Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Universal Basic Income (UBI) is coming

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Zoning. Restaurants with/without robots or per robot as you suggest can have different tax rates. Products have to be delivered, so tax on use of roads, radio spectrum.
So the gov has to make up for all the income tax it's going to lose by paying the UBI.
And you propose they do that by taxing everything a business uses to do business (which a lot of it already is)? The amount of taxes needed will be astronomical to give everyone UBI, to the point at which any business owner would have to ask themselves, why not just close and retire and take the UBI like everyone else?
It would lead to the government having to take over all kinds of "essential" industries that are currently privatized.
Again, looking a lot like Communism, where the gov owns everything. No thanks.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: winfield100
But, on a Bitcoin standard monetary system, where the rich and powerful don't get first access to newly created money, the massive global conglomerates can't afford to exist. They rely on Wall St and the gov manipulating the fiat, and bailing them out. And the banks don't get to do whatever they want.
Bitcoin incentivizes playing by the rules. It just won't be profitable to try to cheat that system.
When you fix the money, the effects trickle through every aspect of the economy. Large corporations get strangled by their own inefficiencies. You'll see a movement back toward more local smaller economies. Mom and pop stores will begin to come back because they'll be able to compete again. And that will allow the general public to choose those instead. That's when a true free market can work, when the people actually get to vote with their money.
Lots of interesting stuff you're posting. Just using this as a jumping off point.

In this case, maybe you've already covered it previously. For me there's a bunch of stuff here stated as fact that hasn't yet been entered into evidence. I would like to learn more! Do you have a pointer to something that will work through this in detail? The scale of a book is fine - I realize that economics frequently doesn't reduce to a blog or forum post, but I also know I won't plow through a textbook, or pursue another degree :)


My own starting point, that I can't square up with what I'm seeing, is that money is a claim on economic activity. Its value comes from our mutual agreement on its value. Fiat, bitcoin, gold - there value comes from there representation as a claim on economic activity at some exchange rate that we mutually agree on, and are constantly re-calibrating on a daily basis with our decisions on what economic activity we choose to acquire, and how much we choose to spend to get it.

None of these have intrinsic value.


The next thing I think germane is that I split inflation into two ideas. There is a measurement of inflation - inflation rate - that has a whole pile of technical details on how it gets measured. The inflation rate gets badly mis-used as a proxy for inflation when somebody stacks up years and years of inflation rates and concludes (as a for-instance) that a $600 smart phone in 2023 cost $20 in 1913 (link to inflation calculator). This is of course nonsense - the entire world's worth of economic activity was unable to produce a single smart phone in 1913. Automatic washing machines were also infinitely expensive (or maybe the technology was closer than I think it was) in 1913; either way washing machines didn't need a smaller collection of USD in 1913 vs 1960, or a smaller pile of gold, or ....

In smartphone and automatic washing machine terms we've been experiencing dramatic and fortuitous deflation :).

But I think the conversation here has been about the concept of inflation / deflation, rather than a particular measure using some particular set of arcane and technical details about how it is measured, so I'm taking it that way.


My other starting point is that currency, in whatever form (USD, bitcoin, gold, sea shells), as a claim on economic activity has a real form of inflation or deflation depending on each particular item with its own changing characteristics. What has me excited about the future, and why I see a UBI as inevitable, is that I see the possibility of a future in which economic activity is no longer fundamentally connected to the work force. In the history of everything the sum total of economic activity is a product of # of working people * some technology multiplier. Technology changes enabling more economic activity by the available work force. So far it means a constantly improving quality of life for all (as well as a bigger and bigger share of the claims on economic activity in the hands of a few wealthy people).

The (possible!) difference we've got coming is that a gargantuan share of the sum total of economic activity might see that technology multiplier get close enough to infinity that the number of working people to supply "stuff" to everybody falls WAY, WAY below the number of people needed to create that much economic activity. More importantly, the number of working people to supply the "stuff" that everybody needs and wants will fall WAY, WAY below the number of people that make up the human species. To make up some numbers - how does human society function, if 9M people in the future can accomplish the economic activity of 9B people today? If all 9B people get their economic needs met from the activity of the 9M, what do the other 8.991B people do? Shoot them all and let the bacteria handle the cleanup?

Then, as Elon points out, the radical thing will be how do we find meaning, in a world where work is not necessarily a path to finding meaning? There will always be people for whom work is that path to meaning. What I'm excited about is the possibility that people for whom meaning is found in art (as a for instance) but can't pursue it in today's economy because (<laundry list of reasons> - maybe they'll be able to find that meaning in the new world. Video games is my own likely path to meaning :)


I'm looking forward to learning more.
 
So the gov has to make up for all the income tax it's going to lose by paying the UBI.
What income? If robots are doing all the work, there won't be any income tax. No point in continuing without you addressing the practicalities of this new world.

I assume you have a ranch or something and are confident in making an income but you will be in the minority. Let's focus on 2040 below so that we are all talking the same thing:
  • 2025 - $50 to establish infrastructure
  • 2027 (Robotaxis) - $200 to start testing inflation affects and how to control it (only if most nations follow suit)
  • 2030 (robots becoming common in Western world)- $1000 - halve all benefits and limit to 30 hour week
  • 2035 (90% goods manufactured by robots)- $2000 - zero benefits, 20 hour week
  • 2040 (90% services provided by robots)- $4000 - working is rare but most items are very cheap
  • 2045 - $8000 - universal high income. $8000/month would be sufficient to live on your own super yacht
What about 2040 is wrong? Maybe you are just bearish on bots in which case we wouldn't need a UBI.
 
