Universal Basic Income & Working Less

4068ac1elhodqr

Raycyst wrote: »

I agree that the universal income should be introduced immediately or very soon. Paid to all citizens on a no questions asked basis. We'd need to close the borders though which I'd support.

The UI would cause an explosion in small industry and in small scale producers of products. Hundreds of thousands of people would be free to try to make extra cash on the side. They'd be offering lots of services like gardening and window washing.

You'd need to lock down borders well before the attraction of 'money for nothing' or it really would be dire straits.

Cash will shortly cease to exist, all transactions within 5-10yrs will be electronic, fully traceable and analytically studied at length by the AI overlord.

4068ac1elhodqr

na1 wrote: »

What UBI will do in 10-20 years:
80% are human-like animals: sitting on the sofa, watching TV, eating fast food, with signs of severe intellectual degradation, no interests, no hobbies, no free money. just eat,watch & sleep
10% are trained engineers who support manufacturing automation.
10% a rich oligarchs, who owns all of the manufacturing and owns a 90% of the world wealth, and who control the governments.

Ask any psych, Human's by their very psychological nature need an equal balance of 'unpredictable random stimulus' but also 'steady patterns of assured events'.

This is why you'll watch a movie you're assured is very good, more than once, but not endlessly. But if the movie you've seen before was only moderately good, you'll prefer to take a risk and watch something completely new.

So there will also be the desire to work, explore and test. But also the need to catch a tan on a sunny beach. The perfect work week is 3.5days on and 3.5days off.

na1

DaniilKharms wrote: »

Considering that where it's been tried the opposite happened, in that more people worked, not fewer, you may want to rethink this.

The other bits about automation and engineers will happen no matter if UBI exists or not.

Oh really?
What is that magic country's name where Basic Income is well established and ongoing?? Utopia?

There are 2 places on earth where something like UBI is established and working for a while: Alaska & Brazilian Bolsa Família
Alaska payout is for Alaska residents only and is about $1000 a year.
Would you consider living in Alaska for 1000?
In Brasil the Bolsa Família is for POOR families only

na1

Bentley Black Lumberman wrote: »

Ask any psych, Human's by their very psychological nature need an equal balance of 'unpredictable random stimulus' but also 'steady patterns of assured events'.

The "psychologists" from SWO have proved opposite:
200k on a permanent dole (for more than a year) during Celtic Tiger era.

na1

Bentley Black Lumberman wrote: »

The perfect work week is 3.5days on and 3.5days off.

Well, ok:

say the amount of skilled work in IT to be done is X. This contributes (for example) to 5% of GDP, and provide some portion of service globally.

Currently the average hours in IT is about 40 a week.
You're suggesting that all IT to be working 28 hours a week
This will produce 0.7*X of service needed to the global society. and 3.5 % GDP

What is your suggestion about the missing amount of IT service? and missing 1.5% of GDP? Considering that the amount of work in IT engineering will grow significantly in a future?
Do you think unemployed uneducated people will start doing degree in IT? Why don't they do it now?

recedite

na1 wrote: »

the missing amount of IT service?

In a free market the pay rates rise, and people will put in the hours. And more school leavers will see those salaries and will train for the career.
Its nothing to do with UBI though.

na1

recedite wrote: »

In a free market the pay rates rise, and people will put in the hours. And more school leavers will see those salaries and will train for the career.
Its nothing to do with UBI though.

In a closed system the amount of money equal to the amount of products &services.
If the "new IT guys" get extra cash, to produce the missing 0.3 * X service - they will also spend more money & CONSUME more products & services themselves.
So the will be more demand for the service.


Basically, if all working people will reduce their working ours to 70% the total amount of services & goods will be decreased by the same percentage: 70%.

Of course the shortage of goods& services will cause the inflation: the prices rise to the level when some of of the people couldn't afford some of the services.
the missing 30% will be distributed unequally among people.
The most suffered would be the "most vulnerable" - the non working people on UBI - this will cause the amount of UBI - to be BELOW THE subsistence level!
This will cause the "most vulnerable" to either start riots or to start educating themselves and start working. What is you guess?

4068ac1elhodqr

na1 wrote: »

Well, ok:

say the amount of skilled work in IT to be done is X. This contributes (for example) to 5% of GDP, and provide some portion of service globally.
You're suggesting that all IT to be working 28 hours a week.... ....Do you think unemployed uneducated people will start doing degree in IT? Why don't they do it now?

One important factor your missing in all of that, is there will be 50% (or more) less global jobs by 2030 (or before). Thus restricting the available working population to more limited shift work, would actually create better involvement for more people.

