Universal Basic Income (UBI)

tempo_n_groove

Universal basic income (UBI) is a model for providing all citizens of a country or other geographic area with a given sum of money, regardless of their income, resources or employment status. The purpose of the UBI is to prevent or reduce poverty and increase equality among citizens.

I just listened to this Joe Rogan podcast with Andrew Yang.  Though I may not entirely agree with the concept, the facts that he has on what is coming in the way of robotics and job loss is staggering.

College and entrepreneurship are great topics that Yang touches on too. 

Please give this a listen.  This was such a great interview.

Let me know what you think.
https://youtu.be/cTsEzmFamZ8

New Jersey just passed a bill where they are going to try this.  Soryy it's a POST article.  You can research other articles about it.
https://nypost.com/2019/03/18/newark-aims-to-become-first-big-city-to-roll-out-universal-basic-income/

Hi!

Really good podcast. I listened when it first aired. Super smart dude. The discussion on automation as it relates to truck driving I found particularly interesting. 

benjs

tempo_n_groove said:

Universal basic income (UBI) is a model for providing all citizens of a country or other geographic area with a given sum of money, regardless of their income, resources or employment status. The purpose of the UBI is to prevent or reduce poverty and increase equality among citizens.

I just listened to this Joe Rogan podcast with Andrew Yang.  Though I may not entirely agree with the concept, the facts that he has on what is coming in the way of robotics and job loss is staggering.

College and entrepreneurship are great topics that Yang touches on too. 

Please give this a listen.  This was such a great interview.

Let me know what you think.
https://youtu.be/cTsEzmFamZ8

New Jersey just passed a bill where they are going to try this.  Soryy it's a POST article.  You can research other articles about it.
https://nypost.com/2019/03/18/newark-aims-to-become-first-big-city-to-roll-out-universal-basic-income/

While robotics are consuming/modifying mechanical jobs, AI is doing the same for knowledge work, and is only slightly behind.
Of the two categories of work 'types' - mechanical and knowledge - there are varying degrees of mechanical and knowledge-based tasks. Packing a box (mechanical) still depends on the right way to pack it (knowledge), for example, and analyzing historical trends (knowledge) still requires building a report (mechanical).

I think there are two future realities which are likely be encountered by workers. 
1) The value the employee is adding through knowledge work is minimal, so when the robotics can replace the worker's mechanical functions (the drudge work), the employee is let go, and the team either uses their existing thought leadership resources, or pivots to develop those existing resources
2) The value the employee is adding through knowledge work is large, so when the robotics can replace the worker's mechanical functions (the drudge work), the employee is developed into a thought leader (where they typically make more money)

I know it goes without saying, but integrating automation and robotics correctly in today's day and age, is an enormous competitive advantage. My hope is that employees start to see this and start showing their worth from a knowledge work perspective, and that businesses start to ask for more knowledge work to give them this opportunity to have a future in this radically changed environment. 

brianlux

This is where I really hope that peak oil proponents are correct.  A world where everything is automated and most work is done by robots?  Artificial intelligence?  That sounds like the end of the world to me.

I'm also wondering why we don't hear much about earth overshoot day defined by Wikipedia as, "Earth Overshoot Day (EOD), previously known as Ecological Debt Day (EDD), is the calculated illustrative calendar date on which humanity’s resource consumption for the year exceeds Earth's capacity to regenerate those resources that year."  That day comes earlier in the year each year.  Last year it was August 4th, this year it's August 1st.  How long can that go on?  Are robots going to create more resources out of thin air?

So I'm rooting for  peak oil to really does happen*.   Barring a break through in some kind of energy source, other than oil, we will probably return to a made-by hand kind of world.  A real word where people, not robots make, build, create.  A natural world.

*My understanding is that solar power will not be able to replace oil- at least not in a world of 7, 8, 10 billion people- because it takes oil to make solar panels and they wear out, requiring more oil to make more panels and the further along we go, the less oil there is, etc.  And peak oil makes sense to me but I don't hear much about it these days.  Denial, maybe? 

Halifax2TheMax

Free if you have the time.

https://www.axios.com/mit-offers-online-course-future-work-automation-income-inequality-tech-0c249f5d-af22-49ea-8a93-07893f2f9a15.html

For the next 8 weeks, some of the best-known minds in the study of the future of work will be appearing at MIT.

