which one of you all was pushing for this?

[callmeslick]

I want to say Vander, but might be dead wrong. Anyhow, here is a look at guaranteed income for all and the potential loss of employment which drives the discourse.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/ ... li=BBnbfcN

[Spidey]

You might be thinking of Lothar.

[callmeslick]

thanks, Spidey. You are likely correct.......

[Vander]

Wasn't me. It has its perks, but I'm not sold on the idea. It seems like a way to "liberate" the money currently spent on targeted social welfare programs, and I'm not sure how that helps social welfare.

[woodchip]

Welfare can be defined to exclude certain healthy individuals after a certain period of time. A cradle to grave stipend does not allow this.

[callmeslick]

this isn't supposed to be 'welfare' or in any way temporary. The suggestion is that this is the way to allow the populace to survive when the economy is still making money, but we need far less actual labor force.

[Spidey]

Problem is…when you remove the normal checks and balances in an economy, that economy is most likely to break down, or worse.

If you create a system where huge amounts of people can survive without being productive, something very bad is bound to happen…like say a culling.

I think something like this is the first step to creating a system that looks like the worst nightmare future scenario ever created by science fiction writers, where corporations rule the world and people are forced to live in cubicles, and provide no real benefit to the powers that be, and are seen as consumers of precious resources, that they would rather have for themselves.

The system as it is today provides a need to have plenty of people to provide benefit for the powers that be, remove that benefit, and there is no telling what might happen. Once automation is doing all of the work, there will be no need to have a large population to provide the lifestyle enjoyed by some because automation will simply take over that job, and in fact there will be no need to even have large automated factories to provide the incomes, that provide such lifestyles, because automation itself will provide this directly. Therefore with no huge factories to produce tax revenue, where will the money come from to produce the stipends.

Take away a populations ability to have sweat equity and be productive, therefore generating wealth, and you end up with a useless population, that can’t provide for itself. So in this system, the people who control the resources will rule the earth without the restrictions of needing large populations, to work and consume.

So in the end when people become superfluous…they will be gotten rid of. It takes a huge amount of faith in the goodwill of humans to believe you can simply create some kind of economic system like this to solve a problem like automation, instead of sucking it up and feeling the pain of letting something work itself out naturally. And there will be a lot of pain, but perhaps better than the alternative. And of course there is always the possibility something along these lines will come into play anyway, regardless of what kind of systems are created. (the inevitability of a technological culture?)

Not to mention that most economists and lay people like myself can’t figure out how a system like this can even work, considering how an economy actually functions. Hard to imagine how currency will work in this system as well, considering what backs the money we use now. (worker productivity) So you can’t simply implement a stipend without overhauling the entire system, at which point it will become something nobody has even seen before. (pure altruistic socialism…good luck on that one)

But anyway…don’t be too hard on me, I was just trying to imagine a future where people don’t need to work…and juxtaposing it to human nature, before we mature as a race. Of course it’s only one possibility out of many.

[vision]

Of course it’s only one possibility out of many.

True, and I am much more optimistic than most on this issue, probably because there is no precedent in history for a population becoming "useless." You know what happened thousands of years ago after humans developed agriculture and had all sort of free time on their hands compared to hunting and gathering? We developed writing, art, philosophy, and the foundations of what would become modern civilization. Most of our laws, the framework for our justice system, even our government goes back over 3000 years. I actually think it is time we kick civilization up a notch and get people out from behind desks doing bull★■◆● work and give them time to form new ideas. There are a lot of brilliant, generous people out there* who never get a chance to make an impact on the world because they spend all their time trying to make ends meet.



*For example, my friend who was an inventor that never got a chance to act on any of his brilliant ideas because he spent all his time running a construction business.

[callmeslick]

the above reasoning is one of the drivers behind an article I read suggesting one steer one's children into as many creative endeavors as possible, as the future will belong to the creative members of the society.

[Spidey]

You know what happened thousands of years ago after humans developed agriculture and had all sort of free time on their hands compared to hunting and gathering? We developed writing, art, philosophy, and the foundations of what would become modern civilization. Most of our laws, the framework for our justice system, even our government goes back over 3000 years.

Yea, and we also developed hundreds of new occupations that became the basis for our modern economy...much more than the arts and such.

[Top Gun]

Personally I think this sounds like the very first step towards Star Trek's post-scarcity society, and I'm all for it. (Hell, if you think about it, 3D printing is like an extremely primitive replicator.) End wage slavery and give people the opportunity to pursue their own endeavors.

[vision]

Yea, and we also developed hundreds of new occupations that became the basis for our modern economy...much more than the arts and such.

Just to be clear, when I mentioned the after effects of agrarian society "art" is really a tiny part of it. Before agriculture we didn't have a way to codify language. We didn't have advanced mathematics. Imagine what wonders await in the areas of heath and medicine, genetic engineering, nano-technology, space exploration, and countless other budding human endeavors if we free up more creative resources. Also, when I use the word creative, I don't mean the arts. Creativity is found in everything. Besides, art is just another form of communication and can be used as a vehicle for complex ideas.