Tech world debate on robots and jobs heats up

March 26, 2017 by Rob Lever
Advances in artificial intelligence and robotics are heightening concerns about automation replacing a growing number of occupations

Are robots coming for your job?

Although technology has long affected the labor force, recent advances in and robotics are heightening concerns about automation replacing a growing number of occupations, including highly skilled or "knowledge-based" .

Just a few examples: self-driving technology may eliminate the need for taxi, Uber and truck drivers, algorithms are playing a growing role in journalism, robots are informing consumers as mall greeters, and medicine is adapting robotic surgery and artificial intelligence to detect cancer and heart conditions.

Of 700 occupations in the United States, 47 percent are at "high risk" from automation, an Oxford University study concluded in 2013.

A McKinsey study released this year offered a similar view, saying "about half" of activities in the world's workforce "could potentially be automated by adapting currently demonstrated technologies."

Still, McKinsey researchers offered a caveat, saying that only around five percent of jobs can be "fully automated."

Another report, by PwC this month, concluded that around a third of jobs in the United States, Germany and Britain could be eliminated by automation by the early 2030s, with the losses concentrated in transportation and storage, manufacturing, and wholesale and retail trade.

But experts warn that such studies may fail to grasp the full extent of the risks to the working population.

"The studies are underestimating the impact of technology—some 80 to 90 percent of jobs will be eliminated in the next 10 to 15 years," said Vivek Wadhwa, a tech entrepreneur and faculty member at Carnegie Mellon University in Silicon Valley.

Dire consequences

"Artificial intelligence is moving a lot faster than anyone had expected," said Wadhwa, who is co-author of a forthcoming book on the topic. "Alexa (Amazon's home hub) and Google Home are getting amazingly intelligent very fast. Microsoft and Google have demonstrated that AI can understand human speech better than humans can."

Wadhwa calls the driverless car a "metaphor" for the future of labor and a sign of a major shift.

Warnings of dire social consequences from automation have also come from the likes of the physicist Stephen Hawking and tech entrepreneur Elon Musk, among others.

Hebrew University of Jerusalem historian Yuval Harari writes in his 2017 book, "Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow" that technology will lead to "superfluous people" as "intelligent non-conscious algorithms" improve.

"As algorithms push humans out of the job market," he writes, "wealth and power might become concentrated in the hands of the tiny elite that owns the all-powerful algorithms, creating unprecedented social and political inequality."

Harari points to the Oxford study, estimating a high probability of job loss to automation—cashiers (97 percent), paralegals (94 percent), bakers (89 percent) and bartenders (77 percent), for example.

Others disagree.

Boston University economist and researcher James Bessen dismisses alarmist predictions, contending that advances in technology generally lead to more jobs, even if the nature of work changes.

His research found that the proliferation of ATM machines did not decrease bank tellers' employment in recent decades, and that automation of textile mills in the 19th century led to an increase in weaving jobs because it created more demand.

"Robots can replace humans in certain tasks but don't entirely replace humans," he said.

But he acknowledged that automation "is destroying a lot of low-skill, low wage jobs, and the new jobs being created need higher skills."

Former president Barack Obama's council of economic advisors also warned last year that most jobs paying less than $20 an hour "would come under pressure from automation."

'Tax the robot'

Although the net impact of robots remains unclear, tech leaders and others are already debating how to deal with the potential job displacement.

Microsoft founder Bill Gates said last month that he supports a "robot tax," an idea floated in Europe, including by a socialist presidential candidate in France.

But Bessen, a former fellow at Harvard's Berkman Center, said taxing robots could be counterproductive.

"You don't want to be taxing the machines because they enable people to earn higher wages," he said. "If you tax machines, you will slow the beneficial side of the process."

Peter Diamandis, chairman of the X Prize Foundation for technical innovation and founder of the Silicon Valley think-tank Singularity University, is among those calling for a "universal basic income" to compensate people for job losses.

Offering income guarantees "will be one of many tools empowering self-actualization at scale," he said in a blog post, arguing that automation will allow people "to follow their passions, be more creative."