What's next: It's a free online course led by MIT's Thomas Kochan and Elisabeth Reynolds, and it will track technological history going back to the 19th century, income inequality, labor groups, automation, German manufacturing and more. In the final 4 weeks, students look at the social contract coming out of WWII and create a new one for the new age of automation, Kochan tells Axios.

Show less

• Among speakers (appearing in videos made for the course) are tech historian David Mindell, roboticists Daniela Rus and Julie Shah, labor economist David Autor, and automation expert Erik Brynjolfsson.
• Some 1,900 students from around the world are already signed up, Kochan said.
• The median age of students this year is now 38, up from last year's 30, as more professionals sign up, he said.

The course starts next Tuesday. I myself am going to be taking it. Register here.

tempo_n_groove

brianlux said:

This is where I really hope that peak oil proponents are correct.  A world where everything is automated and most work is done by robots?  Artificial intelligence?  That sounds like the end of the world to me.

I'm also wondering why we don't hear much about earth overshoot day defined by Wikipedia as, "Earth Overshoot Day (EOD), previously known as Ecological Debt Day (EDD), is the calculated illustrative calendar date on which humanity’s resource consumption for the year exceeds Earth's capacity to regenerate those resources that year."  That day comes earlier in the year each year.  Last year it was August 4th, this year it's August 1st.  How long can that go on?  Are robots going to create more resources out of thin air?

So I'm rooting for  peak oil to really does happen*.   Barring a break through in some kind of energy source, other than oil, we will probably return to a made-by hand kind of world.  A real word where people, not robots make, build, create.  A natural world.

*My understanding is that solar power will not be able to replace oil- at least not in a world of 7, 8, 10 billion people- because it takes oil to make solar panels and they wear out, requiring more oil to make more panels and the further along we go, the less oil there is, etc.  And peak oil makes sense to me but I don't hear much about it these days.  Denial, maybe? 

Amazon of all people has discussed making green houses in Mid western states to 1-stop the mass exodus of food from the west and 2-have a shorter route for food to travel.

There is tons of land that can be built to make mega greenhouses.

benjs

brianlux said:

This is where I really hope that peak oil proponents are correct.  A world where everything is automated and most work is done by robots?  Artificial intelligence?  That sounds like the end of the world to me.

I'm also wondering why we don't hear much about earth overshoot day defined by Wikipedia as, "Earth Overshoot Day (EOD), previously known as Ecological Debt Day (EDD), is the calculated illustrative calendar date on which humanity’s resource consumption for the year exceeds Earth's capacity to regenerate those resources that year."  That day comes earlier in the year each year.  Last year it was August 4th, this year it's August 1st.  How long can that go on?  Are robots going to create more resources out of thin air?

So I'm rooting for  peak oil to really does happen*.   Barring a break through in some kind of energy source, other than oil, we will probably return to a made-by hand kind of world.  A real word where people, not robots make, build, create.  A natural world.

*My understanding is that solar power will not be able to replace oil- at least not in a world of 7, 8, 10 billion people- because it takes oil to make solar panels and they wear out, requiring more oil to make more panels and the further along we go, the less oil there is, etc.  And peak oil makes sense to me but I don't hear much about it these days.  Denial, maybe? 

Nanotechnology could have some good influence here. One of the challenges with solar panels is that they can only capture energy from sunlight which hits perpendicular to the plain (hence why solar panel farms often angle to follow the sun). Almost a decade ago now, I came across a university study where they had successfully transformed the molecular structure to spherical instead of 2D. Think a flat panel that's made of 'microdots', which are able to capture solar energy with almost unfathomably large efficiencies (in the mid-90% compared to <30% without the molecular shape change) because a sphere is perpendicular to the solar direction almost all the time. The added bonus is that solar farms wouldn't have to adjust their angles anymore. I can't speak to the efficiency gains they've reached now, but the idea of spherical (from a molecular perspective) photovoltaic equipment has resonated with me for almost ten years, and my gut still tells me I'll see some brilliant scientist announce its mass deployment in the near future.

benjs

brianlux said:

This is where I really hope that peak oil proponents are correct.  A world where everything is automated and most work is done by robots?  Artificial intelligence?  That sounds like the end of the world to me.

