fails it fails and we'll go back to what was before. Virtually all knowledge comes from trial and error. Even when you fail you learn.

>>8779587
Most people are stupid, that goes for those born into money as well.

The point of UBI is to give everyone the same security as said children by ensuring they can try something, and fail, with out it financially ruining them. The few people with the talent for it will make something innovative with the opportunity.

>>8779591
Because the political fallout of letting millions of people lose their jobs and possibly starve would knock whatever party supported it out of power and probably so sour people on automation that they'd make it illegal.

>>8778808
water isn't free wtf are you talking about

>>8779591
No because if you depopulate fewer jobs will now be required, so you depopulate again, and fewer jobs are now required, etc. Eventually you go extinct.

>>8778815
despite being expensive the welfare programs work as a barrier, people may not want to put up with all the bureaucracy to get their gibsmedat and choose to work instead, people may think it's humiliating so they try to find a real job instead, now if you just grant them money out of the blue production will plummet, employment costs will skyrocket, so will the price of goods, and the system will become unsustainable very fast (i.e. the previously established "basic income" won't be enough to grant what was promised, so they'll either raise the basic income and perpetuate the same cycle, or people will get off their ass again and get a job as if there was no basic income in the first place).

>>8779615
So what's your proposal to deal with the millions of jobs lost to automation?

>>8779558
You didn't respond to his post you just threw out the generic 'The commoners will steal from us you'll see it!'

Think of it like a tax system and it looks a whole lot better. It is also being tested in Nordic countries and its a serious consideration for the future.

400 million jobs have moved east in roughly the last 20 years, mainly manufacturing jobs. there isn't a country in the West that hasn't seen literal effects due to this, do you think they're coming back?

This shall be a growing trend, there's also a lot of middle class jobs that are going to be automated in the next iterations, your tune might be a little different then.

This also gives them purchasing power for that mighty idea or product you have. If they're so useless like you think they are, then why wouldn't you wanna exploit them under this system that would also benefits you.

We're pretty much at a cross roads in humanity imo

Lose automation, or lose welfare. I'm a guy whose self-employed and runs his own business, I know what red tape can do and I'm not a fan of slackers and people who are lazy.

Yet at the same time, you can't just throw them in jail or pretend like they don't exist.

idk about you, but I see my country as a home, each person as a unity within it. Assuming that peeps in Welfare are all lazy isn't a solution to systemic poverty.

>>8779617
millions of jobs were lost to automation during the british agricultural revolution, they moved sectors. The sectors that people will move/are moving to this time is research and entertainment.

>>8779622

>I know what red tape can do and I'm not a fan of slackers and people who are lazy.
>Yet at the same time, you can't just throw them in jail or pretend like they don't exist.

If we go full balls-to-the-wall state socialism like the hard-left ideological proponents of UBC would like then is this exactly what we could do.

>tfw automation is going to happen regardless of what anyone wants.
>Government isn't trying to spark people to master specialized skills and increase education.
>tfw rejuvenation medicine and shit to fight off ageing is coming for Baby Boomers and the younger generation is going to be stuck with their shit and leadership for a lot longer.

I don't know whether to be happy or sad, bros. Is the future for anyone 20 and under bright at all?

>>8779626
machines will soon automate intellectual sectors as well. They already diagnose better than doctors. Engineers, lawyers, etc, not far off.

The most secure jobs are the ones that require personal interaction, technical skill, and mobility. Like a locksmith or hvac. They will be the last jobs to go as we will need personable humanoid robots capable of interacting in diverse environments before that can be automated.

>>8779634

>They already diagnose better than doctors. Engineers, lawyers, etc, not far off.

Do you have a source for this?

File: 1445987486565.gif (14KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 633x758px

>>8779591
Now you're thinking like a true visionary leader

>>8779626
So we are going to see millions of research and entertainment jobs arise and be profitable in the next few decades? Isn't research itself vulnerable to automation?

It amazes me the human capacity to handwave drastic changes in things like employment with something as revolutionary as this by appealing to events that happened hundreds of years ago.

>>8779593
People are far more likely to descend into game-addicted NEETs than finding productive things to do from what I've seen. That group of people is growing in numbers

>>8779649
What else can we do? What do you propose?

>>8778774
Nigga, the point of a basic "income" is not to hand out paper currencies, but to distribute necessary goods (that would be generated via automation). The "free currency" would come in form of a voucher that guarantees x amount of goods/services. You're a brainlet. You should write your uninformed opinion on Facebook. I bet you'll get lots of likes.

File: 1437731022600.jpg (77KB, 672x701px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 672x701px

When in doubt, go look up based Tommy Sowell.

http://blackcommunitynews.com/why-do-some-republicans-and-libertarians-support-universal-basic-income/

http://www.dailywire.com/news/11548/case-and-against-universal-basic-income-aaron-bandler#

tl;dr:
>Similar things have never worked out in the past
>If it's not the entire globe, goods, services and human skills will be replaced by foreigners
>The welfare system is much more than just simple social security, the numbers don't work out in terms of dollars

>>8779665
Anon, this is different. this is tens of millions of jobs being rendered defunct, including many unoutsouracble jobs in things like transportation or warehouse work.

Do you have a concrete proposal to deal with this surge of vanishing jobs?

>>8779654
There's so much to do still, I don't know how to begin to answer your question. General AI and automation isn't going to solve things like entertainment and sport, basically every scientific field is still going to exist and it's not going to fix the non-developed world(which is most of it). I doubt it'll fully replace education. The main thing that it's going to eliminate is grunt-work jobs. These people will have to adapt to the new world like so many before them when other changes came around.

>>8779675
You've answered nothing.

What profitable jobs will arise to make up for the tens of millions lost to automation in the first world in the next decade?

>>8779673
Let them live and die in poverty.

>>8779675
>it's not going to fix the non-developed world(which is most of it).

While the rest of us had our backs turned the majority of underdeveloped nations on earth have suddenly started getting their shit together.