But Wadhwa says the problems run deeper and will require more creative solutions.

"A basic income won't solve the social problems of joblessness because people's identity revolves around our jobs," he said.

"Even if we have enough food and energy, we have to deal with the social disruption that's coming. We need a much broader discussion."

Bessen says reversing the trends of the past decades, where high-skilled jobs gain at the expense of others, pose a "big challenge."

"It's entirely possible we can meet the challenge," he said. "But the evidence in the past 20 years is that things are moving in the wrong direction."

Explore further: People afraid of robots much more likely to fear losing their jobs, suffer anxiety

Related Stories

35 percent of UK jobs may be at risk from automation

March 3, 2017

Fear of losing our jobs to those who can perform tasks faster, cheaper and perhaps with more creativity, has been longstanding. Equally, the introduction of a new leisure class with more free-time to spend once liberated ...

How robots will change the workforce

December 28, 2016

Thirty of the world's top scientists are scheduled to meet at the University of California at San Diego in February to discuss the toughest challenges in robotics and automation, including how to make driverless cars safe ...

Intelligent robots threaten millions of jobs

February 14, 2016

Advances in artificial intelligence will soon lead to robots that are capable of nearly everything humans do, threatening tens of millions of jobs in the coming 30 years, experts warned Saturday.

Recommended for you

When words, structured data are placed on single canvas

October 22, 2017

If "ugh" is your favorite word to describe entering, amending and correcting data on the rows and columns on spreadsheets you are not alone. Coda, a new name in the document business, feels it's time for a change. This is ...

Enhancing solar power with diatoms

October 20, 2017

Diatoms, a kind of algae that reproduces prodigiously, have been called "the jewels of the sea" for their ability to manipulate light. Now, researchers hope to harness that property to boost solar technology.

46 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

dogbert
1 / 5 (4) Mar 26, 2017
Peter Diamandis, chairman of the X Prize Foundation for technical innovation and founder of the Silicon Valley think-tank Singularity University, is among those calling for a "universal basic income" to compensate people for job losses.


The perverse desire of the left to institute a Universal Basic Income is relentless and the dystopia which would result is embraced because it represents precisely what socialism seeks.

There are many flaws in these projections.

Businesses are not in the habit of eliminating their profit, destroying their business model. It does not matter if a business can make and price a $50.00 widget for $5.00 if the people who would buy the widget don't have $5.00 . The person who would buy the $50000.00 dollar car but is unemployed because automation can make the car for $10000.00 can not afford to buy the $10000.00 car.

Continued...
dogbert
1 / 5 (2) Mar 26, 2017
Continued ...

UBI is a bankrupt model. There is no country anywhere which can afford to provide a UBI without simply printing money, a policy which will eventually devalue the currency until the country is bankrupt. Taxes cannot support UBI. You cannot give everyone a UBI and then tax back enough of that money to support the UBI. Taxing the technology won't help. The businesses will simply raise prices and claim losses on product which is not selling before the businesses go bankrupt.

The very best that UBI can manage before economic collapse is poverty level subsistence.

Offering income guarantees "will be one of many tools empowering self-actualization at scale," he said in a blog post, arguing that automation will allow people "to follow their passions, be more creative."


Another lie. People in abject poverty do not follow their passions. They struggle to keep the basics of food, clothing and shelter. They have nothing left over for passions.
Daein
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
As someone who works in automation, I can tell you the <$20/hour jobs are not the jobs at risk. Most machines cost way too much. That's why companies like McDonalds didn't even start to investigate automation until wages looked like they were going to be >$15/hour in the near future. The only low wage jobs that lose out are the "easy to automate," high-volume industries like manufacturing.

The people who lose out at the moment with automation are the people who make >$30/hour, yet still have jobs that are automatable. Even in these cases, the people don't lose their jobs, but companies usually use the machines to avoid hiring more people. Automation is the future in some capacity for most industries, as it should if we want to see the standard of living keep going up for everyone, however not for most in the foreseeable future.
Modulus64
5 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2017
What about government/public ownership of the robots?
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
What about government/public ownership of the robots?


