So no maybe about it, lets be clear on that. Using that logic we were all best off when we lived in a hunter gatherer society! We've been talking about automation taking away jobs as long as we've been talking about the "paperless office" and yet what do you know we're at 3.9% unemployment and have had record low unemployment for almost the duration of the computer age despite getting rid of all those secretary and switchboard operator and cotton picker jobs. So there's one theory shot to hell. A legitimate question about what happens when everything gets automated, although I'd submit we're a longer way from that than you think. Just one example, solar. Relatively new at the scale we're doing now, requires hundreds of thousands of jobs to install, trades or unskilled mostly, never going to be automated. When we do reach the singularity we'll need a universal basic income, but although it's not premature to think about I think it's a bit premature to worry about.
Right, I've heard that much before, but the very nature of the idea seems to invite gaming the system. Plus if the country is already going bankrupt because nobody wants to touch entitlement programs, then extending it to the entire population would likely just drive the country into the ground. The only possible way I can imagine it working is in a post-scarcity economy/society, but I just don't see that happening in the real world or at least not in my lifetime.
There is no gaming, everybody is getting the same amount of money, regardless of who you are or what you are or how you are or whatever. There is only gaming when money is handed out selectively or selectively higher or lower according to certain criteria for example if you are a man or if you are a woman or if you are a new immigrant then there is an incentive for people to game the system to pretend to be a man or pretend to be a woman or etc. Under the Guaranteed Basic Income, EVERYBODY gets the money and everybody gets the same amount. If you are a woman, you get $100 let's say but if you are a man, you also get $100 and if you are a new immigrant, you also get $100, no change, no difference. So why would somebody have the incentive to game the system? If the country is bankrupt because it has to spend $100 trillion just to manage its welfare system to disburse only $1 million to feed the same amount of recipient anyway then why not adopt the Guaranteed Basic Income system that will cost $1.1 million to feed the same amount of people?? Especially if in the future, robots would increase productivity so much that we will have EXTREMELY high GDP growth? Look at how much GDP grew with the advent of internet, information highway, imagine what 100% automation with robots would do??!! This is for the future. Guaranteed Basic Income might not be feasible today but in the future with the abundance of wealth brought upon by robotics, you never know.
Sounds like the premise of a sci-fi novel. Arguing about the viability of technology that doesn't fully exist yet is as productive as discussing android rights or spacefaring logistics. It's still a fun conversation to have as long as we accept that we're only dealing in hypotheticals, but I'm not sure that's what this thread is about. I will plead ignorance on exactly how much money the admin side of welfare costs or how much money could be saved by simplifying that system (people make the same argument for tax reform all the time), but a universal system will still need to be administrated and there would be an actual cost to making that switch. As for gaming the system, off the top of my head I could imagine two scenarios: families having as many kids as possible to collect more money or identity fraud. If the dead can vote, then they can collect universal income.
Trust me if we can think of it we will have it one day. So far everything that we have thought of, we have them all today in one form or another. Robotics is nothing new. We've been using it for decades. Cost? Yes there is going to be a cost to everything but it would be significantly less. How much does it cost to print cheques or electronically transfer money to ppl's accounts? 1) Having children is not really gaming the system. LOL People do it anyway regardless whether it's for earning income or not. 2) Pretending to be dead to defraud the government is a crime now and would still be a crime, nothing really changes. And this is why we have census and this is going to still exist regardless whether there is universal income or not. No matter what happens, you want to know how many people are living in your country.
This roboto techno drive towards utopia is happening right now, slowly. But this trend is likely to accelerate. Just beware. People never experienced such level of security, luxury and abundance before. It will probably lead to bad changes in psychology. There could be little struggle, challanges or things you MUST do to grow, develop a balanced character, respect, attain appreciation, gratitude and so on. I can sense there will be many spoiled children in this kind of world. Besides, if you have everything, can have many things which are not already there at a whim, can travel everywhere with no cost or effort... there is just too much CHOICE. In the past we had rather few choices. Abundance is rapidly increasing in the western world at least. The more you have, the less excitement out of each newest posession. I would bet future could lead to very technologically advanced, having-all, but horrible people. Often I feel the times of 1960 to 1999 where the golden age, when technology was developed enough to relieve us from the hard tasks and serious risks, while not so widespread and advanced, nor money oriented (no smartphones, no "i've dropped my macbook on my other macbook" and much less food poisoning...), that it allowed people to have meaningful connections with each other, more natural way of living. See this guy talk: There will be less and less people who lived during those "analog" times. And more and more poeple who lived only in "digital" and later AI , robotized world. Bless Youtube, so it can record the late 20th century: music, movies, interviews, art, documentaries. We all need balance. Between comfort and struggle also.