I'm also wondering why we don't hear much about earth overshoot day defined by Wikipedia as, "Earth Overshoot Day (EOD), previously known as Ecological Debt Day (EDD), is the calculated illustrative calendar date on which humanity’s resource consumption for the year exceeds Earth's capacity to regenerate those resources that year."  That day comes earlier in the year each year.  Last year it was August 4th, this year it's August 1st.  How long can that go on?  Are robots going to create more resources out of thin air?

So I'm rooting for  peak oil to really does happen*.   Barring a break through in some kind of energy source, other than oil, we will probably return to a made-by hand kind of world.  A real word where people, not robots make, build, create.  A natural world.

*My understanding is that solar power will not be able to replace oil- at least not in a world of 7, 8, 10 billion people- because it takes oil to make solar panels and they wear out, requiring more oil to make more panels and the further along we go, the less oil there is, etc.  And peak oil makes sense to me but I don't hear much about it these days.  Denial, maybe? 

The more I work with data analytics (which I'm lucky enough to do almost full-time these days), the more I come to accept that your first paragraph is the inevitable direction of our society, unless we're collectively going to say no to making more money. I don't see that happening, so yes, I feel that this is one of several likely sources of the end of humanity.

tempo_n_groove

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

mrussel1

tempo_n_groove said:

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

I didn't see it until now.  
Here's what I don't get about UBI, according to the definition in your lead post, why would it not be means tested?  How does giving everyone the same sum of money promote equality?  By definition it would promote inflation, and therefore not actually increase spending power of those living on the UBI. 

PJ_Soul

tempo_n_groove said:

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

It's just such a huge, complicated issue that I don't have the energy to get into it deeply at the moment. But I support it 100% FWIW - UBI should be researched, tested, reworked, retested, evaluated under all kinds of various economic and social scenarios, piloted over and over again, and other factors should be manipulated where needed until UBI can work well. I think it will be an absolutely necessity for a society that will be even close to slightly equitable and livable, and that it will have to be hugely accommodated on many levels rather than just dropped into an existing system and expected to flow well.

tempo_n_groove

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

I didn't see it until now.  
Here's what I don't get about UBI, according to the definition in your lead post, why would it not be means tested?  How does giving everyone the same sum of money promote equality?  By definition it would promote inflation, and therefore not actually increase spending power of those living on the UBI. 

You'll have to listen to his reasoning.  I won't even bother to try and say I'm an expert, just listen to him and he explains it all.

tempo_n_groove

PJ_Soul said:

tempo_n_groove said:

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

It's just such a huge, complicated issue that I don't have the energy to get into it deeply at the moment. But I support it 100% FWIW - UBI should be researched, tested, reworked, retested, evaluated under all kinds of various economic and social scenarios, piloted over and over again, and other factors should be manipulated where needed until UBI can work well. I think it will be an absolutely necessity for a society that will be even close to slightly equitable and livable, and that it will have to be hugely accommodated on many levels rather than just dropped into an existing system and expected to flow well.

There was talk about when the bailouts and quantitative easing was going on that it would have been better spent if the money had gone into the peoples hands rather than the corporations.  I think that would have been a tremendous upside and would have helped out all those companies better than just giving them the money.

Jersey is going to try this now so there will be some info in the upcoming months about it.

mrussel1

tempo_n_groove said:

PJ_Soul said:

tempo_n_groove said:

I'm really surprised that this thread doesn't get more traction?

My guess is people just love negative things so they can bitch about them?

It's just such a huge, complicated issue that I don't have the energy to get into it deeply at the moment. But I support it 100% FWIW - UBI should be researched, tested, reworked, retested, evaluated under all kinds of various economic and social scenarios, piloted over and over again, and other factors should be manipulated where needed until UBI can work well. I think it will be an absolutely necessity for a society that will be even close to slightly equitable and livable, and that it will have to be hugely accommodated on many levels rather than just dropped into an existing system and expected to flow well.

There was talk about when the bailouts and quantitative easing was going on that it would have been better spent if the money had gone into the peoples hands rather than the corporations.  I think that would have been a tremendous upside and would have helped out all those companies better than just giving them the money.

Jersey is going to try this now so there will be some info in the upcoming months about it.