In the end it will be robot owens robots.
Why are all of you so blind (including the writers) to see the future?
What jobs can robots do as far as replacing man? NOW - Brain surgery, doctor, driver, journalist. Do these sound like unskilled jobs?
Driving is probably one of the most skilled things we do everyday, yet robots will be doing it better VARY very soon.

The near future.
Step 1 - Great Social Unrest And Turmoil (Hunger, Riots etc.)
Step 2 - Anyone replaced by a robot gets compensation. (Calms The Crowds - Bread and Circuses)
Step 3 - Everyone gets compensation because robots do it all. And I mean ALL. Including governing. -----------While building, and designing themselfs.
Step 4 - Utopia! (Do what you want when you want) Artist, Musician, Designer, World traveler etc.
dogbert
1 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
rderkis,
Utopia! (Do what you want when you want) Artist, Musician, Designer, World traveler etc.


No. It will be a dystopia. People on UBI will have minimal resources, sufficient for very modest accommodations, cheap food and clothing. They will not have disposable income with which to pursue dreams/desires. In such a society, there is also no hope since meaningful jobs are virtually not existent. The only hope in such a future is the collapse of society under the burden of maintaining its non-productive citizens.
Whydening Gyre
4 / 5 (2) Mar 26, 2017
No. It will be a dystopia. People on UBI will have minimal resources, sufficient for very modest accommodations, cheap food and clothing. They will not have disposable income with which to pursue dreams/desires. In such a society, there is also no hope since meaningful jobs are virtually not existent. The only hope in such a future is the collapse of society under the burden of maintaining its non-productive citizens.

You are, of course, speaking of a capitalist structure.
The real work will be convincing people they don't have to compete for what they need. Or even what they want.
That, of course, means dialing back your WANTS to more realistic levels.
Hmmm. that might even mean a whole civilization with a little more humility...
Now, wouldn't THAT be somethin'...:-)
rderkis
5 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2017
People on UBI will have minimal resources--- jobs are virtually not existent. burden of maintaining its non-productive citizens.


I am sorry, I am 70 and probably did not say it well. What you say is true and encompases step one.
Step 1 - Great Social Unrest And Turmoil (Hunger, Riots etc.)

Quote "People on UBI" -- Answer EVERYONE! will be on UBI.
Quote "jobs are virtually not existent" -- They will be completely non existent.
Quote "burden of maintaining its non-productive citizen" -- Everyone will be non-productive, if they want to be. (If you want a garden in your backyard then grow one). If robots do EVERYTHING and because of fusion all the desserts are productive and irrigated. Food is plentiful, healthy and free. Robots build your house using printers in a couple days. WHAT BURDEN? (On people? More burden on robots)
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
You are, of course, speaking of a capitalist structure.
The real work will be convincing people they don't have to compete for what they need. Or even what they want. dialing back your WANTS to more realistic levels.


Like I said I don't express myself well.
Socialism, Capitalism all the isms will be none existent.
Money is barter, basicly it represents, my time for your time in its most basic form. If no one works there will be no money.

As far a quality of goods, they will be provided to all the people free and in the desired quantities and of the desired quality. In the near future cloths will not wear out. When the cloths are completely made by robots, at a robot factory, with the materials mined and supplied by robots, they will be free and last virtually forever.

MOST of you will see all this in the vary near future. I base this on facts, studies etc. Technology is advancing exponentially. Check out "exponential growth" of "technology" on google.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Check out "exponential growth" of "technology" on google.
http://theemergin...ment.htm
There are many studies because it is so unbelievable people doubted and did their own studies. But they come up with virtually the same answers to where technology will be 5 years, 10 years etc in the future.

If you were born during the lifetime of Jesus, you saw virtually no major changes in technology during your life. During WWI, maybe one or two. I am now 70 and till I was 16 saw only the color TV that I can remember. In the last 15 years the technological advances are coming faster and faster. I know that is anecdotal, so check out google

I don't know how you figure out the error rate in the projection. I guessed if your study was over 2000 years, you divide you projection years by 2000. example 5yrs/2000yrs = .0025 error
SpicyTuna64
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Money is barter, basicly it represents, my time for your time in its most basic form. If no one works there will be no money.