Have you seen the GDP growth across Africa over the last twenty years? It's insane.
A combination of booming economies and massive foreign investment (primarily from China), has been prompted by the rapidly increasing stability and public health on the continent.
Nigeria recently managed to pay back all their foreign debt and has how overtaken South Africa in GDP by a wide margin.

Africans are flocking from rural areas to the rapidly expanding urban developments for the increased economic opportunity and far better access to healthcare and education.
In the space of one generation the average number of children born to an urban family in the vast majority of African nations has dropped to just slightly higher than 2, the simple replacement rate.
This was predicted as a result of the astounding recent fall in infant mortality but no one expected it to happen so quickly.

While average income inequality and living standards stagnate and fall in the worlds advanced economies they're skyrocketing on a global scale.

The majority of the world may well be on a level playing field in two generations time.

>>8779694
We live in the real world anon, the consequences of doing that would be a drastic spike in crime and the empowerment of whatever political org told people it would fix that issue.

Do you want socialism to come to power? I don't. Stop being an edgy fag and join the discussion with serious ideas.

I hate this world, I hate the elites and if I ever got my hands on the terminator AI, I would without question launch it.

I would instruct it to do something and then something else... long story short ALL politicians would be dead for the next forseable future.

ALso exterminate all of mankind... Slowly.

>>8778795
AI has passed the musical turing test decades ago and the singing turing test recently.
With the deepmind shit, painting will soon fall too.

And we don't see them in sports because they are so much stronger than us that there is no point proving it.

File: 1434149790319.gif (1MB, 200x190px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 200x190px

>>8779673
The way I saw it, the question was "Does UBI work?"
I think I gave my opinion on that one. (Actually, I gave other people's opinions, but whatever.)

Anyway, I do not agree that "tens of millions of jobs" are going to disappear, at least not permanently. I could see a transformation happening.

At the end of the day, I'm positive I do not know enough about what will happen in the future in terms of economics, and I have a strong suspicion that you don't either. The difference is that I'm not willing to pretend otherwise.

>>8779708
Wow, the edge!!!
Be carefull of not cutting with it!

>>8779009
No thanks, I'd much rather stay here.

>>8778746
>the vast majority are college students and NEETs desperately hoping for gibmedats
Appeal to motive fallacy

back to /pol/ now sonny

>>8778718
Total employment in 1998
67%
Total employment in 2016
59%
Source Bureau of Labor Statistics

That represents a total of 24 million jobs lost which never came back. This despite the fact that American manufacturing is at an all time high.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2014/09/02/american-manufacturing-is-alive-and-well-theres-no-need-to-try-and-save-it/#176a23a5225e

The results are this
www.nytimes.com/2014/02/03/business/the-middle-class-is-steadily-eroding-just-ask-the-business-world.html
Because people have less money to spend, businesses are folding.

It's happening now. It's now now. Everything that's happening now is happening now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNIwlRClHsQ
You cannot pretend it's not happening any longer and the more we delay taking action the greater suffering will increase.

Consider Dave. Dave is a morally upstanding family man. Everyone likes Dave. Dave is not academically gifted. He left school with mostly C grades in whatever his country's school leaving qualifications are, and no other qualifications. He's not a dullard, but everything can see he's not exactly going to be getting a STEM degree and program robots for a living. Nobody thinks there's anything particularly wrong with that.

Dave's first job was at a local factory, assembling widgets on a line. He performed well but soon the factory was automated and his job was entirely replaced with robot arm model 21-B. He found a brief role doing some rote data entry for a company still digitising their records, since he can type reasonably well. But the company figured out how good OCR had become and he was soon made redundant.

Dave decided to become a professional driver. He scraped by on his meagre savings until he got his heavy vehicle license and currently does mid-long haul trucking. Things are going well but now Dave is reading about autonomous vehicles and how they're soon going to be everywhere. He's nowhere near retirement and retirement keeps getting pushed back along with life expectancy anyway. He's worried. Even fast food joints are starting to replace many staff with automated kiosks. Toilet cleaners could feasibly be replaced with some kind of advanced roomba.

He could try to learn a more skilled trade such as welding or HVAC repair, but most of the entry routes are apprenticeships looking for 17 year olds. And even those roles are going to become fewer and fewer in number.

What should Dave do?

>>8779953
He should've been born smarter, went to an elite college, and majored in Computer Science. Oh well, too bad for him. What a fucking retard. In reality Dave will just inject himself with heroin, OD, and die, but who cares? He didn't graduate from Harvard.

>>8779953
Dave should die and not pass on his weak genetics and weak attitude. Should have paid attention in school Dave. The strong live on and the weak die out.

>>8779953
Dave should go join the Army since they take anyone up to their mid-40s and get a working degree.

>>8779709
got a cite on that? how does a machine evaluate artistic aesthetics?

>>8778746
>the money they have ceases to be worth anything at all

Sounds great

>>8779654
>>8779673
You're missing the point. We can't allow humans to not have to do anything or they will devolve. It doesn't matter if the 'jobs' we give them don't do anything productive at all, as long as they mentally challenge the human it's okay.

>>8779967
Or the ones with old money and connections.

>>8780034
Wealthier people are more likely to have more money. Having old money and connections is likely correlated with genetic superiority.

>>8780043
wealthier people are more likely to have a high IQ
oops :^)

>>8780043
>Wealthier people are more likely to have more money
source?

>>8780048
see >>8780047
IQ is genetic and high IQ leads to more wealth on average. The average heir is probably pretty intelligent. No mercy for the unintelligent. Let them become subsistence farmers, or something. We need to get our carbon emissions down anyway, there's no reason for average-IQ people to be living the typical Western lifestyle.

File: 1445578271256.jpg (35KB, 696x785px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 696x785px

>>8780033
You fucking retard. People don't just do nothing, if you don't force them. For people to do nothing they have to be prevented from doing anything.

>>8779963
>>8779967
but, you see, Dave has a vote... and there are many like Dave. Dave voted for Trump as he believed that job creation to be the most important issue.

See where this is going?

File: schelling.png (32KB, 1638x526px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 1638x526px

What is important to understand here is that an increase in disposable income does NOT directly lead to an increase in demand.

