When will we have a Basic Minimum Income?

[cpa]

I wouldn't count on all accountants going away anytime soon. Sure, if all you have is a W-2 you can easily file your own taxes with a photo from your phone, but if you're taxes involve rentals, business income, investments, etc. it gets harder.

That being said, I still do my own taxes, but it's not a click-and-file approach.



And HR Block, etc. don't hire accountants, not that I know of, to fill in the tax work. Isn't it usually some high school kid, who punches in the numbers for you? And if you have issues, then you can talk to an accountant?

Watson may be brilliant, but Watson will need to be reprogrammed every year after Congress changes the laws, court cases are decided, and the IRS issues new or revised regulations. I have no doubt that (what we call) a W-2 return will be a snap for Watson. But there are so many tortuous turns in the Code, so many elections for taxpayers to make, traps to avoid that it will be a lot of years before Watson can be able to deal with the human element of preparing income taxes. Here is a short list: Taxpayer-made elections, including safe harbor elections, Section 83, 481(a) and NOL carryforward or carryback; IRD and section 691(c) deduction; nominee distributions of income from commonly owned assets; allocations of expenses between different forms or schedules; reporting supplemental information from K-1s received from partnerships, S Corporations and fiduciaries; the list goes on. Will Watson know that when the taxpayer refinanced his home mortgage to take out $80,000 to buy a Tesla that some of that interest is not deductible for AMT? Forever, until the loan is paid in full?

As far as H&R Block is concerned, I have no personal knowledge. I have gleaned from anecdotes that their employees take a crash course in taxes before they tackle tax returns. Each office has a supervisory person who has access to someone with a better knowledge of the tax laws. I think that each geographical region has a CPA or seasoned EA who is a full time, year-round employee to deal with their more complicated returns. But their seasonal employees are not high school kids.

 

[McRat]

You replace your CPA with a robot. Everything is working sweet, then you hear that SpaceX is sending a spaceship to Mars.

You come to work, and find your bank account is cleaned out and the robot is gone.

Years later, while watching the Discovery Channel about the new Mars base, you see that ahole robot in a hammock drinking an umbrella drink and grinning at the camera.

 

[tomas]

The following is just my thoughts on this, Something For Nothing movement, and since I am but one and no can say what a person should settle for in income.

-Stay or move on & seek new income-

Right now, there is a movement of people that want to start a ‘Entitlement’ Income. These people are basing this on their assumption that we will have an over abundance of workers with no available jobs.

All due to robotics and Artificial Intelligence, Etc.

I do not for a minute, believe in something for nothing. If we adhere to their philosophy of ENTITLEMENT, we would still be paying wages to those who were displaced when we did away with the horse and buggy era.

There will always be a place on this earth for good, earnest labors.

When you vote for your income, you deserve the government you receive.

In my learnings, I have seen people who feel that their quality of life is enhanced by sitting on their asses waiting for someone else to do the heavy lifting for them. In their opinions, they are too valuable to waste their time on such menial work. Huh? Such menial work is beneath them.

They are destined & entitled to Greatness, or the next public demonstration , Ha, who is hand feeding them this crock?

Pay you to breath, – Pay to Play, I only wish.
I wish I had a nickel for the times when some of the unenlightened would tell me that I had it made and I didn't understand their plight.
They would follow that up with, "I wish I had your job". Of course, they implied - ONLY IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE TO WORK FOR IT!
The old adage of “Idle Hands are the devil’s workshop”, & weak minds does comes to mind here.

Remember those you knew in school who were the popular kids, Where are they now? I don’t remember every seeing a one of them amounting to much. Some did go on to starting public forums, charitable funds and such, WHICH, depended on using someone else’s dollars. Leeches.
Yet they are quick to advise YOU on how to donate You Money, & how You need to work longer and work more.
They need your contributions.

In all fairness, some did pull their heads out and did accomplish meaningful life’s, but if you check, it wasn’t accomplished because someone was sending them an unearned income.

