Why the world should adopt a basic income

Friedman wanted to replace all the welfare programs with one cash payment. Modern liberals would never risk consolidation. It would be like reducing all the taxes to just one tax. It would put the entire tax, spend to buy votes agenda within range of one libertarian bullet. Do you understand?

 

democracy means people rule, republic means people rule through representatives, democratic constitutional republic means people rule through representatives subject to constitution parameters. Do you understand?

 

robots won't ever replace as many humans as electricity, cars, trains, screws, nails, tractors etc. Do you understand this simple point?

 

Uh... yes there is. Democracy can mean direct rule. Theoretically, a democracy could mean that every issue is voted on by the populace and no representatives exist.

Democracy simply means a government controlled by the people... there are many formats that fit into that definition, a representative republic being one of many.

 

Direct rule, indirect rule (by means of representation) - there is no Fundamental Difference between the two words.

For your edification: List of synonyms* for the word "democracy" here ...

*Need a definition of the word "synonym"? Just ask!

 

They are being replaced as you write. Money is NOT THE PROBLEM. The problem for American car manufacturers is robotic-made imports at lower prices!

Just what do you think is going on in an economy where total manufacturing jobs have dwindled from more than half of all US industries to just barely 8%! See here - go to "Goods-producing, excluding agriculture" then look under to "Manufacturing" and then over to "Percent Distribution" (column 2016) and the number 7.9%.

And what technology is displacing manpower? One that entered car manufacturing to paint automobiles in the 1980s! It's called "robotics".

Of course, if you think Americans will prefer much higher-priced cars made by humans, then don't be surprised when foreign-made cars employing robotics swamp the market!

And there is nothing that either you or I can do about it, because it has already happened!

Wakey, wakey ...

 

You do make me laugh. The basic income guarantee, just like the negative income tax, integrates tax and benefit systems. You blubber about BIG, failing to realise it only marginal difference from NIT. Tut tut!

 

Not the same thing.

https://keydifferences.com/difference-between-democracy-and-republic.html

 

OK, so I went to the link, and this is what I found:

Comparing what is comparable:
*Democracy refers to the system of masses, i.e. a political system dominated by citizens of the country.
**Republic refers to the state wherein the ultimate power lies in the hands of the people and their elected represetatives.

*Under this system, the general public possess a certain degree of power and authority and takes part in the decision making process of the state.
**Here, the representatives are chosen by the people to vote on behalf of them.

Comparing line-for-line:
*So, what is the difference except the word "masses", which he uses to demonize because it was a word employed by the communists! (WORD GAMES!) There is inference that the masses under a democracy decide everything, but under a republic it is their representatives who do. We all know very well there is no such difference extant in not only the US but most such free countries on earth.
**No fundamental difference whatsoever between the wording!

Try harder!

There must be other sites where such pathetic efforts can be made to distinguish the two words, where there is none and never has been.

It's just the Troglodyte Right trying to say, "Hey, were different!"

Well, yes, you (plural) are. You do have a fundamental belief!

That upper-income taxation should be as close to zero as is humanly possible ... !

 

I don't want to address your statement until you answer the question posed in my post, the one you forgot to respond to. Where does the money come from? I doubt it will just be printed, but will come from some kind of economic activity which has a need for money, instead of barter.

 

You seem not to understand a very simple fact. As robotics and AI replace humans, and this is where we are headed, it will of course force more and more humans(population growth) into fewer and fewer fields that robotics, automation and AI cannot do(until they can)...

Hiding your head in the sand is the simplest although the most ignorant actions that people do....can you understand that?

The much scoffed at Luddites were actually the intelligent people of their times. They saw where advancing technology inevitable leads, when coupled with maximization of profits capitalism. BTW, I love capitalism, so don't you dare call me anything but a capitalist. Until of course capitalism and technology removes the need for humans, or removes the need for most humans in the capitalistic equation. Then the equation has no balance and it fails.