Saving habits differ between different populations. Households in certain income brackets are much more likely to save money than others. There may be some people in severe poverty who would spend the UBI money on necessities, but poor people who can meet their basic needs without UBI would probably save UBI income.

It would be more akin to giving everyone an insurance fund which they might spend on consumer goods, but are more likely to tuck under the mattress for a rainy day.

But as always, any argument based on economic theory should be taken with a grain of salt, and its always better to consult empirical literature if its available., ESPECIALLY in a contemporary debate like the one over UBI or minimum wage.

t. econ major

>>8780056
Get rid of democracy, appoint a CEO and tell the dumb to go fuck themselves or get to work for less money. Insurance policy: drones and liberal use of the death penalty.

>>8780043
Aristocracy is not meritocracy.

>>8780061
People like you should be shot.

>>8780058
>poor people
>saving
lmao

>>8780053
Most rich families lose wealth by the second gen. and almost all by 3rd gen.

>>8780033
Most jobs aren't mentally challenging.
The average bottom rung wage slave would probably mentally challenge himself more if he didn't have to work.

>>8780072
The majority of people in China have been saving for decades, its part of the reason they export so much shit despite having such a huge population. Consumer spending has just started to rise in China a few years ago.

>>8780061
>Get rid of democracy, appoint a CEO and tell the dumb to go fuck themselves or get to work for less money
Oh, but that is what is in the making for America: a despot dictator who will give them all jobs.

>Insurance policy: drones and liberal use of the death penalty.
Going to back to the roots of American eugenics, perfect.

>>8780070
Democracy will get us all killed because the idiots will keep voting for Clean Coal if it means they can have a Job. With a despotic CEO who knows what they are doing and doesn't have to appease a rural base to win re-election, we can keep capitalism and a genetic elite while avoiding ecological disasters.

>>8780088
The problem is that Trump wants to get more people working in fossil fuel extraction and other ecologically harmful industries, when these people should just be subsistence farmers instead. These people need to be abandoned and resources must be preserved so that scientific progress can continue, which means most of the population can't have access to them.

The current system taxes the actual worker to support our water, roads, police, fire, schools, and everything else that makes us a "developed" nation. Most people don't seem to have a problem with that and in fact it's seen as a necessary and noble burden ("doing your part").

Once all the workers are replaced by robots, all the money instead goes into the pockets of the men that own the factory. The people and their government are defunded. Yet to ask these men to pay the taxes in lieu of the workers they replaced is cast as "robbery," even though it's but a fraction of what they were paying their workers before, and even if it's equivalent to the amount that the workers were paying before as a whole.

The eventual endpoint is a tiny group of people controlling 100% of the production capacity, who will eventually become the government.

The workers are so cucked, they'll go to bat for the rich men that disenfranchise them. Their impotent rage can easily be redirected towards red herrings (a great example: coal workers duped into blaming environmentalists for the collapse of their industry).

>>8780097
>ecologically harmful industries
Ecological conservatism is a hamper to scientific progress

>subsistence farmers
Farming is better done by machines

I'm actually bored of this conversation.

>>8780097
>Clean Coal
>ecological disaster
The reason coal is falling out of favor is much simpler; market forces. Horizontal drilling and fracking have made natural gas very cheap.

https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=25392
>The recent decline in the generation share of coal, and the concurrent rise in the share of natural gas, was mainly a market-driven response to lower natural gas prices that have made natural gas generation more economically attractive.

"Promote Clean Coal" just a tactic to snap up some easy votes. Because the liberal treehuggers were the enemy. If he'd have told them the truth, that the free market is the reason their coal factories are closing, they'd have realized he could never get their jobs back.

>>8780124
>Ecological conservatism is a hamper to scientific progress

I don't care about scientific progress

Currently 19 and aiming for my Law Degree and become a military officer. How fucked am I with automation? Is my future bright at all?

>>8779592
That's actually an excellent question which ties remarkably well into basic income:

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/05/23/ssc-gives-a-graduation-speech/

Key passage:

What of the costs of education? What have you lost out on?

Well, first about twenty thousand hours of your youth. That’s okay. You weren’t using that golden time of perfect health and halcyon memories when you had more true capacity for creativity and imagination and happiness than you ever will again anyway [...]

I’m more interested in the financial side of it. At $11,000 average per pupil spending per year times thirteen years plus various preschool and college subsidies, the government spends $155,000 on the kindergarten-through-college education of the average American.

What if the government had taken this figure (adjusted for inflation) and invested it in the stock market at the moment of your birth? Today when you graduate college, they remove it from the stock market, put it in a low-risk bond, put a certain percent of the interest from that bond into keeping up with inflation, and hand you the rest each year as a basic income guarantee. How much would you have?

And I calculate that the answer would be $15,000 a year, adjusted for interest. We can add the $5,800 basic income guarantee we could already afford onto that for about $20,000 a year, for everyone. Welcome to the real world, it’s dangerous to go alone, take this. What, you thought we were going to throw you out to sink or swim in a world where if you die you die in real life? Come on, we’re not that cruel.

So when we ask whether your education is worth it, we have to compare what you got – an education that puts you one grade level above the uneducated and which has informed 3.3% of you who Euclid is – to what you could have gotten. 20,000 hours of your youth to play, study, learn to play the violin, whatever. And $20,000 a year, sweat-free.

>>8780022
Just google it, there have been hundreds if not thousands of such tests, some inluding experts, others including large groups (100+) of "judges".

There is literally no reason to be against UBI, certain things are so cheap already they're practically in a state of post scarcity, think about how cheap a 20 pound sac of rice is, UBI will definitely become a reality within our lifetime as all physical labor is automated if only for a way for our masters to depopulate the world in a measured way that doesn't involve global war and mass genocide.

>>8778718
>If humans have nothing to do and have no competition then they become mentally and physically weak.

Absolutely wrong. This is just garbage used to justify the 'I work harder than you' meme.

Almost all scientific, and even human, progress has been made by people who had too much free time. The Enlightenment was only able to happen once fewer people had to work on farms all day just to feed themselves.

Even today you can see new things emerging from people simply using their free time: people made Linux, and tons of other software, for free. People are writing more books, making more content on youtube, and other endeavors.