This would likely create improvements in productivity, self-study, health, well-being, childcare, parentcare, leisure and travel due to a more balance work-life balance. Zero-hour contracts will become the norm in this new gig economy, so you'll actually be glad with those guaranteed, but limited shifts.

The only 'human' IT work available by '30 will be absolutely cutting-edge, extremely creative, innovative research-based work. Likely requiring extreme skill, evolving study or high natural ability. The quantum based (and probably) neural-organic cloud machine-self-learning, cloud-conscious chip-bots will be doing everything else complex.

Humans may still be required for 'awkward' roles e.g. Plumbing (in older buildings), arts, culture, stand-up comedy and some human-to-human interfacing etc.

Raycyst

It's always very difficult to imagine robots doing jobs like plumbing, gardening or gutter repair.

But people forget that robots could be made human shaped.

If they were, then they could do any job that humans could do. We could even make child sized robots for chimney sweeping.


Humans will be largely obselete by 2030, or nearly certainly by 2040.

na1

Bentley Black Lumberman wrote: »

One important factor your missing in all of that, is there will be 50% (or more) less global jobs by 2030 (or before). Thus restricting the available working population to more limited shift work, would actually create better involvement for more people.

One important factor you're missing is that there will be much less positions (in the unskilled sector) but much MORE work in the skilled sector. The amount of work to automate all possible tasks is tremendous!
There will be actually a great shortage of skilled personnel, and for the people on UBI - who have enough money to provide the minimal level of comfort, there will be NO incentive to get these skills.
You either should cut their support, to give them an incentive to educate & find a skilled job or they will be sitting on the sofas and demanding the certain amount of financial support.
SWO already proved that theory.

recedite

na1 wrote: »

In a closed system the amount of money equal to the amount of products &services.
If the "new IT guys" get extra cash, to produce the missing 0.3 * X service - they will also spend more money & CONSUME more products & services themselves.
So the will be more demand for the service.


Basically, if all working people will reduce their working ours to 70% the total amount of services & goods will be decreased by the same percentage: 70%.

Of course the shortage of goods& services will cause the inflation: the prices rise to the level when some of of the people couldn't afford some of the services.
the missing 30% will be distributed unequally among people.
..

Its not a closed system though. Due to various factors;

As others have mentioned the amount of jobs available in the future may be less, but they will certainly be different.

The amount of money in the system is variable. Money can be magically created by the central bank to keep inflation at around 2% or just below (which is actually the main mandate of the ECB)

If the working people reduce their hours due to UBI, this will be balanced by the input of the currently non-working welfare population, who will then be allowed to put in some of their hours.

There is no job that is so unique and special that it can only be done by the current cohort of workers. But there are jobs that are protected by monopoly type situations or restrictive practices. For example there is a shortage of medical consultants. But at the other end of the system it is very hard for an Irish school leaver to get into medicine at an Irish university. Its a lot easier for a foreign student because they don't need to have the points, only the cash.

na1

recedite wrote: »

na1 wrote: »

In a closed system the amount of money equal to the amount of products &services.
If the "new IT guys" get extra cash, to produce the missing 0.3 * X service - they will also spend more money & CONSUME more products & services themselves.
So the will be more demand for the service.


Basically, if all working people will reduce their working ours to 70% the total amount of services & goods will be decreased by the same percentage: 70%.

Of course the shortage of goods& services will cause the inflation: the prices rise to the level when some of of the people couldn't afford some of the services.
the missing 30% will be distributed unequally among people.
..

Its not a closed system though. Due to various factors;

As others have mentioned the amount of jobs available in the future may be less, but they will certainly be different.

The amount of money in the system is variable. Money can be magically created by the central bank to keep inflation at around 2% or just below (which is actually the main mandate of the ECB)

If the working people reduce their hours due to UBI, this will be balanced by the input of the currently non-working welfare population, who will then be allowed to put in some of their hours.

There is no job that is so unique and special that it can only be done by the current cohort of workers. But there are jobs that are protected by monopoly type situations or restrictive practices. For example there is a shortage of medical consultants. But at the other end of the system it is very hard for an Irish school leaver to get into medicine at an Irish university. Its a lot easier for a foreign student because they don't need to have the points, only the cash.