So the gov has to make up for all the income tax it's going to lose by paying the UBI.
And you propose they do that by taxing everything a business uses to do business (which a lot of it already is)? The amount of taxes needed will be astronomical to give everyone UBI, to the point at which any business owner would have to ask themselves, why not just close and retire and take the UBI like everyone else?
It would lead to the government having to take over all kinds of "essential" industries that are currently privatized.
Again, looking a lot like Communism, where the gov owns everything. No thanks.
Tax exclusive use of the commons. Don't tax brain or brawn.

Less hoarding, so land or radio spectrum is used more productively.

You don't tax the productive business, you tax the rentier landlord. If the landlord hoards, they go under and more efficient/lower cost landlord takes over, if they rent to productive profitable businesses they cover taxes and have a return.

At the moment, in most countries, tax on landlords are low while tax on economic activity is high.

Zoning for robot use increases tax on landlords. Robot zoned land can achiece higher rental income.

Georgism. Land Value Tax.

Whatever you tax, you get less of. Let's have less hoarding and speculation and more production or services.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CarlS
Just came across this thread. I was extremely skeptical of UBI when it became a thing thanks to Andrew Yang, but I came across this book
https://www.amazon.com/Utopia-Reali.../ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

The author talks about some other things, but spends a lot of time talking about UBI including going into depth exploring various pilot programs. It's an old trope perpetuated by the robber barons in the 1880s that if the poor have it too easy they will get lazy. The pilot studies on UBI have shown that to be untrue. In fact the studies have shown the opposite.

When the poor have some form of UBI, they don't quit working. The money isn't enough for that. Instead they only work one or two jobs instead of 3-4. The money doesn't get blown on toys and drugs, it goes towards better child care, education, or necessities. Parents have more free time so they tend to spend it with their kids. The rates of domestic violence and child abuse drop sharply.

People who don't need the money might blow it on toys, or invest it, but those things help the economy too.

History has shown that trickle down economics is terrible for the overall economy, even though it was gospel in American politics for the last 40 years. Bottom up and middle out government investment in the economy pays massive dividends for the government. The best the US has ever done is when the effects of the New Deal really started affecting the economy in the 1950s. It wasn't a great time to be a big income earner, the top tax rate was 90%+, but it was a great time to be middle class.

Pumping money into the bottom tiers of the economy stimulates a lot of economic activity. The poor who get money spend it on necessities and it all goes back into the economy where the government gets tax revenue every time it changes hands. Giving money to the richest in society just ads to the money invested and generates very little economic activity that can be taxed.

Middle class people, especially lower middle class will also spend the money generating tax revenue. One wealthy person can only go out to eat so many times, but give that same wad of cash to 1000 middle class people and you will see a lot more restaurant activity.

The US almost had UBI at one point. It was under Nixon. It was pretty much fait accompli that it was going to happen but Congress got arguing about what the level should be and the bill never got out of Congress. Then Watergate happened and the moment passed.
 
Lots of interesting stuff you're posting. Just using this as a jumping off point.

In this case, maybe you've already covered it previously. For me there's a bunch of stuff here stated as fact that hasn't yet been entered into evidence. I would like to learn more! Do you have a pointer to something that will work through this in detail? The scale of a book is fine - I realize that economics frequently doesn't reduce to a blog or forum post, but I also know I won't plow through a textbook, or pursue another degree :)


My own starting point, that I can't square up with what I'm seeing, is that money is a claim on economic activity. Its value comes from our mutual agreement on its value. Fiat, bitcoin, gold - there value comes from there representation as a claim on economic activity at some exchange rate that we mutually agree on, and are constantly re-calibrating on a daily basis with our decisions on what economic activity we choose to acquire, and how much we choose to spend to get it.

None of these have intrinsic value.


The next thing I think germane is that I split inflation into two ideas. There is a measurement of inflation - inflation rate - that has a whole pile of technical details on how it gets measured. The inflation rate gets badly mis-used as a proxy for inflation when somebody stacks up years and years of inflation rates and concludes (as a for-instance) that a $600 smart phone in 2023 cost $20 in 1913 (link to inflation calculator). This is of course nonsense - the entire world's worth of economic activity was unable to produce a single smart phone in 1913. Automatic washing machines were also infinitely expensive (or maybe the technology was closer than I think it was) in 1913; either way washing machines didn't need a smaller collection of USD in 1913 vs 1960, or a smaller pile of gold, or ....

In smartphone and automatic washing machine terms we've been experiencing dramatic and fortuitous deflation :).

But I think the conversation here has been about the concept of inflation / deflation, rather than a particular measure using some particular set of arcane and technical details about how it is measured, so I'm taking it that way.


My other starting point is that currency, in whatever form (USD, bitcoin, gold, sea shells), as a claim on economic activity has a real form of inflation or deflation depending on each particular item with its own changing characteristics. What has me excited about the future, and why I see a UBI as inevitable, is that I see the possibility of a future in which economic activity is no longer fundamentally connected to the work force. In the history of everything the sum total of economic activity is a product of # of working people * some technology multiplier. Technology changes enabling more economic activity by the available work force. So far it means a constantly improving quality of life for all (as well as a bigger and bigger share of the claims on economic activity in the hands of a few wealthy people).

The (possible!) difference we've got coming is that a gargantuan share of the sum total of economic activity might see that technology multiplier get close enough to infinity that the number of working people to supply "stuff" to everybody falls WAY, WAY below the number of people needed to create that much economic activity. More importantly, the number of working people to supply the "stuff" that everybody needs and wants will fall WAY, WAY below the number of people that make up the human species. To make up some numbers - how does human society function, if 9M people in the future can accomplish the economic activity of 9B people today? If all 9B people get their economic needs met from the activity of the 9M, what do the other 8.991B people do? Shoot them all and let the bacteria handle the cleanup?