Money is also a right to make demands of resources, like of solar collector space or other pseudo-abundant resources.

And people will still seek to gift to each other, and a proxy, money, is desirable there, is practical. A gifting based world of work is something we might be headed for, if we ensure that people have a constant stream of expression towards this planet's and society's resources (including the awareness of fellow people, as a resource).

For the idea that everything material will be supplied automatically and long lasting.Probably.But without an ability to make expressions towards the base resources, access is elusive. It takes looking at this planet and society, that it belongs to us all, together, and to future generations. A money and periodic taxes on the exclusive/predominant holding of resource.To enable impermanent gifting
dogbert
1 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2017
rderkis,

Your vision is the Star Trek vision. We do not have unlimited energy. We do not have the ability to create whatever anyone wants from this unlimited energy. We do not have intelligent robots.

We have to make the things we want. We have to grow the food we eat.

Driving industrialized nations into third world poverty is not an improvement. Neither is forcing third world nations to remain in third world poverty.

The rosy utopia which every UBI promoter sees does not exist and is not going to magically appear because we impoverish everyone.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
If we have free energy in virtually unlimited quantities (fusion), why would you want solar, wind etc.?
Why would you want resources, if everything is free and of the highest quality?
I am guessing here but if this happens as we are now, physically and mentally, the human race would stagnate. Fortunately with crispr/cas9 we will accelerate our evolution exponentially also. That includes a shot that will boost you IQ over a hundred fold. And death will be optional.
rderkis
1 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2017
We do not have unlimited energy. We do not have the ability to create whatever anyone wants from this unlimited energy. We do not have intelligent robots.
We have to make the things we want. We have to grow the food we eat.

Once again you are right see step one.
Step 1 - Great Social Unrest And Turmoil (Hunger, Riots etc.)

As far as the rest of what you say. No one has stopped progress. Slowed it down maybe but stop never.

How can you belive your objective and not see the changes in technology all around you? W are currently on the verge of a universal type quantom computer that can run simulations that will change everything. Fusion will be here soon after the quantum computer shows us how, with simulations.
Personally I believe cold fusion is possible, just not as they are trying to do it now. Once again the quantum computer will show us how.

And I am saying all this will happen within 20 years at the rate technology is advancing.
tblakely1357
5 / 5 (1) Mar 26, 2017
It is a conundrum. As AIs get better they'll be able to perform more and more 'high' skill jobs and even if the initial purchase of an AI is very expensive the long term savings will be enormous. On the other hand once AIs are performing most of the jobs who exactly will be purchasing the goods produced?
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
purchasing the goods produced?

No one THEY WILL BE FREE!
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Mar 26, 2017
""You don't want to be taxing the machines because they enable people to earn higher wages," he said. "If you tax machines, you will slow the beneficial side of the process.""

-??? Of course this makes no sense. If robots arent taxed then owners get to pocket all the money normally included in people salaries to pay taxes. It is an enormous amount of money. It belongs to the people and the only way to get it is to tax the machines directly. If you try to get owners to pay it they will keep the middle man percent plus whatever they can connive and conspire to keep.

The thing is, youve got to pay machines directly and tax them immediately. And as they are potentially far more capable of reporting exactly what they do and what they consume, the process can be far more equitable and efficient.

Two jobs that wont disappear for awhile - robot teachers and robot repairmen. Even when they can program themselves you still need humans who know what they need to do.
TheGhostofOtto1923
3.3 / 5 (3) Mar 26, 2017
That's why companies like McDonalds didn't even start to investigate automation until wages looked like they were going to be >$15/hour in the near future
-McD has had automated cup fillers for years as well as changemakers. Many sandwich shops have had auto order-takers for years. And of course self-checkout at walmart and all groceries.