You don't understand how money work,
To simplify model:
the mankind produces 100 units of food.
(assuming there is no overproduction) this food is consumed by all people: non-working on UBI, and working on UBI + Salary.
The 100 units was produced by all working people working 40 hours/week. Now working people start working 28 hours - producing only 70 units.
Due to  the shortage of supply, the prices on food will grow up (in a free marked). 
The price will increase exactly to the amount that the total population have to DECREASE their demand by 30%
The important note that people on UBI are consuming the minumal level of comfortable life.
The UBI has to be risen to match inflation. If this is not done, people on the dole couldn't afford the same level of consumption and WILL protest. And I could understand their point: the UBI is intended to support minimal level of comfort.
Now if non-working people still consume the same amount of "units of food", this means that WORKING people have to decrease their consumption to match that 30 units shortage - basically their salary after inflation will have much less value.
And regarding jobs: people on the UBI are not working not just because there is no jobs.
They are not working because they HAVE NO SKILLS to do the required jobs. And they have no incentive to upskill

Raycyst

You have ignored technology, and automation.

The working people stop working on the farm and instead produce 100 robots. The robots then work on the farm while everyone else sits around.


If human shaped robots are doing the work then humans don't have to.

recedite

na1 wrote: »

You don't understand how money work.

I do indeed know how money works. Have a read of this, its how money would work for the public benefit in an ideal society, instead of just for the banksters benefit.

So back to your scenario, there are a couple of flaws in it...

The 100 units was produced by all working people working 40 hours/week. Now working people start working 28 hours - producing only 70 units.
Due to the shortage of supply, the prices on food will grow up (in a free marked).

You haven't factored in that the non-working population previously on dole + medical card+ rent allowance etc. are now allowed to work without losing their UBI, and therefore they kick in with their 12 hours. Total production is therefore unchanged.

The price will increase exactly to the amount that the total population have to DECREASE their demand by 30%
The important note that people on UBI are consuming the minumal level of comfortable life.

Even if the previously non working population as above failed to contribute, it doesn't follow that the workers would reduce their output to the bare minimum just because they are now receiving UBI. They will still want to get more than the most basic minimum out of life, so they will work and pay taxes to obtain extra money.

...the UBI is intended to support minimal level of comfort.
Now if non-working people still consume the same amount of "units of food", this means that WORKING people have to decrease their consumption to match that 30 units shortage

Nobody is forcing them to work less hours, or reduce their output. Its just an option.

And regarding jobs: people on the UBI are not working not just because there is no jobs.
They are not working because they HAVE NO SKILLS to do the required jobs. And they have no incentive to upskill

I think you meant to say here; "the people on welfare" as we currently know it, not UBI.
They currently have no incentive to work or to upskill, because if they started working they would not be any better off than if they claim the benefits. Under a new regime of UBI they would suddenly have the incentive to work. Once they start working, they have an incentive to upskill, because they can then get more money for the same effort.

DaniilKharms

na1 wrote: »

Oh really?
What is that magic country's name where Basic Income is well established and ongoing?? Utopia?

There are 2 places on earth where something like UBI is established and working for a while: Alaska & Brazilian Bolsa Família
Alaska payout is for Alaska residents only and is about $1000 a year.
Would you consider living in Alaska for 1000?
In Brasil the Bolsa Família is for POOR families only

It's not magic, and you need to learn more.

http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/ie/dime_papers/1082.pdf

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2012/02/22/335.6071.962.DC1/deMel-SOM.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_pilots

So, you know... it's hard to take your opinion on this very seriously.

na1

Raycyst wrote: »

You have ignored technology, and automation.

The working people stop working on the farm and instead produce 100 robots. The robots then work on the farm while everyone else sits around.


If human shaped robots are doing the work then humans don't have to.

The working productivity WILL grow with time that's true. But:
1)it will grow slowly with time - would you change the working hours gradually or change it instantly from 40 to 28 hours? As I understood you suggesting introducing UBI instantly, not gradually?
2)Corporations tend to maximize their profits. Unless you introduce the new rules for all corporations in the world, the corporations will only hire people on 40 hours/week, as it is more profitable for them.
The corporations always look for the places with cheaper labor and less state protection for employees.
If a single country introduce the 28th ours the corporations would prefer to move to a different country, where there are less strict rules

na1

DaniilKharms wrote: »

na1 wrote: »

Oh really?
What is that magic country's name where Basic Income is well established and ongoing?? Utopia?

There are 2 places on earth where something like UBI is established and working for a while: Alaska & Brazilian Bolsa Família
Alaska payout is for Alaska residents only and is about $1000 a year.
Would you consider living in Alaska for 1000?
In Brasil the Bolsa Família is for POOR families only

It's not magic, and you need to learn more.

http://www1.worldbank.org/prem/poverty/ie/dime_papers/1082.pdf

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2012/02/22/335.6071.962.DC1/deMel-SOM.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_pilots

So, you know... it's hard to take your opinion on this very seriously.

