Andrew Yang 2020 candidate on Joe Rogan

So this is a reallllllly interesting podcast that struck a nerve with me. As someone who is actively options trading (low levels), getting an education in technology, working in carpentry and studying the market... this guy fricken nailed some key points.



He is big on the future of automation and truck driving. Many of you are very familiar with this argument.

If you post a talking point with no data, I will not respond to you. If you post partisan nonsense, you will not get a response. If you take the time to post a response backed by data I WILL respond to you.

a reply to: toysforadults


Care to give those of us that don't have two hours to listen to the whole thing some bullet points or an outline of the relevant parts?

Andrew Yang's answer to automation is the effective obliteration of governing by consent. The UBI, which is what he's after, will ensure that people remain a ward of the state for eternity. It will be done at the expense of industries that it will be designed to destroy, it will be devastatingly inflationary, and in very short order, controlled by a central global government structure.

Anyone can make free money from the government sound good. But Mr. "I do math so I'm smarter than everyone else" isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

Want data?

Here it is:

The Machine Economy: An Essay on The Communication of Value in an Automated Economy

This should also let you know that there is an alternative to automation induced communism.

I, for one, don't feel like dragging a century-old class warfare doctrine with us another century.

a reply to: projectvxn

your point of view is that the jobs that are replaced will also be replaced by automation technicians

show me automation technicians that are going to replace the truck driving industry by 10 million people in 5 to 10 years

a reply to: toysforadults

your point of view is that the jobs that are replaced will also be replaced by automation technicians

No. Take the time to review what I posted to you.

show me automation technicians that are going to replace the truck driving industry by 10 million people in 5 to 10 years

Technology changes pretty drastically every so often. This is another one of those times.

a reply to: projectvxn

I'm not sure where your post actually differs from what was proposed on the podcast I post above, care to elaborate?

a reply to: toysforadults

I don't propose to make American citizens wholly dependent on a UBI.

What I propose is to build the means of automated communication of value into existing technology and create a default ownership society via the IoT.

a reply to: projectvxn

ok well that's basically what he said but he didn't predicate his theory or solution on the blockchain that's the only difference in philosophy

it's obvious that the traditional model of supply and demand will need tinkering on some level that you, I and many others have proposed

a reply to: toysforadults

If you post a talking point with no data, I will not respond to you. If you post partisan nonsense, you will not get a response. If you take the time to post a response backed by data I WILL respond to you.

Quoted for irony, considering your posting history.

a reply to: Lumenari

funny because most of my threads are data/ source heavy, obviously you have nothing to add that's not insulting or partisan in some way (big surprise)

let me know when you ACTUALLY have something to say that's not verifiably wrong

originally posted by: toysforadults
a reply to: Lumenari

funny because most of my threads are data/ source heavy, obviously you have nothing to add that's not insulting or partisan in some way (big surprise)

let me know when you ACTUALLY have something to say that's not verifiably wrong

I guess you can't seem to remember any of your posts ever on political threads... you know... most of your posts.

I'm going to bed now, because I am going to play by your rules on your thread which states...

If you post a talking point with no data, I will not respond to you. If you post partisan nonsense, you will not get a response. If you take the time to post a response backed by data I WILL respond to you.

You're wrong.

Good night.

a reply to: Lumenari

oh look another thread where you said nothing, added very little to the topic and are again, verifiably wrong

you do it in almost every thread, I'm surprised your last post wasn't insulting. you could have at least post something that wasn't an insult that had some kind of data or was an assertion worth listening to but that's not within your scope is it?

a reply to: toysforadults

ok well that's basically what he said but he didn't predicate his theory or solution on the blockchain that's the only difference in philosophy

Neither did I. The blockchain is a nascent technology. But it does something no other technology before it has done; it created immutable property from digital information and made that property transactable on the open internet from peer to peer. And since it is an encrypted ledger, it is easily useful for economic activity, like being a means of exchange.

Digital real estate is a new frontier just now starting to take off. Whole digital economies are being created. I propose we build the infrastructure for it into our smart technologies today. Andrew Yang is a proponent to the UBI. He's really good at talking about the realities of automation, but he has the wrong approach. The UBI is a scheme created by elitists to placate HUGE numbers of displaced workers while they, the Elite, reap the benefits of their new tireless workforce.

Automation is going to require that we legislatively level the playing field. But what do we want to do? Be a part of the economy in a new way that directly benefits us for our daily contributions? Or do we want to be paid off to be left behind while the Elite look down on us from Elysium?

a reply to: projectvxn

One of his solutions (which I think you briefly mention in your thread) is to tax automation driven enterprise and create a proportional share ratio or credit system so that American's sort of have a share of the automated workforce that they in turn benefit from both financially and as a consumer.