Then, as Elon points out, the radical thing will be how do we find meaning, in a world where work is not necessarily a path to finding meaning? There will always be people for whom work is that path to meaning. What I'm excited about is the possibility that people for whom meaning is found in art (as a for instance) but can't pursue it in today's economy because (<laundry list of reasons> - maybe they'll be able to find that meaning in the new world. Video games is my own likely path to meaning :)


I'm looking forward to learning more.
Hey adiggs, thanks for the inquisitive post!

Fair warning, I have done thousands of hours in the "What is Money" rabbit hole. And to be honest, a TL:DR would still be too long for this forum. The biggest problem, right at the beginning, is there's no real way to Cliffs Notes this subject.
Everyone should want to know what money really is, and how it works, since very few of us were taught it in school. You have to be willing to dedicate some time, invest in yourself, to raise your own knowledge level on this particular subject.
I'm happy to share some resources that I know, but I've only scratched the surface. Like you, I don't have a degree in any of this. I just may have a little head start from where you are. But I encourage everyone to get started.
If I can get people to start doing their own research on this, form their own opinions and really learn why the fiat system is rigged against 99% of us, I've done my part.


Here's a short beginners guide to what is money:

What is "Fiat money", where does it come from, and why do we use it?:

Here's an article that helps explain The Cantillon Effect, which is basically what happens when the gov gets involved.

Here are a few guides explaining basic concepts. Forgive me if you already know these, but someone else reading this may not.:



The above articles should give you a good push down the rabbit hole. Cool thing is, everyone goes their own way. There's no wrong way to go. As long as you don't just read headlines or only follow one group. Learn both sides of any idea. You may very well come to different conclusions than I do, and that is perfectly okay.

I like your smartphone/washing machine analogy. You could throw TV's in that as well. They are the most basic examples of how technology has made things better and yet less expensive over time (considering inflation, and what you get for what you pay).
Not all products are going to be as easy to show the same concept, but in general, pretty much all manufactured things should follow a form of this pattern. Which means, tech should make things deflationary over time.

So why is it that so many other things become inflationary? It has very little to do with those specific products, and much more to do with how the money is manipulated.

Here's an article about the difference between soft and hard money:

I see what you're saying about the currency connectivity to the workforce. And you may be right way down the road.
I think before that could happen, there will be a shift in how the workforce works.
For example, during the industrial age, there was a major shift of the workforce away from rural farming toward more urban manufacturing. Similarly, the Digital age of the late 80's and 90's, there was a shift necessitated by more jobs needed in tech.
But the difference was the industrial age didn't require humanity to evolve that much since manual labor on farms isn't much different than manual labor on an assembly line. The digital age required a much bigger jump in our evolution from a brain function standpoint.

I'm a Gen X'er, the "bridge the gap" generation. We didn't grow up with computers, the internet, or cell phones. But we were young enough that when those came along, we were able to learn them and adapt/evolve. The generational gaps between our parents and our kids are the widest of any in history (IMO) for this reason. And I feel at the rate of tech advancement, each generation gap moving forward could get shorter and shorter because the changes come so much faster, and people are living longer. But the tech is out-pacing our own brain's ability to evolve. In fact, it could be argued that so much tech advancement has caused us to devolve as a species. (ever watched the movie Idiocracy?)
So the question is, can we, as a species, evolve enough where we start valuing the highly mental/brain-centric jobs fast enough where the next generation knows that manual labor jobs will be disappearing to robots. So the new jobs that are created/available to humans are intellectual in nature.
I'm a big fan of Darwin's philosophies. And we are not evolving the way we need to if we want to last on this planet. We are absolutely on the path to extinct ourselves.

I like your thinking regarding people finding meaning through art and the like once they don't have to work.
Let me give some historical precedent.
Back in the 13th century, barely out of the Dark Ages, there was an area of what is now Italy called the Republic of Florence.
And for an unprecedented roughly 300 years, this area and most of the surrounding areas of now Europe, used a particular form of money called the Florin (Florin - Wikipedia).
The significance of this money is that unlike any other form of money to that point, and really still, during that ~300 year span, it was practically unchanged.
And because it remained unchanged for so long, the stability it gave allowed that region to prosper like no other could. To the point, where their economy grew so much that they didn't need to worry about where their next meal was coming from. They could save, build, and develop the region. Over time, they got to the point where they could actually have "leisure" time.
And as the economy continued to grow, more and more activities could be done because of the freedom their stable money gave them.
In fact, when you look at the timing of this stable Florin, it can be directly linked to the birth of the Renaissance Age. There would have been no other way that so many people would have the time freedom to be so creative if they had to worry about money.

But like all forms of money, eventually a new ruler in the area started to manipulate the Florin, and predictably it failed.
The Florin's run as the soundest form of money has yet to be passed. The Argentine peso, the Portugal real, the British pound, and today the US dollar, have all had a good run, but none went as long as the Florin without manipulation. And the results speak for themselves.
We need a sound money again. That's why I'm so excited about Bitcoin. Because it was created solely for the purpose of being tamper proof, and accessible to all humans.
 
Hey adiggs, thanks for the inquisitive post!

Fair warning, I have done thousands of hours in the "What is Money" rabbit hole. And to be honest, a TL:DR would still be too long for this forum. The biggest problem, right at the beginning, is there's no real way to Cliffs Notes this subject.
Everyone should want to know what money really is, and how it works, since very few of us were taught it in school. You have to be willing to dedicate some time, invest in yourself, to raise your own knowledge level on this particular subject.
I'm happy to share some resources that I know, but I've only scratched the surface. Like you, I don't have a degree in any of this. I just may have a little head start from where you are. But I encourage everyone to get started.
If I can get people to start doing their own research on this, form their own opinions and really learn why the fiat system is rigged against 99% of us, I've done my part.