You didn't provide any single example of a country with 10-20 years(my quote) working UBI?
All of these examples are pilot projects working for 1-2 years. Guess why they didn't last for decades?

Raycyst

One of the few jobs in the future will be acting as a 'yes man' to a rich person.

A bit like the magical mirror on the wall which provides confidence to its owner by telling them they're the prettiest.


Would redacted pay money today to have people follow him around and tell him he's great?
I suspect some of his employees already see that as their role.

na1

recedite wrote: »

They currently have no incentive to work or to upskill, because if they started working they would not be any better off than if they claim the benefits. Under a new regime of UBI they would suddenly have the incentive to work. Once they start working, they have an incentive to upskill, because they can then get more money for the same effort.

Yes there is a "poverty trap", thanks to the current laws, but in a future the unskilled people could not find a job even if they want to. The only way of start working is to get a higher education. And this is much of a hassle for the people if they can get basic food and clothes for free.

na1

People are lazy in general (and I'm not an exception))), and tend to do less efforts if possible. In early era their laziness was controlled by natural selection. Now with all benefits & freebies people degrade rapidly.
I don't watch Irish TV so can't tell about Ireland, but once on occasion I was watching local daytime TV in UK. 
The majority of the daytime audience are people on the dole. Guess what was the main ads topics:
1)buy 1 tracksute for [font=arial, sans-serif]£[/font]5 get one free
2) take a mini-loan for 20% a month

20% a month is  900% APR! How on earth can educated person take a loan for 900%?

4068ac1elhodqr

na1 wrote: »

People are lazy in general

Humans are highly efficient in general. This is why the wheel was invented, to get things done faster and easier. This is why the Robots will be deployed to replace all tiresome or complex tasks when the price-point and their ability allows them to do so.

No idea what you're point is about watching tv, yes some people (certainly not most) are happy to live a sloth like life. Most people require stimuli and some desire to improve and learn.

Not sure what your point is with loans, these high APR types, are probably the only type available to some people - Read up on the law of supply, demand and price elasticity. You can't expect a low interest mortgage with little or no deposit offered, you will have to pay a premium for that.

na1

Bentley Black Lumberman wrote: »

na1 wrote: »

People are lazy in general

Humans are highly efficient in general. This is why the wheel was invented, to get things done faster and easier. This is why the Robots will be deployed to replace all tiresome or complex tasks when the price-point and their ability allows them to do so.

No idea what you're point is about watching tv, yes some people (certainly not most) are happy to live a sloth like life. Most people require stimuli and some desire to improve and learn.

200k on a long term JA during Celtic Tiger  don't agree with you.
Come on, they are not in Bangladesh or Mozambique! They have state support to start the third level education. They can train and get a highly paid job, but no! "There is a Soccer on TV, and there are friends waiting in the pub. why do I need to spend 4-5 years of my life in college, then start working on just above of what I have now for several years, and when I finally get a good job the state take 40% of my wage to support other JA claimants, who was enjoying their lives all this time?"

recedite

na1 wrote: »

20% a month is 900% APR! How on earth can educated person take a loan for 900%?

It is stupid, but lets assume that person wants those tracksuits, but hasn't got the money for them.
Their first thought is to go out and work to get the extra money, but then they remember that if they are caught working, they will lose their benefits.
Its too much of a risk.
Then the add for the loan comes on....
UBI solves this dilemma for them.

4068ac1elhodqr

na1 wrote: »

Yes there is a "poverty trap", thanks to the current laws, but in a future the unskilled people could not find a job even if they want to. The only way of start working is to get a higher education. And this is much of a hassle for the people if they can get basic food and clothes for free.

The unskilled won't need just higher education, but instead 'self-continuous blended learning education'. If they are assured of their basic needs through UBI, then they will have the ability and option to educate themselves.

The future of work will be one of around 50% of time spent at 'continuous adaptive learning', along with juggling up to around x17 possible global responsive 'gig' roles.

This may be e.g. 2 hours experimental coding for an expo-planetary team, then 3hrs the next day copy writing highly custom marketing scripts for an export company in the Far East. The next day 1hr of local parcel deliveries to retro locations considered too awkward for the drones-bots. The next day 2hrs of piano teaching to a human with robot-aversion syndrome.

Water John

A programme of interest on RTE, for science week is, Will a robot take my job, on Monday next?

recedite

Water John wrote: »

A programme of interest on RTE, for science week is, Will a robot take my job, on Monday next?

Don't worry, you'll get at least 2 weeks notice

Water John

Quite clear, automated technology is moving the working goalposts.
3 M truckers in the US, 600K in the UK.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/17/truck-drivers-automation-tesla-elon-musk

Time to reevaluate, what is work?