The main problem with the Andrew Yang and Universal Basic Income

The main problem with Presidential Candidate Andrew Yang's UBI proposal, is the same problem that plagues most liberal proposals.

BIG GOVERNMENT!

Now, I agree with Yang that UBI will be needed as companies rely more and more on automation. Why should the tax payers have to pay for UBI when it's private companies that are increasing automation?

This is a HUGE PROBLEM with Yang's UBI proposal.

It will costs taxpayers 3 trillion per year or 30 trillion over a decade. That's just nuts!

Here's my proposal:

It's simple. Private companies contribute to UBI based on their level of automation. So if your company is at 10% automation you contribute x amount of dollars. If your company is at 40% automation then you contribute more money to UBI.

Again, why do we have to saddle the taxpayers with a 30 trillion dollar bill over 10 years when it's private companies that will be increasing automation?

We work it out so the percentages companies contribute will still allow them to make more profits through automation. Companies will be okay with this because without UBI, who will buy the goods they make?

Also, Yang wants a thousand dollars a month to go to every American, even rich ones. This would be a mistake. My plan would give UBI to low income families and those workers most affected by the increase in automation.

Finally, my plan wouldn't allow the Government to touch the money contributed to UBI. The money would go to a 3rd party escrow system that sends checks directly to those getting UBI. Governments role will be limited to oversight.

Again, I don't understand this rush to Big Government for everything especially in this day and age of technology.

a reply to: neoholographic

I hate to break it to you but we already have big government, a ubi won't change that at all.

The ubi will just be like welfare payments, a weekly cash injection into the economy which is needed.

a reply to: neoholographic

1st, put everyone on the government tit, then introduce the robot apocalypse.

No thanks.

Doesn't automation require human workers to ensure the automated machines work properly?

originally posted by: carewemust
Doesn't automation require human workers to ensure the automated machines work properly?

Yeah, but that will be minimal compared to a factory filled with workers.

This will also reach into C.E.O. jobs eventually. It will be cheaper to have an A.I. C.E.O. that can be in several meetings at the same time and interact with every employee. It can work around the clock and doesn't need 10 million dollars a year and a vacation.

Eventually, we will have to be a Star Trek society where everything is free but by that time, 3D printing should be so advanced where if you're hungry you can just print a Porterhouse steak.

So basic necessities like food and healthcare should be free to all because of science and technology but of course there will always be ways that people make profits.

Yang needs to put his Yin/Yang back into balance.

a reply to: neoholographic

This sounds like a better plan.

UBI would start out as cash monthly and then a group of billionaires would decide to turn that into vouchers that can only be used at certain places and certain goods. Then people who are seen as uncomplient would have their payments stopped all together.

"Mass Automation" will not start becoming a big issue until the 2030s.

A major war or three may push that timeframe further back to the 2040s...

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: neoholographic

This sounds like a better plan.

Thanks.

Again, why saddle the tax payer with 30 trillion over a decade when it's private companies that will increase automation?

a reply to: carewemust

Ummm...automated automation?

When will machines start expecting a living wage?

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

If you take 1k from me to give to my neighbor how is that a cash injection?

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: carewemust
Doesn't automation require human workers to ensure the automated machines work properly?

Yeah, but that will be minimal compared to a factory filled with workers.

This will also reach into C.E.O. jobs eventually. It will be cheaper to have an A.I. C.E.O. that can be in several meetings at the same time and interact with every employee. It can work around the clock and doesn't need 10 million dollars a year and a vacation.

Eventually, we will have to be a Star Trek society where everything is free but by that time, 3D printing should be so advanced where if you're hungry you can just print a Porterhouse steak.

So basic necessities like food and healthcare should be free to all because of science and technology but of course there will always be ways that people make profits.

I think as with every major leap, the growing / birth pains come first. It won't be until we're nearly undone by the unintended consequences of our advancements that we effect necessary change.

When we have advanced to the point that most everything is done by automation and AI, I believe we will revert in many ways. We can go back to small farming, hunting and gathering - not because we have to, but because we can. The food needs of the world can be fulfilled thru quantum assembly or 3D printing or AI-controlled mass-yield MegaCrops, but if you want fresh picked berries for a pie, or a wild turkey for Thanksgiving, you'll have the time to dedicate to doing so.

Stewardship of Earth, exploration and research, of Earth and space. People will be freed from their silly, yet (currently) necessary tasks to take on more noble endeavours, whether they be massive undertakings of humanity or their own personal quests.

If no one is working, then who are these mythical taxpayers?

Don't tell me big business because if no one is working, then no one is buying what their robots are making.

How do you tax $30 trillion out of an economy that isn't working because all it does is produce since no one can afford to consume? The robots aren't consuming.

originally posted by: neoholographic
It's simple. Private companies contribute to UBI based on their level of automation. So if your company is at 10% automation you contribute x amount of dollars. If your company is at 40% automation then you contribute more money to UBI.

Six of one, half dozen of another. The end user is still paying.

a reply to: ketsuko

So many forget the lessons from the depression era. Welfare Handouts depress the country, working hand ups build it up. The balanced solution for extreme jobless in an automated society would be putting them to work. Beneficial pay for service to our country and people.

Basically, we would be better off at renewing FDRs CCC and CWA work programs. Then all Americans can enjoy the benefits of assisting. The economy will thrive. UBI is a dead end for the economy if it is simply taking from one to give to another. Nothing of value is being produced ...no growth. Work or project programs actually produce, and are a worthy investment for all.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

you get it too.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I don't think they have any intention of balancing their books of expenditures with taxes. This UBI distribution will be simply Os & 1s that they will create out of thin air, diluting our entire system. Those that own the assets will maintain purchasing power through their assets being more pricey as there is more funny money chasing the same limited amount of commodities. Maybe that effect could be labeled inflation. Same as it has always been. Cycle after Cycle.

I say lets get the party started and just send everyone 1 million dollars every years. Then we can reach the end goal much faster compared to the slow death of UBI.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

Robot Apocalypse comes no matter what, homie dawg.

Why not get comfortable before you get your head blasted in half by a C-130 full of automated robot lasers?

a reply to: carewemust

Only until you can automate, automation repair.