Here's a short beginners guide to what is money:

What is "Fiat money", where does it come from, and why do we use it?:

Here's an article that helps explain The Cantillon Effect, which is basically what happens when the gov gets involved.

Here are a few guides explaining basic concepts. Forgive me if you already know these, but someone else reading this may not.:



The above articles should give you a good push down the rabbit hole. Cool thing is, everyone goes their own way. There's no wrong way to go. As long as you don't just read headlines or only follow one group. Learn both sides of any idea. You may very well come to different conclusions than I do, and that is perfectly okay.

I like your smartphone/washing machine analogy. You could throw TV's in that as well. They are the most basic examples of how technology has made things better and yet less expensive over time (considering inflation, and what you get for what you pay).
Not all products are going to be as easy to show the same concept, but in general, pretty much all manufactured things should follow a form of this pattern. Which means, tech should make things deflationary over time.

So why is it that so many other things become inflationary? It has very little to do with those specific products, and much more to do with how the money is manipulated.

Here's an article about the difference between soft and hard money:

I see what you're saying about the currency connectivity to the workforce. And you may be right way down the road.
I think before that could happen, there will be a shift in how the workforce works.
For example, during the industrial age, there was a major shift of the workforce away from rural farming toward more urban manufacturing. Similarly, the Digital age of the late 80's and 90's, there was a shift necessitated by more jobs needed in tech.
But the difference was the industrial age didn't require humanity to evolve that much since manual labor on farms isn't much different than manual labor on an assembly line. The digital age required a much bigger jump in our evolution from a brain function standpoint.

I'm a Gen X'er, the "bridge the gap" generation. We didn't grow up with computers, the internet, or cell phones. But we were young enough that when those came along, we were able to learn them and adapt/evolve. The generational gaps between our parents and our kids are the widest of any in history (IMO) for this reason. And I feel at the rate of tech advancement, each generation gap moving forward could get shorter and shorter because the changes come so much faster, and people are living longer. But the tech is out-pacing our own brain's ability to evolve. In fact, it could be argued that so much tech advancement has caused us to devolve as a species. (ever watched the movie Idiocracy?)
So the question is, can we, as a species, evolve enough where we start valuing the highly mental/brain-centric jobs fast enough where the next generation knows that manual labor jobs will be disappearing to robots. So the new jobs that are created/available to humans are intellectual in nature.
I'm a big fan of Darwin's philosophies. And we are not evolving the way we need to if we want to last on this planet. We are absolutely on the path to extinct ourselves.

I like your thinking regarding people finding meaning through art and the like once they don't have to work.
Let me give some historical precedent.
Back in the 13th century, barely out of the Dark Ages, there was an area of what is now Italy called the Republic of Florence.
And for an unprecedented roughly 300 years, this area and most of the surrounding areas of now Europe, used a particular form of money called the Florin (Florin - Wikipedia).
The significance of this money is that unlike any other form of money to that point, and really still, during that ~300 year span, it was practically unchanged.
And because it remained unchanged for so long, the stability it gave allowed that region to prosper like no other could. To the point, where their economy grew so much that they didn't need to worry about where their next meal was coming from. They could save, build, and develop the region. Over time, they got to the point where they could actually have "leisure" time.
And as the economy continued to grow, more and more activities could be done because of the freedom their stable money gave them.
In fact, when you look at the timing of this stable Florin, it can be directly linked to the birth of the Renaissance Age. There would have been no other way that so many people would have the time freedom to be so creative if they had to worry about money.

But like all forms of money, eventually a new ruler in the area started to manipulate the Florin, and predictably it failed.
The Florin's run as the soundest form of money has yet to be passed. The Argentine peso, the Portugal real, the British pound, and today the US dollar, have all had a good run, but none went as long as the Florin without manipulation. And the results speak for themselves.
We need a sound money again. That's why I'm so excited about Bitcoin. Because it was created solely for the purpose of being tamper proof, and accessible to all humans.

Most of this has already been brought up on the crypto currency thread on this forum with debates back and forth. This is probably more appropriate for that thread.
 

History shows that every innovation in tech is always predicted to create massive unemployment, but it has always created new jobs. There is always a chance the pattern will change, but thus far there are always predictions of doom and gloom that don't happen. Predicting how disruptive technologies will disrupt exactly is very hard to predict.

AI customer service is going to be awful. It's bad enough now having to navigate the bots that want to tell you useful information to get to a real human who might be able to help.
 
History shows that every innovation in tech is always predicted to create massive unemployment, but it has always created new jobs. There is always a chance the pattern will change, but thus far there are always predictions of doom and gloom that don't happen. Predicting how disruptive technologies will disrupt exactly is very hard to predict.

AI customer service is going to be awful. It's bad enough now having to navigate the bots that want to tell you useful information to get to a real human who might be able to help.
I disagree, gen Zs won't speak to a human. Companies that rely on humans are often the worst because you can't get through. AI trained on company data will be amazing in the next 12 months let alone 5 years.
 
I disagree, gen Zs won't speak to a human. Companies that rely on humans are often the worst because you can't get through. AI trained on company data will be amazing in the next 12 months let alone 5 years.

I don't need to physically talk to a human on the phone, chat usually works just fine, but usually it takes a real human being to deal with the problem if I get to a point where I do need to contact them. I usually have to navigate past a maze of getting shunted into dead ends by bots before I can get the point where I can communicate with something with a pulse. I anticipate communicating with AIs is just going to be even more miserable.