I'd love to argue quantitative easing.  I think it was genius and it worked.  Giving people money is not better than giving people jobs.  We'd probably still have 10% unemployment if we didn't spur new investments.  Trickle down doesn't work on its own, but neither does bottom up economics.  

Meltdown99

I do think eventually people are going to have to be subsidized.  I just do not how and who.  I mean, should doctors and lawyers receive a UBI? and then they'll argue they shouldn't pay to support people.  

PJ_Soul

Meltdown99 said:

I do think eventually people are going to have to be subsidized.  I just do not how and who.  I mean, should doctors and lawyers receive a UBI? and then they'll argue they shouldn't pay to support people.  

It should be the companies/businesses/corporations/government who are saving all the money by not paying workers who support people, not the people who are working. I think the only way for this to work is for all that money that previously went to salaries/wages/benefits (which is ultimately paid for by consumers anyhow) to be shifted to taxes that then get distributed back to the consumers just like that money is now (barely) via wages and benefits. This seems like the easy part to me, frankly. The hard part is figuring out what all these people will do otherwise. Obviously UBI isn't intended to just leave millions sitting on their asses with nothing to do. I think it will have to be accompanied by major programs geared towards volunteer work, the arts, and other unpaid enrichment activities so that the people replaced by machines can still be a benefit to society, and so they have options to feel fulfilled personally. And of course, investment into education to fit into such a new world would be a huge part of any workable plan too. And ultimately, in a long time... hopefully all this can be done without monetary currency at all. That should be the ultimate goal IMO. I doubt humans are capable of being that admirable, but you never know. Maybe in 500 years or something people will have figured it out. Yes, this is a very Star Trek view of the future, lol, but hell, why not expect the best from humankind?? I think we all should, and then at least there are attempts to strive for better things.

mrussel1

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

mrussel1

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

Well this is all definitely true.  There's never political will until it's too late.  Climate change is exhibit A in America.  I would like to see that 25% study.  That seems exceptionally high, for the US.  Now if you are talking about across the world, that could be.  I would certainly think so in Vietnam, China and other countries where our manufacturing has migrated.  

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

Well this is all definitely true.  There's never political will until it's too late.  Climate change is exhibit A in America.  I would like to see that 25% study.  That seems exceptionally high, for the US.  Now if you are talking about across the world, that could be.  I would certainly think so in Vietnam, China and other countries where our manufacturing has migrated.  

Oh, automation and AI (don't forget about AI - it will have a massive impact!) is going to displace at least some workers from ALL sectors. It is a common misconception that it will only have a really heavy impact on manufacturing. It will include all levels and types of jobs, including medical, secretarial, legal, clerical, transportation and distribution, agricultural, technical, hospitality, government, financial, education, you name it. America is just as vulnerable as any other country.

tempo_n_groove

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

Well this is all definitely true.  There's never political will until it's too late.  Climate change is exhibit A in America.  I would like to see that 25% study.  That seems exceptionally high, for the US.  Now if you are talking about across the world, that could be.  I would certainly think so in Vietnam, China and other countries where our manufacturing has migrated.  

You have to listen to the podcast...

So truck driving is going to be gone for the most part in 10 years.  All those truck drivers are going to need work.

Now take all the truck stops across middle america.  There really isn't a need for them anymore so get rid of those non money making buildings.

All the people that work in them, waiters, waitress', fuel attendants, aren't needed anymore.

Now all the delivery drivers that used to deliver to them aren't needed anymore.

All the manufacturing that was made to send to these stations aren't needed anymore so let's cutback on production and issue more layoffs.

How many jobs do you think that is?

mrussel1

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

Well this is all definitely true.  There's never political will until it's too late.  Climate change is exhibit A in America.  I would like to see that 25% study.  That seems exceptionally high, for the US.  Now if you are talking about across the world, that could be.  I would certainly think so in Vietnam, China and other countries where our manufacturing has migrated.  

You have to listen to the podcast...

So truck driving is going to be gone for the most part in 10 years.  All those truck drivers are going to need work.

Now take all the truck stops across middle america.  There really isn't a need for them anymore so get rid of those non money making buildings.

All the people that work in them, waiters, waitress', fuel attendants, aren't needed anymore.

Now all the delivery drivers that used to deliver to them aren't needed anymore.