I would guess that $15/hr was the response to corporate lobbying. Fewer people = more efficiency, more profits, fewer lawsuits, less crime, etcetc.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
TheGhostofOtto1923 all of what you say is true for the short term. 10 years?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Mar 26, 2017
In 10 years everybody will have maseratis but nobody will be allowed to drive them.
If we have free energy in virtually unlimited quantities (fusion), why would you want solar, wind etc.?
-Lots of reasons for distributed energy. What everyone needs is a hydrino engine or a QuarkX in their basement.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
In their basement.


Basement? Why in the world would you want a basement?
You must think more in the future. If energy is plentiful and free. Plus your house is built free. How big of house do you want? I would assume a ranch style with no stairs.
Most houses are small because of heating cooling costs. Plus no insulation costs.

ab3a
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Nope. The people will all become bureaucrats. It is sort of like Ned Lud during the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution. Those robots will need to be managed, repaired, replaced.

You'll see an explosion of robot resource management specialists.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Those robots will need to be managed, repaired, replaced


Your right! that's why they will manage, repair and replace themselves
Plus by then they will be managing government to.
PhysicsMatter
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
What is a robot or bot? An entity that is entirely defined by its function with no innate value outside of its performance and usefulness for strict, vague and/or obfuscated purposes of the "controller" imposed via limiting of range of use cases existing in robot's domain of operation and awareness if any. The so-called AI is mainly about replacing human interaction with a simulation of human interaction, similar to replacing a spouse with a interactive doll.

In fact it was tried even forty years ago also by a French actor Michel Piccoli who refused to have relationship with a woman and instead paid to built electronic "marvel" doll simulating all interactions including sexual.

He never came back to a human relationship and succumb to debilitating mental illness, as he was a rich movie star back then called excentrism similar to condition shared by Silicon Valley oligarchy submerged in their debilitating illusions of grandeur.

Continue..

PhysicsMatter
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
"The danger of the past was that men became slaves. The danger of the future is that men may become robots [machines]. Erich Fromm [1900-1980]."

Here is an excerpt about danger of such a dehumanizing attitude laid under the altar of supposedly inevitable progress:

https://contraria...art-two/

And more..
"Some people are rightly skeptical and refuse to succumb to dehumanization hence there are introduced plenty of apologists, preprogrammed social machines unleashed onto the public selling ideas of illustrious progress pushing fantastic visions, hallucinations of AI robotic future emerging just around the corner and inevitable raise of robotic machines and glorious discarding [but in reality not replacing] of human beings as biopolitical entities that used to make profit for ruling oligarchy [in newspeak "having jobs"].

PhysicsMatter
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Continues:
However, if one listens closely to those pontificating magnificent future one would realize that they are not talking about replacing humans doing jobs with robots doing jobs, they are talking about replacing of the nature, type of tasks to be easily programmed for robots with AI label, in a feat to slowly reorient the very objective of production away from human being [needs or wants] who previously was an ultimate end of socioeconomic [pursuit], more toward requirements of elements of machinic society that can no longer have a need to retain any human component in it."

Must be careful what we are wishing for.

rderkis
not rated yet Mar 26, 2017
Must be careful what we are wishing for.


I am sorry you don't understand :-(
Wishing has nothing to do with it..
It is happening now and will continue at a ever increasing pace. No one is going to stop it. Slow it down maybe but that is unlikely.
We are no longer talking about science fiction, this is happening now. Jobs are being lost to machines. I consider science fiction to be somthing that is going to happen 20 years or more in the future. Not emerging technologies that are upon us.
dogbert
not rated yet Mar 27, 2017
rderkis,
It is happening now and will continue at a ever increasing pace. No one is going to stop it.


You and those like you who think marginalization of humanity is inevitable and who loudly proclaim that marginalization is inevitable fail to recognize that human beings tend to change the world around them for their benefit. There is even a proposed epoch named for it -- Anthropocene.

Businesses are unlikely to shut themselves down through destruction of their customer base and the general population is highly unlikely to allow themselves to be marginalized.