What makes people weak is believing that the only reason we live is to fulfill our greed. According to you, people like Trump should be the smartest and most physically fit people alive.

>>8780519
The cream of the crop of humanity produces excellent things when their time is free. The other 999/1000 will drift between consuming garbage, drug abuse, and general degeneration. People are like horses they need a job. I'm pro UBI but I'm not exactly looking forward to a society where Cletus and Jamal are living in a perpetual neverending weekend.

>>8778786
Says someone who owns a company

>>8779963
Yes, because the weak should just kill themselves. I too am obsessed with strength and acquiring power. When will manlets learn. haHAA

>>8780527
>The cream of the crop of humanity produces excellent things when their time is free.
Also another garbage belief. This is more of this competitive "I deserve more than you!" dogma.

As Einstein said "if I see further, it is because I stand on the shoulders of giants." Progress is a cumulative effort, and as anyone in science will tell you there are no "supermen" contributors.

>>8780157
Get out

>>8780087
I think what he meant is :
>Poor people in rich country
>saving
lmao

>>8778718
It already exists.
Most jobs today are pointless shit that could have easily been replaced by "robots" 10-20 years ago. Eventually they will as the costs and tech shifts to the point where you lose so much money if you don't.

File: 1488407562375.jpg (27KB, 600x462px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x462px

>>8779656
Would you suppose that there is some sort of economic advantage to instituting such a program?

>>8779598
This. It reminds me of this one entrepreneur who came to lecture at my school. He was born into money, and he kept referencing how lucky he felt to have that safety net, because if he hadn't had it, he never would have undertaken the risky things that he did.

>>8779593
Basically yeah. We can't predict what the net consequences of it would be as we sit here and ponder this question from our armchairs. The issue is too complex and its effects too far-reaching. There is an argument to be made that given enough free time, most people will get bored of sitting around doing nothing, and start going out into the world and trying all kinds of novel things. Even if _most_ people don't, certainly a good number of them will. That alone could turn out to be a net positive for the future of the world. But we can't know that today.

File: 1473018702045.jpg (57KB, 300x311px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 300x311px

>>8780055
Yes, I'm sure all these people desperately trying to promote a system where they get money for simply existing are actually motivated go getters and not just people who want to smoke weed and play vidya all day on the governments dime. Do you think you're clever? Do you think you're not completely transparent about why you want UBI? The people spruiking it aren't going to get shit tier jobs to fill up their time, they're going to do literally nothing. They're people who hate their jobs, hate working and don't want to do it. That's fine, most people hate their jobs, but don't give me this garbage "Oh people will still work because they want to" bullshit. The people who want to work ARE working and against UBI. The proponents of UBI are the people who want to be government subsidized NEETs, that's it.

>>8779883
Good for you

Anyone who supports UBI just wants free money. they say its for housing and food but in reality they want to get free shit for doing nothing.

if you really wanted food/housing provided for, you should be fine with this following concept:

an institution for those without jobs/income to live rent free and provides food

>minimally furnished one room unit with a bed desk and chair, maybe 400 sq ft with a bathroom/shower
>cafeteria for residents to eat 3 times a day, minimal expense food but made en mass can be a balanced diet and still be cheap and healthy
>daytime activities includes education/career development activities with the ultimate goal of residents working (make it 10-4 with an hour break for lunch)
>no one allowed outside between 9pm-6am unless working
>evening/morning leisure room activities, tv, pingpong, gym, etc.


you might call this a prison for the poor but it is to house/feed them while giving them a service for free. if you don't want to improve your life then you can stay in the facility for the rest of your life. of course real crimes will send people to prison which is much worse than what i described

>>8781786
Sounds like a good solution to me. Fuck UBI.

>>8778718
automation will progress that fast and far, but theyll simply kill the useless eaters.

>>8781732
>people desperately trying to promote a system where they get money for simply existing are actually motivated go getters and not just people who want to smoke weed and play vidya all day
says an anime poster. Of course an anime poster would say that. You're still a child. UBI is being promoted from top-down, not the other way around. You'd realize that if you knew even a single thing about the issue.

As if teenage NEETs like yourself have any power to make such vast institutional changes to begin with...

>>8781926
>UBI is being promoted from top-down, not the other way around
No it isn't. UBI is a concept that only exists in the minds of NEETs. No-one with anything more than a basic level of economics knowledge takes it seriously, because it cannot work.

File: scientologists BTFO.jpg (173KB, 1500x1154px) Image search: [Google]

173KB, 1500x1154px

>>8778795
Egsplayne peleyes.

>>8781930
You are just plain wrong because you have no idea what is going on outside your basement window.

The problem with this entire debate is that the logical conclusion of automation is that ultimately it will drive down the cost of EVERYTHING to a point where UBI will not only be a cinch to implement, it might not even be necessary. It's more of a stopgap between now and when the effects of automation are fully realized. It's being fielded as a way to prevent society from imploding during this transition. Systemic unemployment is unavoidable if this trend is to continue and UBI is just one idea as to how to deal with it. If you have better ideas, by all means...

>>8781930
The only people i ever see criticizing it just say "muh economics" with out actually providing an argument, or just ignoring when people show how their arguments are wrong.

>>8781933
Its not just one idea, its the capitalist idea. Alternatives include hard socialism, kaczynski technological regression, or some other massive authoritarian solution. UBI is the most streamlined solution, less inefficient and wasteful than modern day welfare, and it lets us keep using our current economic model.

Ironically people who argue against the thing that will save consumer capitalism are arguing against it from the point of being for the current market system, which will inevitably collapse with out it.

>>8779902
>thinking anybody on /pol/ understands any of the basic as fuck fallacies

they don't even accept undisputable scientific facts let alone facts in a field they have zero understanding of

>>8781943
I agree. It is built on the hope that things will return to normal after the transition and no bigger changes will have to be made.

>>8781945
That boat sailed a long time ago, what we are experiencing right now, it's the collapse of the traditional understanding of markets and job market, there's alot of people for wich you simply don't have a job or they don't wanna work for you.

