What should be done with the unemployable people?
-
I lean more on the Universal Maximum Income where everything above a threshold is taxed
You literally just described the progressive tax system that every developed country has today
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Yes and no, that progressive tax system needs a hard limit that says that you can't earn more than that.
I would want the people to know that they won't be able to earn more than that hard limit and if they chose to keep working and generate more "riches" beyond that they're doing it exclusively for the benefit of others. -
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
What's if we look at it like a lottery,
If the job you go into as a trained professional is automated away after 10 years in industry, your wage is covered for the rest of your life by the company that replaced you.
Plenty of problems here with my idea, but it's a great solution if the kinks are worked out.
-
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
For me the big question is self-driving vehicles. No one seems to worry about job losses anymore, but that was one of my big takeaways from when that was hot. I seem to recall them giving 3million as the number of people who drive for a living in the us. Imagine 3 million people suddenly out of work, jobs gone. Where else could that many people go? Driving doesn’t require college, so I have to imagine that few of these people do, so where else can they even get hired?
-
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
UBI/freedom dividends is a solution well before mass AI driven unemployment. It disempowers rulerships/oligarchy towards empowering people. It eliminates crime. Gives people the opportunity/time for education and entrepreneurship.
It is far better than corrupt hierarchy that fights over centralized socialism vs corporatist supremacy.
to make him useful
Your question is horribly ugly and disgusting. Some people are unemployable due to dissatisfaction with society, or a tax structure that encourages investment instead of employment. When you consider "making people work" you are considering enslaving them/their time to eat this week without letting them use their time to contribute to their/social prosperity over their lifetimes. People need a money guarantee. Not a job guarantee. The former is even more productive for successful tax payers.
-
Yes and no, that progressive tax system needs a hard limit that says that you can't earn more than that.
I would want the people to know that they won't be able to earn more than that hard limit and if they chose to keep working and generate more "riches" beyond that they're doing it exclusively for the benefit of others.You raise far more tax revenue able to redistribute as freedom dividends by incentivizing those who can earn $1m/hour to put in more hours.
-
In theory, the rich can just continue paying off each other spending money on rich people stuff. 80% of the economy consisting of activities like robot-staffed billionaire-owned construction companies making and selling super-yachts to oil billionaires, who made their fortune selling fuel to space tourism companies ferrying billionaire designer bag heiresses to the Moon. The rest of us can starve to death and the economy won't even blink.
Your statement is mostly false, despite your valid examples. Wealth/income requires people/consumers. Phones/computers are cheap because billions can afford it. Food profits is a function of people. Autos definitely require scale, that is far more efficient than a humanoid robot doing flexible "manual" labour.
At the same time, however, not requiring slaves does motivate genocide instead of just sharing wealth with the slaves. It's better to exterminate humanity than to deal with slave class uppitiness.
-
If you're a sociopath, let them suffer and die slowly, homeless.
If you're not a sociopath, and decent, tax the rich and give them a good UBI so they can play and do art or music or video games or what the hell ever.
Easy peasy lemon squeezy.
Suffer and die slowly? Where's the profit in that? Now organ farms, THERES a moneymaker!
-
What's if we look at it like a lottery,
If the job you go into as a trained professional is automated away after 10 years in industry, your wage is covered for the rest of your life by the company that replaced you.
Plenty of problems here with my idea, but it's a great solution if the kinks are worked out.
There is no world in which legislation will pass mandating companies pay you your salary for the rest of your life for simply replacing your role with automation/AI/etc lol. And if they somehow pulled off that miracle, lobbyists would just get them to change the definition of what it means to “replace someone with automation.”
-
It's basically that or communism. Nothing else deals halfway serviceably with a large population of people who can't be employed.
Like govt is obliged to give you a job?
Communism has never worked, and if we automate away most jobs, the whole idea it's founded on becomes obsolete.
Or do you have some kind of "futuristic communism" idea?
-
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
Unemployed people are not a negative on society. People don't have to be employed. That's a capitalist misconception.
Assholes are a negative on society. They actively reduce the experience for everyone else. Even productive assholes are a negative on society.
-
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Take out back and sh--
--own a great time with a BBQ cookout and given a big plate of delicious food while friends brainstorm how to help get them back on their feet!
-
Like govt is obliged to give you a job?
Communism has never worked, and if we automate away most jobs, the whole idea it's founded on becomes obsolete.
Or do you have some kind of "futuristic communism" idea?
You should look up what actual communists think instead of listening to capitalist propaganda on what communists think. In short, communism is a stateless, classless, moneyless society. The best well-known analogy is the Federation from Star Trek: The Next Generation.
-
If you make them comfortable how do you recruit people for the army?
Make federal service required for anyone to obtain "full citizenship".
::: spoiler "Would you like to know more?"
/s
::: -
I started to notice a intense automation and Artificial Intelligence Investments from companies and that made me wonder, what would happen or what should be done with the people who can't be trained for a new job and can't use his current skills to to get a job.
How would he live or what would he do in life? More importantly, what should be done with him to make him useful or at least neutral rather than being a negative on the society?
Basic Income.
Now someone always has to ask how to pay for it.
Years ago a study was done about basic income in Canada. It was determined that the country would save billions by discontinuing most of the government handouts (there was 60+ at the time) and replacing those with a single payment. Consider how many offices are in each major city for welfare, employment insurance, etc. Save money with reduced wages, rent, power, insurance, so on and so forth.
-
Unemployed people are not a negative on society. People don't have to be employed. That's a capitalist misconception.
Assholes are a negative on society. They actively reduce the experience for everyone else. Even productive assholes are a negative on society.
I prefer someone who gets shit done and changes the world for the better while being impolite to courteous inhibitors of progress.
-
You raise far more tax revenue able to redistribute as freedom dividends by incentivizing those who can earn $1m/hour to put in more hours.
You're missing the point, the objective of that is not to collect more tax, objective is to desincentivise greed by making it kinda pointless beyond certain level.
Also once most of the basic stuff is free I wonder how many people will settle for less pay and less hours. So more jobs would be available.
-
Ignoring the odd idea that this hypothetical person is somehow completely unemployable regardless of industry or upskilling, why do you assume that that immediately makes them a negative to society? Is a person's entire value predicated on their ability to earn money?
Not OP, but it can be very detrimental to people's mental health if they don't have a role in society. Not a job, but a purpose where their labor provides a benefit to others, like being a caregiver or volunteer. Depression is commonly cited among those who are unemployed, on disability, or recently retired.
You are also going to see a lot of classism surrounding UBI. After all, I can see a lot of people who are able to work becoming bitter at a portion of society that don't need to work.
-
Basic Income.
Now someone always has to ask how to pay for it.
Years ago a study was done about basic income in Canada. It was determined that the country would save billions by discontinuing most of the government handouts (there was 60+ at the time) and replacing those with a single payment. Consider how many offices are in each major city for welfare, employment insurance, etc. Save money with reduced wages, rent, power, insurance, so on and so forth.
Statistics backing the value of socialism.
-
I prefer someone who gets shit done and changes the world for the better while being impolite to courteous inhibitors of progress.
I don't trust competent assholes. They're less likely to consider they're wrong. So when they do fuck up, they fuck up hard and refuse to listen.
Source: I work in IT and see it all the time
-
I don't trust competent assholes. They're less likely to consider they're wrong. So when they do fuck up, they fuck up hard and refuse to listen.
Source: I work in IT and see it all the time
also competent assholes are less likely to change the world for the better