LIFE is NOT a REALITY SHOW! It is for LIVING.

Too many people are nothing more than Peeping Tom slugs, sitting around wanting ME to support them and THEIR NOBLE Habits, & causes, right?. Bah!

Since this isn’t a clear cut case of how we should treat each and every situation,
I will only listen to you and your ideas, if you can show me the tangible fruits of your efforts & labors.
Well, now that makes ME feel better,,,,,,

"There have always been jobs" does not mean there always will be. I really wish somehow the survey could have been two levels deep: 1) Do you believe that automation will replace 50% or more of labor during this century? 2) If you do, then what do you think of BMI as a solution? That would weed out the people who don't even want to imagine or contemplate the possibility that the universe might change - and keep posting about welfare. Even @McRat made a joke about robots stealing the money. It could happen, couldn't it?

 

[trils0n]

For anyone who wants to look outside their filter bubble (and doesn't mind visiting an anarchist website) this essay touches on some of the subjects discussed here, and in one section tries to imagine how capitalism and government would cope with the potential large scale unemployability of humans brought about by AI/automation (bolding mine):

The corporate architects of the new economy, like Google, Apple, and Facebook, may be the only hope for capitalism to survive the ecological and financial crises it has created. Economic growth based on fossil fuels and manufacture, followed by financial bubbles, has had a three hundred year run and it might be meeting its geological limits. Of all the capitalists, only those of the IT sector are ideating game-changing transformations to this dynamic, and developing the technologies to make them feasible, from ethereal production to AI to extraterrestrial exploitation.

On the other hand, AI and robotics threaten the social contract by undermining the historic point of unity between the capitalist logic of accumulation and the statist logic of social control: control people and profit off of them by putting them to work. Any solution to that crisis would require bold interventions by the State approaching some kind of utopian yet corporate socialism (a prediction that was already made in 2009, that socialism would not result from the development of productive capacities, as Marx foretold, but rather repressive capacities, once the State had the techniques to surveille and control those who were no longer kept in line by the threat of hunger).

A corporate socialism could include universal wages, the colonization of outer space, and the expansion of the service economy beyond anything previously imagined. To save capitalism and to avert the disasters of its own making, the Silicon Valley vanguard doesn’t only need the president’s ear, they need all the resources, the regulatory assistance, and the planning capacities that the State has at its disposal. And right at this juncture, the new president rebuffs the IT powerhouses and begins imposing policies that directly harm them, supported by the pillars of the traditional economy who continue doing business like it’s the 20th century.

We happen to be at a point in history where a number of potentially significant shifts in society might happen to coincide. Divisions within capitalism, and between captialism and governments will be more apparent, particularly around the issues of extractive/fossil fuel economy vs green tech, AI/Automation vs full employment, globalized vs national capitalism, etc. Over the past 300 years capitalism has faced many crises like what AI represents, but with the help of government has always reproduced itself in some form or another. Whether BMI will be part of the next form that capitalism takes is an interesting question. It would seem to take the role of allowing capitalists continue to accumulate, and statists to continue to exert some form of social control, so it might be a likely outcome. A more radical/revolutionary approach would be abandoning capitalism and/or the hierarchical, top-down control of the state, in favor of a more horizontal, voluntary, non-coercive method of organizing society.

 

[BozieBeMe2]

There will always be a need for employment. The problem will be the necessary re-training period, if such said job is outside of your comfort zone. Some people do not transition easily. That is when sacrifices come into play. Each time my job was phased out, I given offers to retrain or move. I did job searches in the area I was strongest in, and I retrained, PLUS, I moved. Not with the same employer though!
I have managed to close three employers due to obsolescence, Ha!
When seeking further job training(s), I have always tried to make my job skills fit the needs of future employers. I learned this trick at Butler U.
I have trained my replacement many times and move onward and upward. Never settled for even an amount or less
So, the future IS readable if look where it is headed. My current job skills is in automation and robotics, yet I started in hydraulics, pneumatics & electrical systems. 49 Yrs ago.