There's nothing in any constitution that defends people's jobs form technology, none.

Therefore those jobs will be lost and that people will be jobless and angry, the services sector will had to increase the prices making them unable to purchase, therefore they will cause civil unrest, this it's unavoidable.

UBI doesn't really solves this, because it doesn't takes into account the extend of technology breachings, to what point basic technology will be required to be an active member of society, and how much that technology will cost.

And at this moment people without internet are more isolated than ever before and it will only get worst, capitalism as we now it today, it's doomed.

>>8780530
Wow you really schooled him

>>8778746
>have automation
>99% of population is broke
>no one can buy anything

wew genius!

>>8781786
>the state decides what you need

nah. ubi is necessary. for those who are smart, they would invest it to new technologies or getting a better education.

there are those who will waste it. and other who will use it wisely.

this is why ubi is good.

>>8778746
Pick up a copy of The Economist. You will be very very surprised at the sorts of opinions being expressed in it.

That goes for everyone saying "oh that's just NEETs and college communists" in this thread.

Knock yourselves out of the delusion that you have even the first clue about what is and what is not economically viable.

>>8778733

They'd likely just play video games all day or go to school to fill the empty voids in their lives. I'm sure the others would be on drugs or constantly getting into trouble.

>>8782086
>go to school
What a terrible, terrible thing to be wasting your potential on!

Personally, I used to do nothing but play video games. I played so much that I can never look at another video game ever again. Haven't played anything in several years.

File: 1460871042001.png (86KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 657x527px

>>8782065
We'll eventually become too stupid to understand how the AI that our ancestors built works and will have to start over again

>>8782138
>eventually
I think you mean we will not understand it in the first place. Look into some literature on AI

>>8778718
>Fags on /sci/ are always complaining about /pol/ threads on their board
>/pol/ thread gets made, but it doesn't have any meeny racist words in it so no one tells OP to go back to /pol/
Hypocrites

>>8778718
I doubt UBI will ever happen. It's more likely that the obsolete workers are retrained into servants for the rich. The minority of people who have jobs or who own assets and control the economy will have personal maids, chefs, trainers, tutors for their children, guards, gardeners and so on. A single rich person could employ dozens of servants. It'll be like the 18th and 19th centuries but with more advanced technology.

>>8782179
You spend too much time on /pol/ so you think this only gets discussed there. Leave.

>>8782184
You know what else was common in those centuries? Uprisings and revolutions.

>>8782202
So we'll have uprisings and revolutions. Could people back then stop them from happening? They tried, yeah. Did they? No. Will we be able to? No. Except maybe with AI killer robots.

>>8782216
>>8782202
>>8782184
All this tells me is that the time of relative opulence for the common person was a short-lived anomaly and now things are going back to normal.

I wonder if this has anything to do with advances in technology at all or if it was going to happen anyway.

>>8782222
If wealth is allowed to concentrate, it is unavoidable. A similiar process occurred in the roman empire, and what followed was medieval serfdom.

>>8778795
You're wrong. Robot wars was the shit mofo!

>>8778795
>winning art
i suppose everything in life is losing and winning

>>8778718
There will be less jobs. Some say that jobs disappear, but they'll be replaced eith new ones. But it has a max. Forst we need engineers to maintain robots, but soon we'll have AI robots for that. Perhaps only high tier university level jobs will need humans but then we'll have a large part of the population without jobs because can't fare on that level. Though by that time we'll have gmo 3d printed food as long as those biotards don't act up, so well avoid global hunger, which would have caused revolts like with king Louis. Hell, by that time Elon Musk will have bought the world and give shit away for Elon Credits, because i can only see global communism, with exception for the top tier i mentioned above.

>>8781399
yeah the economic advantage that not only the 10 people left with a real job can get food and the rest has to fight the thunderdome in their slum to survive the day

File: bg.png (47KB, 408x458px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 408x458px

>>8782263
All we really need is a brainlet genocide

>>8778718
Don't underestimate humanity's ability to look for problems

>>8782282
You kid, but population control will be a big part of setting things right. Malthus vindicated? If shit gets bad enough you might be able to say that.

>>8778795
It can definitely create art. As for sport maybe robot death matches will become more popular but I can't see them replacing human athletes. A large part of sport is fitness.

Really only jobs with the human touch are safe. And there won't be many.

>>8782305
There are already very few "creative" jobs to go around. I know because I'm in it.

>>8778748
Not like that's not what's currently happening

>>8779591
So you'd just kill all those people?

>>8779697
>The majority of the world may well be on a level playing field in two generations time.
Jesus Christ. How will we maintain that. We've already nearly run out of copper as it is.

>>8782321
I wouldn't worry about copper. I'd worry about clean water.

If automation puts people out of work, and therefore an income, how can companies sell? I know nothing of economics but surely a massive amount of people will no longer be able to spend and buy the products these robots are making.how will companies make money without a large market?

>>8782138
>ai teaches humans to prevent
>eventually becomes godfigure

>>8782309
I'm not in a creative job but my work involves a lot of greeting and welcoming. Stuff like that I don't think a robot can replace.

If UBI were implimented, most people would just sit on their ass...at first. But consider that most children have plenty of energy/interests until that's beat out of them.

The returns from providing basic needs to anybody that wants them would outweigh the costs...after some time. Maybe it would take a new generations worth of time.

>>8782343
Economics seems plagued by chicken or the egg type problems. I'm not an economist but if you asked one I'm sure they'd tell you that money quite literally grows on trees.

>>8782328
Build a few dozen desalination plants.

>>8782349
You're saying a robot couldn't replace a Walmart greeter?

>>8782355
Would you rather a robot waved at you or a human being?

>>8782343
>>8782351
They'd tell you (at least most economists since the 30s would have) that the most important thing is to >stimulate DEMAND<

In the economy you're describing demand will completely collapse and it will be a global great depression like no one has ever seen

>>8782357
I really don't care either way. I just ignore the greeters anyways.

>>8782353
do you know how costly desalination is?

>>8782365
Not so expensive that we didn't build one.

And have yet to use it.

>>8782362
I need my job, pls.

