RE: Universal Basic Income is a fairy-tale. Can someone please explain to me how this idea makes any sense.

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Universal Basic Income is a fairy-tale. Can someone please explain to me how this idea makes any sense.

in life •  6 years ago 

Yes, regarding the question of advanced technology taking everyone's jobs, I didn't mention this in my blog as I wanted to keep it short.

Whether or not this future comes is open to debate. But it is certain that we do not live in that world today, there is still a great need for human labour currently. Yet I hear some suggestions that UBI should be implemented soon, in the next few years. We are still far from a world where machines look after our every need.

It is worth noting that previous tech advances have created more jobs than they destroy, higher level jobs that are more satisfying to people are created, lower level drudgery is taken over by machines. There has been many panics in the past about mass joblessness that would arise from technology, but it has never happened. This time may be different, or it may not be, but we should acknowledge previous concerns have always been false alarms so far.

Also, we must have an understanding of basic economics here. Taxing the machines makes no sense, as in practice it would amount to another sales tax. The companies owning the machines would have to pass on their increased costs for paying the tax to their customers, ultimately that is me and you.

For example, if a self driving taxi were taxed to pay for UBI, the cost of that tax bill would be passed on to the customers of the taxi. The ultra cheap transportation we could all enjoy would be denied. We would have expensive taxis fares, in order that we can raise the money to pay for free money for all. Again, I point to the circularity of this, why make the world more expensive to fund UBI?

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Great answer.

The companies owning the machines would have to pass on their increased costs for paying the tax to their customers, ultimately that is me and you.

This is how the cycle works (and should work). The main thing here is that disposable income can be available. Without that the companies have nobody to sell to - or only a very small group which will gradually erode due to the exponential curve it creates.

Remember that when cities create incentives to house factories, it’s all about the jobs created. Because income/wages are needed for everything else to thrive. That is the reason why taxing the machine units is being raised... not as a communist folly, no, but as an integral part of the cycle of markets.

Now, despite my defense here, don’t get me wrong. I don’t believe UBI is the solution. Not if as the de facto outcome as knee jerk. A program like UBI only works is the understanding of the program is high. Yes, there will always be bottom feeders who don’t do anything, but from the other end humans are humans and the greed gene is a real one thus the capitalist cycle will only be kickstarted again. Not having to worry about monthly dues will liberate mindsets and actually stimulate (few holistic studies have all shown that a majority of participants actually get their ass off the ground).

Yet...

Economics basic math disagrees about your self-driving cab argument. Key is to tax in the sense that the math doesn’t become more expensive for the company, if the automation is taxed higher... it won’t happen and no low-level jobs will be lost. As such there will not be an increase in cost for the customer.

And thus... the world wouldn’t be more expensive. That’s the circularoity of it. Companies won’t revolutionize if it costs them more. That’s not how their fiduciary duties work either. ¯_(ツ)_/¯