But in the non fiction world we're reaching a point where automation is replacing labour in return for investment in capital, our economy however relies on labour receiving wages in order to buy things.
The majority of peoples labour will become worthless as machines will do it for lower cost.
"How do you ensure that production of goods and services is maintained at the same level - or increases - when you switch to UBI" - automation, it is happening right now without UBI and you can see the effect in terms of increasing productivity equaling stagnant wages and decreasing wealth in real terms for the majority over time.
But it's not a model of communism, what if it was funded by the government buying shares across the economy. What if instead of owing $4bil the top percentage now only kept $1bil, would that stop them bothering, would it stop you?
With the current model we're looking to be where there will be a mass die off of the population with increasing automation and wealth going to the top percentage of the top 1%.
I doubt you're a billionaire so is that the future you want for you and yours?
But why pay lots of people to do jobs when automation can do it much cheaper, unless you have UBI to redistribute wealth because it's not everyone in a room having the same salary but most of the having 1$ whilst a few have greater than $1000.
UBI isn't about printing more money which would lead to the scenario you describe but to tax capital to redistribute it.
You say more wealth but the trend is to invest capital for more automation as it becomes more affordable and generic. This also doesn't mean just robots but automation of services roles too, think about trading for example or the role that AI like Watson is filling.
The trend has been that wealth transfers more to capital rather than labour which is our traditional means of wealth distribution so unless those at the top consume with insane abandon then our economies will eventually shrink. As automation makes inroads into traditional human jobs then it is inevitable that companies will adopt it just to stay in business.
But robots and AI don't buy anything apart from small amounts of power and parts and their designers, technicians and owners will not make up for the lost income of previous workers in terms of spending in the economy. In that model UBI does not destroy wealth as it redistributes capital so that people can spend it to buy things.
I was going to post exactly this, anyone who enforces this will simply vanish from the Internet.
In fact EU content providers should be fighting this as even the existence of such a law could diminish external linking.
Am not so sure, for example does the cost for nuclear have the thousands of years of storage of radioactive waste factored into its $$ per KWH or is that picked up by the current and future generations of tax payers?
Libertarians engage in magical thinking that somehow the wealthy and powerful to not step on everyone, take everything from everyone, and destroy everyone else.
Yep. I nailed it. You just wanted to rant against libertarians where none were even mentioned. And even now all you are doing is parroting.
Assuming that I am not ranting against libertarians how would refute the argument presented when history would indicate otherwise?
Then wouldn't the dark matter clouds just collapse in on themselves and form singularities as there would be no counterforce to gravitational attraction?
It's not a "rocket engine" it's a real rocket engine that uses a liquid oxidiser and a solid fuel, known as a hybrid.
And yes a turbo jet is much more complicated, so what?
" Another man, who spoke to journalists but chose to remain anonymous to prevent further harassment, says he was stopped more than 25 times by police under a variety of pretences after he had attended a peaceful local protest against duck and pheasant shooting. He finally made a formal complaint after police armed with machine guns pulled him over during an evening out with his wife."
Apart from the invasion of privacy, what a complete waste of resources, maybe some budgets need to be reduced in order to cut down on waste.
Don't forget to include the opportunity cost of the current setup. People not working on projects that might lead to business outcomes that enhance the bottom line etc
You also might want to consider shifting anything that doesn't add to the bottom line out the door, for example use O365 instead of local Exchange as that will mean less person hours spent on a commodity service rather than something that differentiates the company in the marketplace.
He's the CEO and it's his call, however he's going to wake up to the realities of not planning for something breaking down when it happens. Modern technology is great but doesn't have an infinite life span just yet.:)
Slashdot Mirror
So are the AI and robots going to spend money to keep our economy going?
But in the non fiction world we're reaching a point where automation is replacing labour in return for investment in capital, our economy however relies on labour receiving wages in order to buy things. The majority of peoples labour will become worthless as machines will do it for lower cost.
Except it isn't everyone's wage going up by 25%, does a minimum wage worker earn the same as the CEO of Alphabet?