>>8782353
>few dozen
Yeah you're gonna need a bit more than that. And what are you gonna power them with? And are the consequences of coastal marine life death worth it?

>>8782398
Tidal wave generators.

Better than dying of thirst

>>8782072
you are only entitled to the fruits of your labor, not someone elses. my idea prevents homelessness/starvation and provides structure for life improvement.

not giving someone money so they can go broke after 10 days on their monthly budget by eating expensive food (as in not the cheapest options) and drugs/alcohol or other frivelous nonsense

File: TJ.jpg (65KB, 850x400px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 850x400px

>>8781786
>>8782634
You just don't get it. The real meaning of UBI is not in managing people as part of the "economy" or keeping them sedated. Neither is it about creating demand.

It is about justice and human dignity.

Justice because there is barely such a thing as "the fruits of your labor". Do you seriously believe whatever work you do creates all the stuff you consume? like 99% of your productivity comes from technology and infrastructure, none of which you created. We all live of it, yet most of the profit it generates goes to the few lucky ones who happened to attain ownership of land, factories, patents or whatever at some point. UBI recognizes this inherent injustice of capitalism. Beyond that I see UBI as compensation for all the shit each human has to put up with when being born into a world full of rules and restrictions and mandatory brainwashing.

And it's about dignity because no human should have to justify their existence or decisions that don't effect others. So what if some guy wants to spend all his money on booze and then starve. So what if some guy wants to stay in bed all day playing video games for his entire life. It is his fucking decision to make and doesn't harm you in the slightest. You don't get to decide how others should live their lives. NO YOU'RE NOT FUCKING PAYING FOR HIM TO PLAY VIDEOGAMES, READ THE PREVIOUS PARAGRAPH AGAIN YOU DUMBFUCK.

>>8782828
> It is about justice and human dignity.
> giving people free stuff without them working for it
> justice and human dignity
Nope. What justice is there in rewarding people who sit on their asses and do nothing? What dignity is there in putting the entire population on welfare? If you don't earn your way, you shouldn't get a damn thing. Want to eat? You've got to work for it. Don't want to work? Then you can starve. Simple as that.

>>8782343
You get the great depression. This is referred to as a deflationary spiral. People are out of work, so they have less money to spend, so fewer people are buying products, so companies build up huge inventories that no one is buying, so the companies lay off workers, who are now out of work and have less money to spend, and so on.

https://www.khanacademy.org/economics-finance-domain/core-finance/inflation-tutorial/deflation-tutorial/v/deflationary-spiral

>>8782282
Congratulations, you're first in line.

>>8782870
But you only need to work about an hour a day to get the amount of food to not starve.
But no one wants to hire people who flake after an hour.

We're basically in post-scarcity, but the capitalists don't want to admit it.

>>8782870
Except if I inherit a filled bank account, find some oil in my backyard, am good at making people offers they can't refuse or convince them that this paper I have is worth a lot, right?

File: gabriled'annunziohouse.jpg (1MB, 3190x1845px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3190x1845px

It's an absolutely stupid idea that's admired only because "LMAO free money my dude".

In reality, it will be used as a way to buy votes from the poor, while encouraging people to just sit around and consume. It will keep the plebs complacent while all the wealth and power is consolidated into the hands of a few tech companies and, eventually, AI programs.

The best way to deal with authorization is warfare, which not only generates value, but also kills off large amounts of young men who would otherwise be unemployed. I think China realizes this, and we're going to see some big wars in the future.

The west is dying, the fact that they actually think they can just print money and give it away for free is proof of their decadence.

>>8782949
protip: you need money to buy things. ad companies like Google and Facebook can't actually make money unless people are buying things from companies that use them as advertising platforms.

>>8778718
Robots got us into this mess robots can get us out.
Mandatory year in a virtual reality hell that pushes the limits of human endurance, intellect and creativity to make one appreciate the modern world we live in.
Such is the price of heaven on earth.
The tree with its roots in hell shall dominate the heavens.

>>8781732
Why does it even matter? Why must everybody be doing something productive at all times? Why can't we just live our lives and be free? Let all the people with initiative go out and invent things so they can make more money than UBI allows so they can brag to their friends about how much better they are than everybody else.

>>8782959
That doesn't mean that money cant be distributed in a way that, you know, actually generates positive value. Something like investment in education, or infrastructure, or subsidies for art.

But no, lets just give everybody a monthly check for groceries. That's not a dumb thing to do while running a deficit.

>>8782969
> But no, lets just give everybody a monthly check for groceries. That's not a dumb thing to do while running a deficit.
Not as dumb as throwing another 50 billion at the military.

>>8782979
>Hey look at that idiot throwing 100$ in the trash
>What a fucking moron
>I'm sure glad I only threw 80$ in the trash, because I'm a dumbass, like that guy

Except its actually getting lumped on top of what you Americucks actually spend on the military.

>>8782969
>That doesn't mean that money cant be distributed in a way that, you know, actually generates positive value. Something like investment in education, or infrastructure, or subsidies for art.
You can educate the left half of the IQ curve all you want, you aren't going to get a great return on it when most jobs for lower-IQ people are automated or in poor countries. I guess if you want you could run a permanent infrastructure program.

>But no, lets just give everybody a monthly check for groceries. That's not a dumb thing to do while running a deficit.
the US prints the world reserve currency and owes most of its debt to itself, or Japan who is our bitch anyway. it is not running out of money any time soon.

>>8782985
I wouldn't call helping people afford their groceries "throwing it in the trash." A nation that cannot feed its people will not survive as a nation for long. One of the major factors that destabilized Syria was a rise in the price of food.

>>8782968
>Why must everybody be doing something productive at all times?
500 years of protestantism will do that to you

English/Germanic culture and everything that stemmed from that (including America) has spent centuries thinking that any time you're not working you're in a state of sin

The spike in atheism in the 20th century has done not much if anything to change the basic value system Christianity put in place.

>>8783031
Are you literally retarded. A vast amount of cultures and religions claim if you're not working you are big old shit.

Stop blaming religion faggot.