 

[nwdiver]

There will always be a need for employment.

There's a huge difference between existent employment and sufficient employment.

Also... a BMI isn't intended as a subsistence wage. It's purpose is to ensure consumers have the purchasing power required to consume a decent percentage of our production capacity. As production capacity rises the BMI must also rise to keep pace. To ensure we don't wind up in an absurd scenario with great abundance and equally great poverty.

 

[mspohr]

For anyone who wants to look outside their filter bubble (and doesn't mind visiting an anarchist website) this essay touches on some of the subjects discussed here, and in one section tries to imagine how capitalism and government would cope with the potential large scale unemployability of humans brought about by AI/automation (bolding mine):



We happen to be at a point in history where a number of potentially significant shifts in society might happen to coincide. Divisions within capitalism, and between captialism and governments will be more apparent, particularly around the issues of extractive/fossil fuel economy vs green tech, AI/Automation vs full employment, globalized vs national capitalism, etc. Over the past 300 years capitalism has faced many crises like what AI represents, but with the help of government has always reproduced itself in some form or another. Whether BMI will be part of the next form that capitalism takes is an interesting question. It would seem to take the role of allowing capitalists continue to accumulate, and statists to continue to exert some form of social control, so it might be a likely outcome. A more radical/revolutionary approach would be abandoning capitalism and/or the hierarchical, top-down control of the state, in favor of a more horizontal, voluntary, non-coercive method of organizing society.

Thanks for that link. Fascinating article. Lots to think about there.

 

[kort677]

15 pages in

ok so now I'm totally hating all this BMI. Starting to sound like welfare,

the light bulb came on, finally>?

 

[ohmman]

A counterpoint to the concept of labor oversupply, from the Times today.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/no-robots-arent-killing-the-american-dream.html

(and before some of you get too excited, note that they suggest a pretty aggressive tax structure instead)

 

[kort677]

an old fable comes to mind
The Ant and the Grasshopper - Wikipedia

 

[BozieBeMe2]

kort677
ohmman
++10

 

[nwdiver]

Don't love it. Still wishing for a better answer.

LOL... when you find it let us know... and Elon. BMI isn't a 'good' thing... it's just WAY better than an absurd economy with virtually unlimited abundance and equally oppressing poverty because there's simply insufficient employment to provide the purchasing power necessary to consume a small fraction of what's available.

Lots of detractors. Aside from banning or heavily taxing automation I don't see a viable solution.

A counterpoint to the concept of labor oversupply, from the Times today.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/no-robots-arent-killing-the-american-dream.html

(and before some of you get too excited, note that they suggest a pretty aggressive tax structure instead)

'But labor productivity and capital investment have actually decelerated in the 2000s.'

Hmmm... Supply could also be outstripping demand. Providing consumers with more purchasing power could help with that... solutions anyone?

 

[tomas]

the light bulb came on, finally>?

Hold on, bubba. There was a bit of sarcasm in there that it looks like crap when it's about 20%, and has to be viewed differently when it is 50%, which you don't believe is imminent. But I do. However, true that I don't yet agree BMI is the ultimate answer, hoping there's something else out there that we haven't yet thought of.

 

[BozieBeMe2]

Our employees were told they need to give back to the system to help stay solvent. All told, they gave back 63 Mil and were willing to forgo all raise and bonus for 3 contracts. (3x4=12) The system was saved and the top CEO's used the 63 mil as bonuses for doing a Great job in stemming the red ink. When the workers complained about the give backs not being used as promised, they were told that Toyota, could build it for less, never mind that Toyota CEO's are not pay as much as their American counter parts. The reasons for that impending disaster that bankrupted two lessor firms was laid at the feet of 'Legacy costs' .

