With the upcoming AI job apocalypse, many technology people are further discussing how society will look if the overwhelming majority of economic productivity is generated autonomously. How will people live if there are no jobs?
It is something that has fostered a number of proposals. At the top of the list if Universal Basic Income (UBI).
Actually, this discussion is part of a broader discussion that rarely gets brought up. Most individual focus upon income. This is not what the wealthy do.
Take a look at the Forbes 400 list. Is that composed of the highest income earners? The answer is no. Instead, it is the wealthiest people. The metric is net worth.
Since we are talking about a new economic model that could be designed for the future, why are we still focusing upon income?
It seems habits are hard to change.
UBI versus UBW
Do we want to replicate the same slavery type system?
Few can argue that working for a paycheck, the proverbial time for money, is not a form of wage slavery. We see it throughout the developed world. People are paid just enough to keep returning each day.
The opportunities to get ahead, for the majority, are limited. Ownership in the economy is not there. When one is a wage earner, the only asset is labor. This is effectively sold, commonly in hourly increments, in return for money.
As the wealth builds, whether it is for the company, industry, or country, these individuals benefit none. Their have no assets for the most part. Instead, they are often drowning in debt.
Automation is providing the opportunity to create something different. Sadly, many of the ideas being put forth mirror what we already have.
Universal Basic Income is still a wage based concept. Even if it isn't "earned", we see how people are still enslaved. How will people pay their bills? The answer is only if the establishment sees fit to pay them.
With the recent shutdown of the US government, imagine if the majority of the country was dependent upon the money to survive. Taken one step further, what happens to those who do not agree politically with the party in power?
Universal Basic Wealth
The entire discussion comes down to a simple premise: who owns the means of production?
It is a debate that took place for more than a century. Communism is really nothing more than a breakdown of the economy. Under this system, private ownership is foregone for the public sector. In other words, the government owns the means of production and "distributes" it to best serve society.
Of course, when you look at a communist system, it tends to be two-tiered. The equality comes in by making the majority poor. Those at the top do very well, friends of the "party".
Capitalism has morphed into corporate ownership. Ironically, this could be viewed as another form of communism. Here the government is not the owner but entities so large the government is basically controlled by them. Tactics such as regulatory capture are commonplace. Friends of whomever is once again part of the game. Politicians are for sale, often retiring with tens of millions of dollars.
Under a new system, the same issue will need settling. Who is going to own the means of production?
UBI doesn't solve this. It is nothing more than a repeat of what we see. Some entities, in the case probably Big Tech, owns the automation. From there, people will scream for money (income) so, if dire enough, politicians will claim to be helping by extracting (taxing) the production. They will then redistribute the wealth in a manner deemed "fair". Naturally, this will likely be subject to interpretation by the ones in power.
The solution is not income but, rather, wealth. People need to own the means of production for a variety of reasons. To achieve this, a system whereby people can have a piece of the economic output which is not dependent upon the grace of others is essential.
How do we construct such a system? That is difficult. To me, tokenization is a part of the solution. Here is where people can own a part of the ecosystem, with tokens in a wallet they control.
The challenge is to get something like this to merge what what is already produced. Wall Street is not giving up its power. In fact, it is only gaining with each passing year. Crypto, once the mecca for freedom fighters is rapidly being hijacked by major financial firms.
UBI is, at best, a starting point. The trust answer lies in some form of wealth distribution. How that is achieved is where the discussion should focus. To me, it is where things need to head in the long run.
Posted Using INLEO
The next 5 years are going to be nuts. And yes, I completely agree that it's going to be more about net worth than income. I've been going heavy into metals, solar, batteries, tools, and miners, lol, well, stocks in the family fund too... But my personal is all into the others right now. Those things I mention are going to help drive wealth. Buying silver and/or gold every week, and investing in my own personal blockchain infrastructure, primarily Monero these days. The 'income' I make goes to build the wealth for the future. I don't think people are ready for what's to come.
Totally agree. The future's not about what you do, or know; it's about what you have.
They don't have to burn books when nobody reads them.™
https://archive.org/details/ironhee00lond/mode/2up
https://archive.org/details/lookingbackward01bellgoog
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-there-is-no-communism-in-russia
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/franz-mehring-the-bakunin-marx-split-in-the-1st-international
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-the-conquest-of-bread
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/alexander-berkman-what-is-communist-anarchism
https://archive.org/details/THESURVIVOR1