All the manufacturing that was made to send to these stations aren't needed anymore so let's cutback on production and issue more layoffs.

How many jobs do you think that is?

I'm with PJ Soul on the AI piece, I wasn't thinking about that specifically.  But I'm not convinced that shipping is on the way out.  Plus, I do think that the government will be forced to slow down progress and put in some serious constraints on automation and AI.  I think there will be tremendous demand on the gov't from voters.  The forecast assumes that gov't will not interfere with technology, but I believe it will in some way.  

PJ_Soul

For sure. In this context, and do believe in the trickle down theory, lol. This is going to be massive... I wish the governments would start preparing for it NOW (that would include getting realistic about it with the population so that people know what to expect). But they won't because they suck, and we'll all pay for it (and our kids and grandkids and on down the line until governments pull their heads out of their asses... along with the people who vote for them as they suck).

dignin

Sam Harris has a way better interview with Yang.

https://samharris.org/podcasts/130-universal-basic-income/

Not really a fan of Rogan. 

And in my opinion, if you don't want violence in the streets you are going to have to have UBI in the near future. I'm picturing French Revolution type stuff.

PJ_Soul

mrussel1 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

mrussel1 said:

PJ_Soul said:

mrussel1 said:

Honestly, I'm not sure it is going to move so fast that we'll even notice.  I mean, what if the unemployment rate stays sub 5% for the next 15 years and we turn around, and all the manufacturing is done with robots and we are just using people to deploy and manage the robots.  Will we need UBI then?  Maybe not.  At what point do we need it?  If full unemployment is redefined as 10% then maybe so.  

If unemployment doesn't go way up then it wouldn't be necessary. It's a discussion because it's predicted that 25% of the workforce will be out of jobs because of automation in the not-too-distant future, and that percentage will only go up from there slowly, likely hitting 50% at some point down the road. It would definitely be best to work out a plan before that starts to happen and not after! We don't want to be trying to design a workable UBI system (around the world no less) during an emergency humanitarian crisis as people are all losing their homes and starving because of a massive lack of jobs obviously, lol. A devastating depression is not the ideal scenario for a UBI system launch, haha. That said... I don't really expect any worse from a lot of governments, including America's and Canada's. I think our governments have a real habit of acting too late on things, especially the hard things. And there is nothing harder than completely redesigning a nation's economic system. Plus, this will take actual cooperation and agreement across party lines. Fat chance.

Well this is all definitely true.  There's never political will until it's too late.  Climate change is exhibit A in America.  I would like to see that 25% study.  That seems exceptionally high, for the US.  Now if you are talking about across the world, that could be.  I would certainly think so in Vietnam, China and other countries where our manufacturing has migrated.  

You have to listen to the podcast...

So truck driving is going to be gone for the most part in 10 years.  All those truck drivers are going to need work.

Now take all the truck stops across middle america.  There really isn't a need for them anymore so get rid of those non money making buildings.

All the people that work in them, waiters, waitress', fuel attendants, aren't needed anymore.

Now all the delivery drivers that used to deliver to them aren't needed anymore.

All the manufacturing that was made to send to these stations aren't needed anymore so let's cutback on production and issue more layoffs.

How many jobs do you think that is?

I'm with PJ Soul on the AI piece, I wasn't thinking about that specifically.  But I'm not convinced that shipping is on the way out.  Plus, I do think that the government will be forced to slow down progress and put in some serious constraints on automation and AI.  I think there will be tremendous demand on the gov't from voters.  The forecast assumes that gov't will not interfere with technology, but I believe it will in some way.  

I wish I did, but I can't agree, simply because automation and AI is cost effective, and our governments are in the pockets of corporations, who will insist upon developing the technologies, and they have the legal right to do so, and as long as safety and privacy requirements and stuff like that are met, the government wouldn't have a leg to stand on. If the government actually overrides that and interferes with technological development ... well, I can't even guess how that would pan out, but I suspect not well at all. I actually don't even think it's possible. It's not like people haven't cried for this in the past for the same reasons. It's never even come close to being achieved. Most don't really take too well to the government declaring that a business can't use what is available to them to increase efficiency, keep up with competition, or save money and/or resources. I mean.... I'm not even necessarily against doing that... But if that's the solution, man, American better embrace socialism FAST!

brianlux

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

Meltdown99

brianlux said:

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

I feel the same way about us here in Canada.  The nearest large city near has seen the homeless problem/opioid/alcohol abuse skyrocket.  And nop one who has the means to address (government does shit)...

brianlux

Meltdown99 said:

brianlux said:

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

I feel the same way about us here in Canada.  The nearest large city near has seen the homeless problem/opioid/alcohol abuse skyrocket.  And nop one who has the means to address (government does shit)...