"How do you ensure that production of goods and services is maintained at the same level - or increases - when you switch to UBI" - automation, it is happening right now without UBI and you can see the effect in terms of increasing productivity equaling stagnant wages and decreasing wealth in real terms for the majority over time.
But it's not a model of communism, what if it was funded by the government buying shares across the economy. What if instead of owing $4bil the top percentage now only kept $1bil, would that stop them bothering, would it stop you? With the current model we're looking to be where there will be a mass die off of the population with increasing automation and wealth going to the top percentage of the top 1%. I doubt you're a billionaire so is that the future you want for you and yours?
But why pay lots of people to do jobs when automation can do it much cheaper, unless you have UBI to redistribute wealth because it's not everyone in a room having the same salary but most of the having 1$ whilst a few have greater than $1000. UBI isn't about printing more money which would lead to the scenario you describe but to tax capital to redistribute it.
You say more wealth but the trend is to invest capital for more automation as it becomes more affordable and generic. This also doesn't mean just robots but automation of services roles too, think about trading for example or the role that AI like Watson is filling. The trend has been that wealth transfers more to capital rather than labour which is our traditional means of wealth distribution so unless those at the top consume with insane abandon then our economies will eventually shrink. As automation makes inroads into traditional human jobs then it is inevitable that companies will adopt it just to stay in business. But robots and AI don't buy anything apart from small amounts of power and parts and their designers, technicians and owners will not make up for the lost income of previous workers in terms of spending in the economy. In that model UBI does not destroy wealth as it redistributes capital so that people can spend it to buy things.
I was going to post exactly this, anyone who enforces this will simply vanish from the Internet. In fact EU content providers should be fighting this as even the existence of such a law could diminish external linking.
When you want to run high detail photo terrain and UHD meshes. My next PC will have at least 32GB of RAM
Am not so sure, for example does the cost for nuclear have the thousands of years of storage of radioactive waste factored into its $$ per KWH or is that picked up by the current and future generations of tax payers?
Libertarians engage in magical thinking that somehow the wealthy and powerful to not step on everyone, take everything from everyone, and destroy everyone else.
Yep. I nailed it. You just wanted to rant against libertarians where none were even mentioned. And even now all you are doing is parroting.
Assuming that I am not ranting against libertarians how would refute the argument presented when history would indicate otherwise?
Isn't that basically Dev Ops where Scrum is replaced by Kanban?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...
Then wouldn't the dark matter clouds just collapse in on themselves and form singularities as there would be no counterforce to gravitational attraction?
You win the thread
It's not a "rocket engine" it's a real rocket engine that uses a liquid oxidiser and a solid fuel, known as a hybrid. And yes a turbo jet is much more complicated, so what?
Aircraft have had this ability for decades with the mag switch, off, left, right and both.
Meet another example of the new US Welfare Queens.
Good to see the spirit of Enron is alive and well.
Does it work using cold fusion?
And yet the Rasberry Pi which has enormous cost pressure managed to be manufactured in the UK.
You forgot to mention the reply where he admitted to committing genocide too.
" Another man, who spoke to journalists but chose to remain anonymous to prevent further harassment, says he was stopped more than 25 times by police under a variety of pretences after he had attended a peaceful local protest against duck and pheasant shooting. He finally made a formal complaint after police armed with machine guns pulled him over during an evening out with his wife."
Apart from the invasion of privacy, what a complete waste of resources, maybe some budgets need to be reduced in order to cut down on waste.
Don't forget to include the opportunity cost of the current setup. People not working on projects that might lead to business outcomes that enhance the bottom line etc
You also might want to consider shifting anything that doesn't add to the bottom line out the door, for example use O365 instead of local Exchange as that will mean less person hours spent on a commodity service rather than something that differentiates the company in the marketplace.
He's the CEO and it's his call, however he's going to wake up to the realities of not planning for something breaking down when it happens. Modern technology is great but doesn't have an infinite life span just yet. :)