Tesla has is more than 5 years late delivering FSD because AI is not as great as they anticipated. Computers can process much faster than humans, but a skilled human can operate a transport machine in edge cases better than any computer can and all the billions poured into the tech has not made computers better.

I was skeptical of the robo taxi future when it was announced and I'm still skeptical.

Companies are going to rush to AI to replace customer service because they will be sold on how great it's going to be and the customers will absolutely hate it with a passion. The smart companies are going to trash the AI and go back to the current system at minimum for the medium term.

In the car industry there have been a number of waves of optimism that robots could replace all line workers making cars and companies learned it was a pipe dream. Tesla was the most recent company to learn those lessons. Sandy Munro talked about his experiences with the robotics fad 20-30 years ago in Detroit. Even a poorly educated and rather dim human has flexibility in what they can do that a machine will never have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlS
There are going to be bad players in any fiat system. Can't avoid it. So I agree with you that a free market can't exist with fiat.

But, on a Bitcoin standard monetary system, where the rich and powerful don't get first access to newly created money, the massive global conglomerates can't afford to exist. They rely on Wall St and the gov manipulating the fiat, and bailing them out. And the banks don't get to do whatever they want.
Bitcoin incentivizes playing by the rules. It just won't be profitable to try to cheat that system.
When you fix the money, the effects trickle through every aspect of the economy. Large corporations get strangled by their own inefficiencies. You'll see a movement back toward more local smaller economies. Mom and pop stores will begin to come back because they'll be able to compete again. And that will allow the general public to choose those instead. That's when a true free market can work, when the people actually get to vote with their money.

As for me thinking that govs are smarter than they are, it's not that. There will come a day, possibly sooner rather than later, that these gov officials are going to see the writing on the wall. At that point, it's not even about anything sidious, it'll be about survival.
Not sure about UK, but US congress doesn't have term limits, so we have career politicians. If the USD gets replaced as the global reserve currency by Bitcoin, you're looking at complete chaos. Corporations will have no choice but to cut most, if not all, of their lobbyists, which will mean most of the senators and house reps will be taking major cuts to not only their campaign contributions, but also their kickback payments. So at that point, they're going to have to decide if it's even worth it for them to stay in office. Most of them have/had successful businesses/careers before running for office, making far more than their political office salary. They don't go into politics for the peanut salary.
So when Bitcoin threatens their meal ticket, which it does, they will absolutely put up a fight, regardless of party affiliation. They will come together to try and stop it. Some already are. Some are publicly supporting it, just for votes, while they privately are against it.
But make no mistake, they will fight tooth and nail to keep grasp of their power.

Corporations have had to switch their investment strategies towards residential property because of how bad fiat has become. They realized the better ROI was in property instead of the previous investments they used to do, like stocks, bonds, and treasuries.
If gold weren't so difficult and expensive to move and protect, they'd buy that, because it's a more sound investment than anything linked to fiat. More and more financial and investment firms are starting to buy Bitcoin because it has all the positives of gold without the negatives.

So I'm a realist, not a pessimist. And I'm for small gov, not anti-gov. Just anti this current form of gov, because it only works for the elite few at the top. And there's no such thing as trickle-down economics.
That's why Bitcoin brings hope. It's a bottom-up technology, bringing the power back to the masses. As a yank, I've been brought up being taught the history of the US escaping the feudal British empire, valuing personal freedoms (disappearing as they are). Maybe Brits are just so used to being ruled by the elite few that it doesn't resonate with them the same way. No disrespect, just an idea.

Canada is the perfect example of all that I've been saying! The Canadian gov has already shown it's hand when they financially attacked the truckers of the blockade. Their citizens now know their gov is not out for their best interests. The gov will do whatever it wants to keep their power and control.
And what disrupted those attempts to cut the trucker's money off? Bitcoin
So it does not surprise me at all that that gov would be the one actively researching UBI.
You’ve got some interesting view points, but you’re missing some information that I know I have and is available to all. That leads me to believe you’re likely missing other information.

The above references your point about the trucking incident in Canada. FYI, that whole fiasco was organized by not-Canadian-truckers, but rather foreign entities (mostly American). Those not-Canadian truckers shut down Canadian cities (primarily one, but definitely disrupted others). Canadian citizens, including Canadian truckers couldn’t leave their homes and go to work. Kids couldn’t go to school. Elderly couldn’t get groceries. Canadian citizens watched from their locked homes while a portable city was built in their neighborhood with 24/7 ongoing concerts, outdoor spas, lavish banquets etc…

Absolutely, the Canadian government blocked those mostly not-Canadians from being funded. In the process some Canadians who’d also thrown money that way, many unknowingly, temporarily had their funds blocked. Don’t donate to organizations with nefarious intentions to disrupt a country and its citizens. Duh.

The law-abiding citizens locked in their homes, unable to get to work, to stores, to schools, demanded their government and their police put an end to the ridiculous event. An event that wasn’t wanted, nor started by Canadian truckers.

The Canadian government actually showed how you stop a foreign invasion without casualties. First they cut of their funding. Then they hired special police - yeah, you might want to study up a bit on how they used those police to move the rebels without people dying. Included with the police were towing specialists in unmarked vehicles to move the trucks blocking citizens. Why unmarked vehicles? Because the disrupters had threatened harm to any towing business and family members if they tried to tow the trucks.

Neither here nor there, your stance on the argument against UBI being able to work is interesting in the same way the other side is interesting.

Personally, I don’t believe UBI can work and it has nothing to do with fiat, inflation, governments etc…. It simply has to do with people. People suck. People are why we can’t have nice things. People are why there are wars, corruption, a planet being stripped of its resources, pandemics, disgusting individuals being elected to office, genocide, social media worshipping fake, filtered individuals, fake news, propaganda, useless opinions - the list is endless in the ways people suck.