Top CEOs make more than 300 times the average worker
The True Price Of Auto Labor Costs

Not really a level playing field by any means
Quote:
"Even the roar from Congressional critics about assembly line largesse seemed to miss the fact that (according to the UAW) labor costs account for about 10 percent of the cost of producing a vehicle; the remaining 90 percent includes research and development, parts, advertising, marketing and management overhead."

 

[tomas]

There will always be a need for employment. The problem will be the necessary re-training period, if such said job is outside of your comfort zone. Some people do not transition easily. That is when sacrifices come into play. Each time my job was phased out, I given offers to retrain or move. I did job searches in the area I was strongest in, and I retrained, PLUS, I moved. Not with the same employer though!
I have managed to close three employers due to obsolescence, Ha!
When seeking further job training(s), I have always tried to make my job skills fit the needs of future employers. I learned this trick at Butler U.
I have trained my replacement many times and move onward and upward. Never settled for even an amount or less
So, the future IS readable if look where it is headed. My current job skills is in automation and robotics, yet I started in hydraulics, pneumatics & electrical systems. 49 Yrs ago.

You don't get it, do you. There will NOT always be jobs for everyone. You are unusual.

 

[BozieBeMe2]

Glass half full
Glass half empty

Guess which view has served me well and has PAID, me well??

As a foot note:
Thank God Elon doesn't see the wall as plain as some profess to

 

[ohmman]

Have you ever been at a dinner party having a conversation when you realize that everyone in the conversation is talking about completely different things?

 

[Max*]

Starting to sound like welfare,

That's because it sort of is.

The way the funding would work is that BMI would replace all of the entitlement programs (welfare, SSI, etc.) and all the bureaucracy tied to them, and give you one check to live off of.

The reason why everyone is not happy about the idea of BMI (besides political reasons), is that it would require a much higher tax rate on those working. Even getting rid of all the entitlement programs, and having just the BMI is not enough.

I don't care if 100 people are sitting on their behinds and not working, as long as I don't have to pay MORE taxes to support them with BMI. I don't care if they get a bunch of entitlements, and I don't (which is also a lie, the middle/upper-middle class has a lot of write offs). If I have to pay less taxes, I have nothing against them not working (like I said, I care for the economical reasons of BMI, not political).

So far no politician has shown it to be possible this way. It still might happen, though.

If you want more, better learn an in demand skill, be prepared to move to the jobs, face the competition, and sacrifice lifestyle.

Exactly correct.

So we have the haves and have lesses vs haves and have nots.

That will be in any real economic model (not a utopia where communism can survive. IRL -- The corrupt government are the haves, and the population are the have nots).

If you want everyone to be the "haves" there will always be someone who wants to be the "haves+" or the "haves++". There will never (nor should there be) an equal structure for people who do nothing and for people who work their asses off.

 

[Max*]

There will always be a need for employment. The problem will be the necessary re-training period, if such said job is outside of your comfort zone. Some people do not transition easily. That is when sacrifices come into play. Each time my job was phased out, I given offers to retrain or move. I did job searches in the area I was strongest in, and I retrained, PLUS, I moved. Not with the same employer though!
I have managed to close three employers due to obsolescence, Ha!
When seeking further job training(s), I have always tried to make my job skills fit the needs of future employers. I learned this trick at Butler U.
I have trained my replacement many times and move onward and upward. Never settled for even an amount or less
So, the future IS readable if look where it is headed. My current job skills is in automation and robotics, yet I started in hydraulics, pneumatics & electrical systems. 49 Yrs ago.

Let me guess, you have an education? Possibly a higher education?

What about the people with GEDs and high school degrees who work on the factory floors? What do you want them to retain into? Rocket scientists? Let's get real.

The whole point of the BMI [from the socialist point of view] is to help the people who are not capable of retraining. It's not to help people like you and me.

 

[Max*]

Have you ever been at a dinner party having a conversation when you realize that everyone in the conversation is talking about completely different things?

Ah, you must have visited my family!