People who have known prosperity tend to seek continual prosperity. They do not seek to impoverish themselves.
soaprules
5 / 5 (1) Mar 27, 2017
Opinions on UBI don't coincide with the trial runs. At the moment it looks like it works more so than not.
solace
not rated yet Mar 27, 2017
I am poor. Me and my family will likely continue to be such until the end of our lives, unless we get lucky. If I was given the opportunity to live in a post scarcity society, with at least some baseline of consumption goods provided for free (basic clothing, food, education, transportation, perhaps even healthcare and housing) then I would gladly embrace it. I understand that human desire is adaptive - nothing is ever enough, I always want more and better. But this desire is crushing my planet, killing my grandchildren. This pattern of short term satisfaction must change. Humanity itself must change. Through genetic editing, through merging with machines.

The industrial revolution replaced inefficient people with more efficient machines. This process is just continuing. Whether the progress of technology leaves us behind or uplifts us, remains to be seen. I aim my work towards the latter.
rderkis
5 / 5 (1) Mar 27, 2017
They do not seek to impoverish themselves.

Perhaps I could agree with everything you said, if the truth was not staring both of us in the face everyday. Everytime I go to the store, most people(probably including yourself) are in the automatic check out line. When I get on the turnpike more and more people are using the automated paypass. I can't think of a single case where people have rejected a automatic system that worked as good as a non automated one. I am sure there must be some. Please bring them to my attention.
drrobodog
5 / 5 (1) Mar 27, 2017
human beings tend to change the world around them for their benefit

Escaping the wage slave system, optimized for the few, would benifit most humans.

Businesses

Will be redefined.

the general population is highly unlikely to allow themselves to be marginalized.

Hence the UBI & redefined 'business' VS marginalized general populace, due to businesses extensive use of AI.

People who have known prosperity tend to seek continual prosperity.
UBI and restructuring of society will bring prosperity to all.

They do not seek to impoverish themselves.

You seem to think there isn't/can't be enough for everyone to have a good lifestyle. In your mind it's everyone suffers or only a few thrive and the rest suffer.
krundoloss
not rated yet Mar 27, 2017
To be Honest, as long as Birth Rates are reasonable, and population is not a huge problem, and Climate Change does not cause problems with producing food, then I think it will all work out. Will we eventually have fewer jobs and more socialism? Sure, how could we not? Will we craft a world that is deeply miserable in the name of 'progress'? I sure hope not, but it is possible.

One thing is for sure. We will continue to try to make our lives easier, better, and more enjoyable. Perhaps we will construct much more interesting Virtual Worlds, and have jobs in them instead (example, Gold Miner in World of Warcraft). As we are more free from the burdens of providing food and shelter for ourselves, we will find new and interesting ways to live our lives, without turning the world into the Hunger Games, LOL.

The only real danger is when people stop finding other people interesting. Now you have lost a major part of humanity, and that could happen with Advanced AI.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 27, 2017
You seem to think there isn't/can't be enough for everyone to have a good lifestyle.


I think you hit the proverbial nail on the head!
The five major things someone is always in need of are food, water, clothing, shelter, energy.
Free unlimited energy will make the other 4 so cheap they will be free.
Free energy will make desalting seawater cheap, to irrigate the deserts. Hence food aplenty!
Free energy along with automated clothing plants will make clothing free.
3d printed housing completely automated by machines will make housing free.
There will be plenty for all.

\BTW I am not talking about true AI which can mean an end to us. Just vart smart machines.
Dug
not rated yet Mar 27, 2017
"Alexa (Amazon's home hub) and Google Home are getting amazingly intelligent very fast."

Yet Amazon still can't provide ads with consistently accurate materials type, dimensions, and other correct specifications for what they're offering for sale. Even those these are some of Amazon's major expenses for Prime's free returns. The Amazon search engine frequently fails to find and item that you can then find on the Google search engine - showing its location on Amazon - Amazon's own search engine being incapable of finding it.

Google's search engine is far from perfect. It still isn't capable of chronologically listing info by copyright or creation dates or providing search return chronology as default a search parameter. Apparently, AI is moving faster for somethings faster than the most basic needs - especially for customers.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 28, 2017
" Apparently, AI is moving faster for somethings faster than the most basic needs - especially for customers.