The best thing you said in all your posts was a point of how people don’t take personal responsibility.

If the robots don’t kill us, and they should-it’s logical, then we’ll eventually kill ourselves.
 
I think many people think UBI or another mechanism should be done. I agree. I've also seen numerous examples where the local 1% take everything and don't care for the rest of the population.

We need to guard against this.

To a large degree, having $TSLA or investments is personal insurance.

People do need purpose. Work doesn't work for me as most projects I've done recently are really daft and uninspiring. I mostly do it for the money, or more accurately for sustaining my family. My work can be intellectually fulfilling, but at least equally frustrating.

I watch a lot of videos on UK & USA people and towns where people seem lost. Often sipping breakfast beers. Many UK Town centres are depressing as hell.

Eg on youtube "Wandering Turnip", Peter someone, "Soft White Underbelly"

This worries me. I don't have an answer but we need to start opening people's eyes to what life has to offer. Hard though.

Make work schemes and crappie jobs won't help. Social connection, shared goals might.

Mainstream media is a big problem, clickbait hate and ignorance generation.

UBI should be at least partly inclusive of big random payouts to stir things up.

Encouragement for kids, plenty of places for parents and grandparents to socialise while children play. More children people have in their environment and social circles, more they have kids.

Support for community centres, men's sheds, introductions to neighbours, cheap venues well advertised. Or TMC

Post independence, FIRE etc, I'm off travelling.
To add to your points; the human body needs to move to remain healthy, the human mind needs to be stimulated to remain healthy, the human spirit needs a purpose to remain healthy.

UBI recipients would be like instant retirees. What do retired people do? They do what they’ve longed to do their whole lives; a passion, a hobby. Or they die within a relatively short period of time post retirement.

We could look at UBI as another form of survival of the fittest. 😉
 
To add to your points; the human body needs to move to remain healthy, the human mind needs to be stimulated to remain healthy, the human spirit needs a purpose to remain healthy.

UBI recipients would be like instant retirees. What do retired people do? They do what they’ve longed to do their whole lives; a passion, a hobby. Or they die within a relatively short period of time post retirement.

We could look at UBI as another form of survival of the fittest. 😉

Studies on UBI have shown that few people quit working. Those who do quit working are often one member of a couple who do so to take care of children. Just about all the studies showed that the level of positive attention children get when families get UBI increases, rates of family violence goes down, drug use goes down, for the poorer people diet improves and quality of life goes up. The working poor go from 3-4 jobs to maybe 1 or 2.

Middle class people spend the money on more "wants", boosting consumer spending or they use the extra safety net to do something they wanted to do like start a business. The rich throw it into their investments.

The Canadian plan is for around $2000 CAN a month, that's $1500 USD. For someone struggling to get enough to eat and pay the bills, an extra $1500 a month on top of what they earn working helps a lot. On NPR yesterday I heard a story of somebody they have been following for a few years. She is an American recipient of SNAP benefits. She was only getting around $30 a month before the pandemic and her health was poor. During the pandemic SNAP benefits were temporarily boosted and with a better diet her health improved significantly. Now that the temporary boost has run out she's back to $30 a month and her health has deteriorated again.

Anybody who retires because of UBI is either pretty close to being able to retire anyway and has a fair bit of wealth put away, or they are a complete idiot who is going to quickly realize they made a mistake and go back to work.

This whole idea that giving people money makes them lazy has been proven in practice to be untrue. People who are born with more money than they can spend in a lifetime do often end up lazy, but that's an extreme case. Giving people a little extra, but not enough to live on comfortably has been shown to be the boost needed to pull the poor out of poverty and enhance most lives.

People being people, there will always be a few edge cases that can be found by those making an argument that the whole system doesn't work. Back in the 90s the US was considering stripping away a lot of welfare benefits and ended up doing so. During that there was a lot of talk of the "welfare queens" who were just having children so they could get more benefits and news organizations who wanted to promote that argument found a few. Subsequent studies that looked at the entire forest rather than a few rotten trees have proven that those welfare queens were very few and far between. The vast majority of those who were on welfare were people who had fallen on hard times (job loss, divorce, health crisis, etc.) and were struggling to get back on their feet. And that's true today.

I posted a link above to the book Utopia for Realists. I started reading the book as a major skeptic of UBI, but the author makes a very solid case that it does work and it would be a major boost to the economy.

Too many people think of the economy as a zero sum game. ie if you get more, I get less. But it doesn't work that way. Economies are not zero sum. There are cases where giving to one might mean another gets less, but it doesn't have to be that way. Pumping money into the bottom tiers of the economy stimulates economic activity right up the chain because poor people have needs that were suddenly met with the influx of money and they spent it into the economy. As that money moves around, it stimulates more income, which the government taxes every time it changes hands (except some illegal activity), and everyone makes more money. The rising tide raises all boats.

The only people who end up unhappy in this scenario are those who enjoyed lording their wealth over those poorer than they are and personally, I'm perfectly fine to see those people unhappy with the changing situation. They need to be taken down a peg anyway.
 
You’ve got some interesting view points, but you’re missing some information that I know I have and is available to all. That leads me to believe you’re likely missing other information.

The above references your point about the trucking incident in Canada. FYI, that whole fiasco was organized by not-Canadian-truckers, but rather foreign entities (mostly American). Those not-Canadian truckers shut down Canadian cities (primarily one, but definitely disrupted others). Canadian citizens, including Canadian truckers couldn’t leave their homes and go to work. Kids couldn’t go to school. Elderly couldn’t get groceries. Canadian citizens watched from their locked homes while a portable city was built in their neighborhood with 24/7 ongoing concerts, outdoor spas, lavish banquets etc…

Absolutely, the Canadian government blocked those mostly not-Canadians from being funded. In the process some Canadians who’d also thrown money that way, many unknowingly, temporarily had their funds blocked. Don’t donate to organizations with nefarious intentions to disrupt a country and its citizens. Duh.