I choose not to assume some new field that robotics and AI cannot do will magically arise, for there is not even an inkling today of what that might be. You know, to earn the money to buy what AI and robotics provide which must be purchased? We gonna wash one another's clothes? Cut one another's grass? Until a robot can do that? Then what? You don't have a clue for you cannot think about it. Can you? If so, explain it to me since you seem to KNOW.

 

It is a Looney Left offering, just as there are many Looney right offerings... Neither work, Go back to 1970 and start over again. That is all we need, even the loney left would be happy. But the elite that have amassed all the LEFTS money would not. SO which side is at fault again ?

 

Nice fantasy, and I'm sure many Millenials look forward to the day when they'd never have to leave their parent's basement, but in a world of limited resources, this idea is an impossibility.

 

You are forgetting the American people who have elected into office a Replicant majority in both chambers of Congress. And now Donald Dork into his White House play-room. (His away-office when he's not in Mar a Lago.)

And the idiocy of a wholly inept Electoral College that has elected (four times in the nation's history) the loser of the popular-vote. And I won't even go into the manipulation of local voting by Gerrymandering.

Uncle Sam, hang your head in shame ...

 

You have learned this 14 times. 99% of humans were farmers. New tools replaced 99% of them and we still have 97% employment. Shall we go for 15 times??

PS: without knowing it you are parroting a Marxist lie that, surprise, encourages libcommie govt to take over to solve a problem that is not a problem. Do you understand?

 

4.1% GDP and hang your head in shame? When is last time France had 4.1%?

 

then why so afraid to name one???

 

the money comes from people who work to support those who do not work thus both are discouraged from working. This is how communism slowly starved to death 120 million!

 

yes on theory that people who earn money have a right to it far superior to the right of thieves who did not earn it. Private property is the basis of a free society.

 

both are fine consolidations that liberals would never go for. Programs for the poor must always number above 100 thus insuring the survival of many even under the worst of conditions.

 

Is this supposed to make sense? Have you gone from a "childish basic income guarantee is libcommie" to celebrating it in one wack?

 

It isn't a marxist lie to see that as automation, robotics and AI displace human beings, that this will create a problem with humans having jobs in order to consume. It is just common sense.

When the industrial revolution happened, and as labor saving devices replaced human labor, fewer farmers were needed to produce the food needed. So these displaced farmers had a place to go...to factories, to production. So there was a new area to take up the slack, and in fact we needed more labor in factories than we had. So we allowed in immigrants to fill these slots.

With robotics and AI, that is replacing more and more humans, there is no sector like manufacturing to take up the slack. Not sure why you cannot fathom such a simple thing. Of course you can tell us what new sector will act like industrialization that will supply jobs for these displaced workers. And I am all ears. Until you can do that, you are totally clueless. So prove to me you are intelligent and tell me what that or those new sectors will be, that robotics and AI can never do!!! ha ha ha.

I feel like I am talking to a robot with incoherent programming.

 

You are talking about capitalism. For one thing that you do in communism is work! For the State. You don't own sh*t. Equality of outcome, which is one reason it will always fail.

You really understand communism? It is all about work. With no reward for that work. No wonder it has never succeeded. ha ha

 

I would assert that the world doesn't have nearly the energy generation capacity to support your vision. I would point out that the vision, absent actual functioning infra to support it is simply a pipe dream, until such time that energy generation catches up to your vision. I doubt that the era of carbon energy is over, not in the near, or mid term, and even the long term is fuzzy here.

The fragility of battery technology still hasn't produced what most folks would agree would be a long term reliable platform. It also ignores the cost to the environment to require energy production to spike to satisfy the additional load. It also presupposes that batter life doesn't also include or recognize the reality that dead batteries are future superfund sites waiting to happen. The infra to recycle them doesn't exist, isn't likely to exist, or otherwise be produced.

 

can you tell us why you think that?