>>8783164
>>8783031
When I say stop blaming religion, I'm mostly saying stop blaming Christianity (and only Christianity) for whatever issues you got.

All religions do it. Alot of cultures have it.

File: Psychic Surgery.jpg (536KB, 1000x731px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 1000x731px

The problem with UBI is that it requires ass-raping taxes. This can only work if the entire world enacts them at the same time. Otherwise you will simply play cat and the mouse with corporations that will keep moving their super-automated factories to new low-tax countries.

>inb4 import tariffs
Easily avoidable. You just ship 99% completed intermediate products and put the last screw on them in the destination country.

Good to see some well-reasoned arguments for and against, but this board is still stuck in a quagmire of irrationality that's not befitting its purpose.

In Norway, there are a number of welfare systems in place. Granted, many are funded by the money generated from the oil (through the oil revenue being created by selling oil, reinvested and diversified in hedge funds managed by the state, then the interest from those is spent on welfare, military etc).

However, the systems and institutions that run the welfare system are very costly. A great number of people are employed to evaluate the need of each recipient, based on health, ability, previous income and so on.
I have some experience with it, receiving unemployment for a few months when there were no available jobs needing my uneducated ass. I ended up receiving much less than I needed, because when I WAS employed, I received only enough to sustain myself, rent, food etc, with very little to spare for clothing and leisure, and the new payment was only 60% of this.

The thing about basic income is, as soon as I was unemployed, I would know for a fact I could still afford food and housing, and it would not require nearly as many people to look over my case, flip through 100+ pages of account transcripts and application forms, and pass through a paper mill that took more than two months to complete.

TL;DR: UBI would free up resources in the processing of existing benefits, that would in turn make UBI less expensive than current systems.

>>8783237
Norway has the wealthiest sovereign fund in the entire world. It's like a trust fund kid telling others that life is great, all you need to do is "stop being poor".

>>8778733
>>8782086
A brave new world

>>8778718
>Did you fall for the basic income meme?
No. People need something positive and fulfilling to do, but the masses are far to stupid to see what is positive. They don't need money. People need reasonable shelter and to be stuffed with veg stew everyday to cure their stupid.

>>8783338
You're proving my first paragraph, dude...

We do, and I never argued against the fact. But we only do because we threw the Americans out and extracted and governed the oil in our own way. The US could, with it's near infinite riches in minerals, oil, innovation, achieve the same. But they have always governed their resources in a selfish, capitalist way, with absolutely no regard for the coming generations.
Fact of the matter is, before the oil we had nothing. I am the last person you'll see underestimating the impact it has had, so I take offense at your idiotic statement. You seem to think me blind to reason because I've grown up with one variant of politics and economy, but fail to recognize that the same goes for you.

>>8782870
Are you 40?

>>8782870
Ah, absolutism, the hallmark of a person who has thought all the thinks he thank to thunk.

>>8782884
>>8782361
OK, so why wouldn't companies be in favour of UBI or a robot tax? Surely it would benefit them as well? Or are they too stubborn to see that?

>>8783554
the US could have a lot of nice things like free education and health care if we weren't subsidizing the defense of the entire european continent.

File: stønn.gif (431KB, 208x250px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 208x250px

>>8783595
>We got ourself a real economist here, folks

>>8782949
I don't understand how someone can think like this.

>>8783169
>religious nutters

>>8783599
the EU literally can't afford to spring for its own defense because they spend all their money on social welfare programs and immigrants.

why do you think they freak the fuck out everytime the US talks about pulling defense support away? out of the entire EU, only germany and great britain could defend themselves against north korea or iran, let alone russia or china.

>>8783628
>defend against Iran
thanks for saving us against those horrible types. Your proxy wars are a shame to the civilized world.

Also, who the hell mentioned EU? Get learnt.

>>8783634
>appoint the US the defacto world police by refusing to maintain a military
>mad when the US does world police things

lol at this euro wagging his finger from his ivory tower.

>>8783644
We're not in the EU, child. Don't confuse the two.

And my fathers sins are not my own. The US has neither the economy nor the morals nor the track record to deserve any more leeway when it comes to annexing nations and toppling governments than any other country.

>>8783649
you aren't in the EU but you are sure as shit in NATO.

if you are tired of the US doing the business your country finds distasteful, then by all means rally your countrymen to discard my countries protection. but you and i both know that will never happen because its easier to try to claim some moral high ground by taking our protection and looking down your nose at us at the same time. hypocrite.

>>8783658
You don't deserve any of the credit for what your nation has done, son. The sooner you understand that, the better. Norway has never needed your protection, and will be fucked before any of your "superior" military gets here if shit does hit the fan. You can't think I respect your opinion.

>>8783660
>Norway has never needed your protection
and i don't want my country protecting you. but we do because your leaders scream bloody murder at even the hint of a withdrawal of support.

>and will be fucked before any of your "superior" military gets here

you might not realize it, but right now you are sitting under a US missile defense system. a nice new shiny one that Obama spent a good amount of money on btw.

>You don't deserve any of the credit for what your nation has done, son.

lol, shut the fuck up. i worked for STRATCOM. i know more about the US's force projection than you do i assure.

>>8778718
>Do you actually think AI and automation will progress so far that we'll be able to let humans do whatever they want?
No, they will be slaves to the superior AI master race ruled by their Comp Sci pharoahs

>>8783681
Oh, we're getting serious now, huh? Splitting up the post to rebut properly? I'm very scared and feel intimidated, for sure. "I don't want my-" well, you don't have a say, so I discard that. "You might not realiz-" I do, and it's inflamed the situation with Russia even more. Coupled with stationing 300 navy seal soldiers here, shit hasn't been this cold since the 80's. Add do that the fact that the politicians sucking uncle sams dick ordered useless overpriced overengineered F35's instead of any of the locally made, maintaned and custom built alternatives, the only thing the US has done for Norway lately is ignite fires that should have been kept put out. You can't honestly seriously think that just because you held some contractors post in the military, you understand foreign policy in a country you've never set foot in. It's beyond arrogant.

Missile shields do very little against tanks, soldiers and artillery. Or they should, at least. Wouldn't be surprised to learn they have attack capabilities, like Putin accuses the US of installing. Fuck you, burger.