The law-abiding citizens locked in their homes, unable to get to work, to stores, to schools, demanded their government and their police put an end to the ridiculous event. An event that wasn’t wanted, nor started by Canadian truckers.

The Canadian government actually showed how you stop a foreign invasion without casualties. First they cut of their funding. Then they hired special police - yeah, you might want to study up a bit on how they used those police to move the rebels without people dying. Included with the police were towing specialists in unmarked vehicles to move the trucks blocking citizens. Why unmarked vehicles? Because the disrupters had threatened harm to any towing business and family members if they tried to tow the trucks.

Neither here nor there, your stance on the argument against UBI being able to work is interesting in the same way the other side is interesting.

Personally, I don’t believe UBI can work and it has nothing to do with fiat, inflation, governments etc…. It simply has to do with people. People suck. People are why we can’t have nice things. People are why there are wars, corruption, a planet being stripped of its resources, pandemics, disgusting individuals being elected to office, genocide, social media worshipping fake, filtered individuals, fake news, propaganda, useless opinions - the list is endless in the ways people suck.

The best thing you said in all your posts was a point of how people don’t take personal responsibility.

If the robots don’t kill us, and they should-it’s logical, then we’ll eventually kill ourselves.
Thank you for the reply. And you are correct that I do not know all aspects of the entire incident.
But media is going to release what they get the most attention from anyway.
So you probably are correct about much of that.

My question would be:
If it was non-Canadian residents doing to protesting, how would the Canadian government have access to their bank accounts to freeze them?

I'm not taking sides on what the protest was even about. Not my fight. I was simply using it as an example of a state government showing the whole world that the money you keep in any bank, is not your money. It's simply an IOU that they can refuse to honor at any time.
And a CBDC that they absolutely with use to implement UBI, will be even easier to restrict. They will own you.
 
Thank you for the reply. And you are correct that I do not know all aspects of the entire incident.
But media is going to release what they get the most attention from anyway.
So you probably are correct about much of that.

My question would be:
If it was non-Canadian residents doing to protesting, how would the Canadian government have access to their bank accounts to freeze them?

I'm not taking sides on what the protest was even about. Not my fight. I was simply using it as an example of a state government showing the whole world that the money you keep in any bank, is not your money. It's simply an IOU that they can refuse to honor at any time.
And a CBDC that they absolutely with use to implement UBI, will be even easier to restrict. They will own you.
The same way the American government can cease a person’s assets abroad, that’s how the Canadian government did it.

You’re preaching to the wrong choir. I’m not happy with any government, anywhere on the planet. I’m not happy with any bank or banking system anywhere in the world. I don’t trust people to do what’s morally, ethically, logically or reasonably right in general, and certainly not when money, politics, power, rules, regulations or legislation is involved.

It’s too easy to point fingers at ‘entities’, a government, a bank, as if they somehow just came into being of their own accord. Every government, every agency, every banking institute was started and is maintained by PEOPLE. And thusly is not immune to the same foibles, temptations as the guy down the street. Indeed, I would argue that those people are more likely to give in to temptation, to exert their will, and become corrupted then the guy down the street just trying to make ends meet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlS
The same way the American government can cease a person’s assets abroad, that’s how the Canadian government did it.

You’re preaching to the wrong choir. I’m not happy with any government, anywhere on the planet. I’m not happy with any bank or banking system anywhere in the world. I don’t trust people to do what’s morally, ethically, logically or reasonably right in general, and certainly not when money, politics, power, rules, regulations or legislation is involved.

It’s too easy to point fingers at ‘entities’, a government, a bank, as if they somehow just came into being of their own accord. Every government, every agency, every banking institute was started and is maintained by PEOPLE. And thusly is not immune to the same foibles, temptations as the guy down the street. Indeed, I would argue that those people are more likely to give in to temptation, to exert their will, and become corrupted then the guy down the street just trying to make ends meet.
Completely agree Krugerrand!

That's why Bitcoin has come along in the first place! To take back the power from those people, and give it back to us!
Bitcoin cannot be involuntarily ceased by govs, cannot be manipulated or counterfeited by the Fed or central banks, and cannot be shut down because it has no corporate authority to arrest or centralized system to turn off.
Bitcoin is freedom money!

UBI is the exact opposite. (I can tell you know this Kugerrand, it's for the others reading this thread)
You're giving all the power over your finances to a government, who time and time again has shown they are not capable of handling it properly, responsibly, or ethically.
It's like if you were playing a game of Monopoly, and one player was taking $500 from the bank every time they passed GO, but no one else did. Then even after the other players saw the cheater doing this, they just continued playing the game!
Bitcoin is your way to exit this rigged game.


Look at this directly from the Bank of England:

"What is inflation?​

Inflation is a measure of how much the prices of goods (such as food or televisions) and services (such as haircuts or train tickets) have gone up over time."

This is a flat out lie. Inflation is not a measure of anything.
Inflation is caused by the increase of money in circulation. That's it. The more money that is "created", the more inflation increases.
It's not about the prices going up, it about the value of your money going down, because every time the gov creates Billions of new money out of thin air, the amount you have becomes worth less.

The cost of goods and services is irrelevant. In a non-inflationary economy, if the price goes up on goods or services you use, you'll just find it elsewhere for less, the market will balance itself, because your money is still worth the same.
In a deflationary economy, your money actually goes UP in value, allowing you to get more goods and services with the same amount of money.