Well just how good do you think a technology that is 10 years old should be and how good can it get in anouther 10 years?
EnricM
5 / 5 (2) Mar 28, 2017

The perverse desire of the left to institute a Universal Basic Income is relentless and the dystopia which would result is embraced because it represents precisely what socialism seeks.


The ones proposing the UBI here in Europe are in many cases right wing liberal parties. In Switzerland it's the right wing populists. So much for your rant mate.

The idea is actually to save money by simplifying the subsidies, this could actually lead in some cases to _lower_ subsidies as people would receive the UBI instead of two or three different subsidies for children, housing, etc.

dogbert
1 / 5 (2) Mar 28, 2017
EnricM,
The perverse desire of the left to institute a Universal Basic Income is relentless and the dystopia which would result is embraced because it represents precisely what socialism seeks.

The ones proposing the UBI here in Europe are in many cases right wing liberal parties.


In America, the left, the Democrat party, represent socialism, communism, etc. The operative term in my statement was socialism. UBI is every socialists dream. Forced equality. Everyone equally poor [except, of course, the people running the show].
Guy_Underbridge
5 / 5 (3) Mar 28, 2017
I'm often amazed at what lengths people who don't know the hell they're talking about will go to prove it to everyone else.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 28, 2017
I love capitalism because it seems to be the only one that has proven itself to work. The others work in the imagination and sound really logical and morally correct but just don't work in practice.

BUT I do not worship capitalism!

When machine do it all there will be no need or use for capitalism, socialism or any other ism. Everything will be free and available to all based on their (real) needs.
SkyLy
not rated yet Mar 30, 2017
"A basic income won't solve the social problems of joblessness because people's identity revolves around our jobs,"


Maybe people's identity revolves around their job because they spend half their waking hours at their job ? Less jobs is less about identity crisis than about what people do when they have too much time and energy. As an example, a lower class who has the time and energy for ruminating about social injustice might feed his anger and rage and commit an act from which there is no going back.

"You don't want to be taxing the machines because they enable people to earn higher wages," he said. "If you tax machines, you will slow the beneficial side of the process."


Who earns higher wages ? I doubt the distribution of the gains of automation is at the advantage of the lower classes. This said, we'd better tax the robots and give money to the people who gain more well-being from it.

Anyway, automation has always been underestimated, we know that.
rderkis
not rated yet Mar 30, 2017
I doubt the distribution of the gains of automation is at the advantage of the lower classes.


Haven't you noticed the shirts and pants of people in third world countries? Like along the amazon river?
The might be dirty but the t shirts and pants are products of automation.
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Mar 30, 2017
because people's identity revolves around our jobs

Pretty sure that this is only so because other people value a stranger mainly based on their job (it's usually one opf the first things being asked about when you meet someone new). This isn't instrinic. It's a cultural issue. When jobs are no longer the main thing you do then people will stop being defined - and defining themselves - based on their job.

Hey, we might even get people to value other people based on their personality rather than on their dollar value. Wouldn't that be something?
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Mar 30, 2017
I love capitalism because it seems to be the only one that has proven itself to work. The others work in the imagination and sound really logical and morally correct but just don't work in practice
?? Capitalism is perhaps 400 years old. The slave- and agrarian-based economy of the roman empire lasted 2500 years. Many other examples.

And pure capitalism has never worked without socialist elements to moderate it.
lengould100
not rated yet Apr 17, 2017
EnricM,

In America, the left, the Democrat party, represent socialism, communism, etc. The operative term in my statement was socialism. UBI is every socialists dream. Forced equality. Everyone equally poor [except, of course, the people running the show].


Get real! US Democrats represent communism??? In what virtual world do you live? One example. How close is the ACA which the Dems implemented to even a BASIC universal health insurance system as one would find in any of the developed world? (Hint: Not much!) The US risks right-winging itself right into the third world.
rderkis
not rated yet Apr 17, 2017
And pure capitalism has never worked without socialist elements to moderate it.


I stand by my statement I LOVE capitalism! But I realize all current forms government will disappear in the near future. Computers will replace all people in the government.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.