Such, if I'm purchasing a product create by a machine I also benefit financially from it as well. I can see how integrating a crypto into this exchange could both track/ facilitate this process with minimal administrative cost to government.

Am I following you here?

Add:

So if most of our economy is automated we don't want only the owners of this majority machine workforce to be owned by government or business but shared as a national resource. This is very communist idealistically but incorporates an element of free the free market. It's better than officially nationalizing it and putting into the hands of government. If let's say it's a publicly traded company, the population owns a % of the share as a sort of dividend.

a reply to: toysforadults

One of his solutions (which I think you briefly mention in your thread) is to tax automation driven enterprise and create a proportional share ratio or credit system so that American's sort of have a share of the automated workforce that they in turn benefit from both financially and as a consumer.

I don't see profit sharing with people who had no direct contact with production being a popular idea. EDIT: Especially with decentralized manufacturing on the rise.


However, if you build an IoT system of exchange into every device you can then do some interesting things.

Every phone could charge relay fees, storage fees, and clock time fees around the clock and make money by decentralizing its functions. Any idle computer system found in a car, phone, PC, smart fridge, smart thermostat, solar power system, can devote computing time. And when it comes to the sale of excess power generated by a decentralize modern solar grid, the second-by-second buying and selling of power and distribution where needed would also be possible and accountable to individuals who own the power generation methods.

All of this could be tracked and securely accounted for via encrypted blockchains or blockchain-like technologies. But this requires a drastic infrastructure change and a lot of government spending. Before that can happen we need to fix our current situation and adopt a secure FedCoin type means of national exchange. We would need to enact identity laws that would codify the right of ownership of identity. That no sale shall take place of personal information but for the consent AND fair compensation thereof to the natural rightful owner or direct legal representative of the individual identity in question.

YOU should both OWN your own data AND be able to make money from it. Not some other entity. There would be a lot of work to do, but this economy would ensure participation, not a payoff.

edit:
For this to work we would have to start laying that groundwork RIGHT NOW. Start implementing these types of laws and begin the implementation of the framework by which we can remain free people in a Machine Economy. This is important. I don't want the relationship between me and government to grow ever inseparable as machine take over nearly everything in our lives.

originally posted by: projectvxn
Andrew Yang's answer to automation is the effective obliteration of governing by consent. The UBI, which is what he's after, will ensure that people remain a ward of the state for eternity. It will be done at the expense of industries that it will be designed to destroy, it will be devastatingly inflationary, and in very short order, controlled by a central global government structure.

Anyone can make free money from the government sound good. But Mr. "I do math so I'm smarter than everyone else" isn't nearly as smart as he thinks he is.

Want data?

Here it is:

The Machine Economy: An Essay on The Communication of Value in an Automated Economy

This should also let you know that there is an alternative to automation induced communism.

I, for one, don't feel like dragging a century-old class warfare doctrine with us another century.

For every 5, 10, 50 jobs the entrepreneurs of productivity create, the productivity gains eliminate 50,000, 100,000, or 500,000 jobs go away.

We have HUGE gains in productivity. It should be taxed and redistribute these productivity gains as UBI. This way, society has the money to keep the economy going with the side effect of creating culture. Culture is something everyone enjoys including the top 1%.

Why would anyone spend 100 million dollars on the next great Star Wars movie if the audience doesn't exist to buy the product.

Consider this video. It has an excellent argument in support of UBI:



As the video states, unemployment is really a euphemism for leisure. If we have so much productivity in the economy from automation, why should we look at leisure time in a negative way. We should think of UBI as fuel for the economy to remain stable.

Otherwise, as Marx claimed, laissez faire capitialism always ends in communism. This is because unfettered greed will result in the government's currency collapsing to NOTHING in value. Once the currency is worthless because it's concentrated in too few hands, then the people in the breadlines will demand MORE government not less.

In my opinion, without UBI, the economy will collapse because the currency will become worthless.

The 4th Industrial Revolution is coming!

a reply to: toysforadults

The commentary on the remote piloting of the trucks is very interesting.

a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm very familiar with how it works.

Read the sources that I used in that essay. This isn't new to me.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm very familiar with how it works.

Read the sources that I used in that essay. This isn't new to me.

My problem with your way of thinking is it will most likely result in the return of communism for reasons I stated in my post.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: dfnj2015

I'm very familiar with how it works.

Read the sources that I used in that essay. This isn't new to me.

My problem with your way of thinking is it will most likely result in the return of communism for reasons I stated in my post.

I propose an ownership society that respects private property.

You have no idea what you're talking about.