They're counterfeiting money, and they aren't even hiding it anymore:

"We can use our bank reserves to buy bonds​

The money we used to buy bonds when we were doing QE did not come from government taxation or borrowing. Instead, like other central banks, we can create money digitally in the form of ‘central bank reserves’."


This is blatant counterfeiting, and debasing the currency for everyone else. This is the source of inflation.
But because they're the government, no one questions it.
What can we do about it? Exit their system. Bitcoin fixed this.
 
Completely agree Krugerrand!

That's why Bitcoin has come along in the first place! To take back the power from those people, and give it back to us!
Bitcoin cannot be involuntarily ceased by govs, cannot be manipulated or counterfeited by the Fed or central banks, and cannot be shut down because it has no corporate authority to arrest or centralized system to turn off.
Bitcoin is freedom money!

UBI is the exact opposite. (I can tell you know this Kugerrand, it's for the others reading this thread)
You're giving all the power over your finances to a government, who time and time again has shown they are not capable of handling it properly, responsibly, or ethically.
It's like if you were playing a game of Monopoly, and one player was taking $500 from the bank every time they passed GO, but no one else did. Then even after the other players saw the cheater doing this, they just continued playing the game!
Bitcoin is your way to exit this rigged game.


Look at this directly from the Bank of England:

"What is inflation?​

Inflation is a measure of how much the prices of goods (such as food or televisions) and services (such as haircuts or train tickets) have gone up over time."

This is a flat out lie. Inflation is not a measure of anything.
Inflation is caused by the increase of money in circulation. That's it. The more money that is "created", the more inflation increases.
It's not about the prices going up, it about the value of your money going down, because every time the gov creates Billions of new money out of thin air, the amount you have becomes worth less.

The cost of goods and services is irrelevant. In a non-inflationary economy, if the price goes up on goods or services you use, you'll just find it elsewhere for less, the market will balance itself, because your money is still worth the same.
In a deflationary economy, your money actually goes UP in value, allowing you to get more goods and services with the same amount of money.


They're counterfeiting money, and they aren't even hiding it anymore:

"We can use our bank reserves to buy bonds​

The money we used to buy bonds when we were doing QE did not come from government taxation or borrowing. Instead, like other central banks, we can create money digitally in the form of ‘central bank reserves’."


This is blatant counterfeiting, and debasing the currency for everyone else. This is the source of inflation.
But because they're the government, no one questions it.
What can we do about it? Exit their system. Bitcoin fixed this.
I am sympathetic but I'm not sure where you are going with all this. Are you expecting the USA to vote for a party that will not hand out free money and just let the robots take everyone's jobs and place them all in poverty and just say you should have bought BTC?
 
I am sympathetic but I'm not sure where you are going with all this. Are you expecting the USA to vote for a party that will not hand out free money and just let the robots take everyone's jobs and place them all in poverty and just say you should have bought BTC?
Oh, if Americans love anything it's a free handout. And then complain about immigration but won't actually get off their asses and work.
And the two joke political parties will say whatever they think the voters want to hear just to stay/get in office. Even though the Dems would be fundamentally the side to want UBI, if it was working to sway voters, the GOP would jump on board real quick. I don't trust either side. And ever since the 60's, they've done nothing but polarize every issue, driving a stake between the people. You can't be moderate about anything anymore. Which is by design, because as long as we're fighting ourselves, we're not paying attention to all the BS they're doing behind the scenes.

I think the recent election of Milei in Argentina is very interesting. Whether you like him or not isn't my point. My thought about it is this. The people of Argentina were finally so fed up with the corruption in their government that they voted for a 3rd party candidate because he brought a fresh approach, that people on both sides wanted to hear.
In the US, we have an election coming next year, and both parties are back at it, more of the same, exhaustingly stale arguments and messages. I'm not saying the same could happen in the US (yet), but don't be surprised if an independent candidate, like RFK Jr, steals a lot of votes from both sides. Not saying he'll win. Real change happens one funeral at a time. I'm just saying it'll be one of the first signs of how many people in the US are getting fed up with their government, just like the people of Argentina.


As for the robots, they've been replacing humans for a century. Just because these new ones will be more capable of more tasks doesn't change what's already been happening. AI is creating just as many jobs as it replaces. The same thing happened with every other innovation in history. Humans will adapt like they always have. We're not going to wake up in a year and all of the sudden robots are everywhere. It happens over time, enough time for people to adapt.
The real problem is that the school systems and curriculums haven't been properly updated since the Industrial Age. They're still designed to spit out dumb employees. So few can actually think for themselves, problem solve, or even use common sense anymore. We've been devolving intellectually for decades. That's part of the reason we need robots in the first place! Employers can't even find competent workers anymore.
So, yes, from that perspective, those kind of people will be hurting for jobs. But I'm a fan of Darwin, and I consider what happens to them the natural order of things. Nature doesn't have feelings. The smarter, stronger, more adaptable, will survive. The rest are just taking up space, wasting our resources. Sorry, not sorry.

If UBI were such a great idea, why hasn't it been successfully done anywhere else?
So many attempts, but none make it past the pilot phase. And those are just small groups. The real death sentence to these plans is when it's attempted at scale. No country can afford true UBI for everyone.
Norway, a welfare state. Kenya and other African nations, where most live in poverty. And now Whales. Good luck to you.

It's not a new idea. It's a rebranded Communism/Marxism hybrid. It only benefits those in power, because it hands them all the control.
But Democracies know it's not sustainable at scale long-term. Even dictators recognize it might be initially popular, but they'd quickly see it can't work, and their people would revolt.

Educate yourselves people! Focus your time on making yourself more adaptable, more valuable. Because that's who survives in the end.