You're shattering my illusion of Canada as Eden.  Sorry to hear that.   Way too many homeless and too much substance abuse, both here and there- it's terrible. 

PJ_Soul

brianlux said:

Meltdown99 said:

brianlux said:

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

I feel the same way about us here in Canada.  The nearest large city near has seen the homeless problem/opioid/alcohol abuse skyrocket.  And nop one who has the means to address (government does shit)...

You're shattering my illusion of Canada as Eden.  Sorry to hear that.   Way too many homeless and too much substance abuse, both here and there- it's terrible. 

Are you joking here Brian? You know that we have social problems, yeah? But Meltdown isn't entirely correct. I can't speak for his province and their crap government, but the new(ish) government in BC is totally addressing these issues in many ways. There is no magic cure for it obviously, but they're working hard on it and making really solid and predictably slow progress with both the addiction/fentanyl problem and homelessness, among many other things, like the child care affordability crisis. That's what happens when the population actually manages to elect leaders who give a shit about more than their corporate cronies and their own egos (and TBH BC barely managed that - they had to form a coalition with the 3 Green Party seats to form a majority).

Meltdown99

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

Meltdown99 said:

brianlux said:

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

I feel the same way about us here in Canada.  The nearest large city near has seen the homeless problem/opioid/alcohol abuse skyrocket.  And nop one who has the means to address (government does shit)...

You're shattering my illusion of Canada as Eden.  Sorry to hear that.   Way too many homeless and too much substance abuse, both here and there- it's terrible. 

Are you joking here Brian? You know that we have social problems, yeah? But Meltdown isn't entirely correct. I can't speak for his province and their crap government, but the new(ish) government in BC is totally addressing these issues in many ways. There is no magic cure for it obviously, but they're working hard on it and making really solid and predictably slow progress with both the addiction/fentanyl problem and homelessness, among many other things, like the child care affordability crisis. That's what happens when the population actually manages to elect leaders who give a shit about more than their corporate cronies and their own egos (and TBH BC barely managed that - they had to form a coalition with the 3 Green Party seats to form a majority).

You know I was talking about the closest big that I live near.  Remember the previous governments created the problem left for the current government to fix.  I wouldn't brag about a province or city that had a new story of kids using dirty needles as darts...wtf is the matter with you.

brianlux

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

Meltdown99 said:

brianlux said:

In America, there's no reason that everyone should not have the basics- food, water, clothing and shelter.  I'm all for that happening in one way or another.

I feel the same way about us here in Canada.  The nearest large city near has seen the homeless problem/opioid/alcohol abuse skyrocket.  And nop one who has the means to address (government does shit)...

You're shattering my illusion of Canada as Eden.  Sorry to hear that.   Way too many homeless and too much substance abuse, both here and there- it's terrible. 

Are you joking here Brian? You know that we have social problems, yeah? But Meltdown isn't entirely correct. I can't speak for his province and their crap government, but the new(ish) government in BC is totally addressing these issues in many ways. There is no magic cure for it obviously, but they're working hard on it and making really solid and predictably slow progress with both the addiction/fentanyl problem and homelessness, among many other things, like the child care affordability crisis. That's what happens when the population actually manages to elect leaders who give a shit about more than their corporate cronies and their own egos (and TBH BC barely managed that - they had to form a coalition with the 3 Green Party seats to form a majority).

Only joking in the sense that a lot Americans see Canada as this totally together  place which, of course, it isn't (and if you know of such a place, please let me know).  HFD and others here have talked about the problems, especially in places like Winnipeg.  Last year, C. and her business partner were back in the north east U.S. and south east Canada and they spent a couple of days in Montreal.  By the sound of what they said about the place, it sounds like an urban Eden.  But I'm sure they didn't see the whole city.  Any place where there are lots of people and/or poverty, there will be social problems.

Actually, anymore, I guess you could say any place has social problems.