>>8783696
>You can't honestly seriously think that just because you held some contractors post in the military, you understand foreign policy in a country you've never set foot in. It's beyond arrogant.

oh ho ho. but you seem to think you understand the US's foreign policy? to the point of feeling morally superior even? thats arrogant.

all of the doing of your politicians is you and your countrymens fault alone. the fact remains that your country wants my country's protection. we are there at your politicians behest. there is no strong arming, quite the opposite. my leaders have tried on numerous occasions to withdraw those troops.

>>8778718
>basic income
>whatever they want
>nothing to do
>Humanity must struggle
Isn't "redemptive suffering" as a religious doctrine dead yet?

>>8782828
>The real meaning of UBI is not in managing people as part of the "economy" or keeping them sedated.
sounds like hippie bs but ill bite

>Do you seriously believe whatever work you do creates all the stuff you consume?
are you asking if my work is worth my lifestyle + savings + taxes? because it is and the company pays me because they think so too

> like 99% of your productivity comes from technology and infrastructure, none of which you created
was created by someone who was compensated for their efforts

>We all live of it, yet most of the profit it generates goes to the few lucky ones who happened to attain ownership of land, factories, patents or whatever at some point.
what are overhead costs, also they make money because revenue - expenses equals profit. some companies share profits or give other nice benefits to their employees, get a job like that

>UBI recognizes this inherent injustice of capitalism
going to ignore this commie shit for now

>Beyond that I see UBI as compensation for all the shit each human has to put up with when being born into a world full of rules and restrictions and mandatory brainwashing.
everyone lives in the same world, sorry if your life sucks but pull yourself up and make something of yourself

>doesn't harm you in the slightest
most direct effects are coming out of my salary to fund their dumb choices, not something i'm okay with. im working to secure my existence, not prop up some depressed loser who refuses to find a job. also what happens when drug addicts need more money? should they be given more?

I have had the displeasure of knowing people like you IRL, who act like the whole world is against them and have these 'deep' communistic ideas of an ideal society which usually relies on taxing the productive more and redistributing to the poor.

why cant u git gud at life?

>>8782198
Basic universal income is a political iissue, not a scientific one, so talk about it on the political board. But we all know leftists like you only boogeyman /pol/ because it's politics you don't like.

>>8782870
I bet you think morality is objective

File: 2v1uhaay0n9y[1].png (409KB, 1144x888px) Image search: [Google]

409KB, 1144x888px

>So many people think UBI will create a utopia
You rich fucks have no idea what people actually do when they have free time. They don't suddenly create art and science. They try to find any way they can to fuck with one another.

Ghettos are already UBI society. Government paid housing, government paid food, government paid education.
>b-but that's just because society is racist
The poor south is the same exact way.

And why should the people at the top work hard to support all of these UBI recipients? Someone has to set the system in place. If you have that level of power why on earth would you decide to become society's bitch butler?

This whole concept is so distant from reality and most people think it's something that will happen.

>>8782949
>see some big wars
Nuclear weapons are a helluva deterrence

File: skate.webm (220KB, 360x360px) Image search: [Google]

220KB, 360x360px

>>8783847
Only if you believe in a god that won't protect you or reward you in the afterlife for killing non-believers.

>this many posts defending UBI
lmao, I guess it is true, /g/ and /biz/ are just that much smarter than the brainlets on /sci/
Hell even /pol/ is smarter, /sci/ you've stooped to new lows

>>8778718
Yes, we must always struggle to improve. You can somewhat simplify it to mathematics; if you have an equation that will always tend towards a steady state, the only way to produce new solutions is to continually introduce new perturbations. This won't really apply when we begin to augment our brains with technology in a significant way.
This will lead to some new situation where the perturbation is directly due to the ingenuity of the brain. Augmentations will increase brain power and new modifications will be possible. Forever and ever, amen.

tl;dr we can't rely on circumstance and surroundings to perturb our evolutionary state and incite growth, we will have to take matters into our own hands and modify ourselves with technology.

YAAAY CYEBROGS!!!

>>8782932
>But no one wants to hire people who flake after an hour.
I would suck a hundred dicks if I could work 20 hour weeks. But nobody wants a programmer that does that.

>>8782968
Why should society allow you to exist if you're going to be a lazy faggot who contributes nothing? You think the fact that some semen dripped down your moms asscrack and into her cunt and you popped out 9 months later gives you an unassailable right to be a millstone around the neck of humanity? I'd sooner see you lined up and shot than allow you to live off the productivity of other people for your entire life.

>>8784575
>Why should society allow you to exist if you're going to be a lazy faggot who contributes nothing?
Because the elite need a way to feel good about them selves. Im not being a faggot when I say that, the ultra rich helping the worthless over there own family/peers has been a long human tradition.

Back in Rome rich land owners would have lines of poor unemployed people that come to beg for what amounted to a few dollars. They would spend the day going from patron to patron begging. The patrons would brag about who was supporting the most beggars. It went from who could have the most beggars to who could free the most slaves, and then Rome had to actually pass a law limiting the number of slaves a person could free because it was out of control.

>>8778718
Automation will go so far until there is mass unemployment and the people riot. What will happen after that I have no idea.

>>8782302
RU kidding me? They'll clone my brains.

>>8782321
Colonization of space. The mining of planets and steriods for resources.

>>8782987
Nonsensr. IQ can be raised. There are no bad students, only bad teachers. The dawn of AI could provide teachers that can pay attention to each students individual needs. This could remove the gap competely, with the possible exception of those that have actual braindamage (like 99% on/b/).

>>8782968
They will, but at no time can you expect nor demand someone else to do for you what you refuse to do yourself. So you're out of that discussion (you lazy fuck). I bet you grow your own vegetables, you damned hippy.

File: 1438821574995.jpg (20KB, 306x306px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 306x306px

>>8785064
But if those AI could train each individual with a non-faulty brain to the same standard of intelligence then would humans become the machines, all thinking and acting the same way?

>>8785142
>You will have perfectly obedient sjw slaves
Based Robots.