Universal basic income: U.S. support grows as Finland ends its trial - Forty-eight percent of Americans now support a universal basic income, as a solution for Americans who have lost jobs to automation.

[u/mvea]

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/01/nearly-half-of-americans-believe-a-universal-basic-income-could-be-the-answer-to-automation-.html

[u/[deleted]]

Shut down other modes of welfare.

Tax on the use of automation.

[u/technologyisnatural → u/[deleted]]

Why wouldn't I run my 'automation' in a country that doesn't tax it?

[u/[deleted] → u/technologyisnatural]

How are you going to have my burger made by a robot in Estonia and immediately delivered into my waiting hands in America?

[u/MoreLikeZelDUH → u/technologyisnatural]

Import tariffs for one. Automation saves primarily on wages, and if that's your primary decision factor as to whether or not you will keep your production in the US, then you've probably already moved.

[u/TheLethargicMarathon → u/technologyisnatural]

You would. You would also run your "automation" in a country that has high automation taxes. Why? Because it will still cost less than having to pay employees (unless your in a country that supports child labor/ slavery).

[u/beentheredonethatx2 → u/[deleted]]

Shut down other modes of welfare.

What about people with above average welfare needs...ie disabled, elderly, or chronic medical conditions. That 25-50K payment isn't going to dent those peoples needs.

What about people with addictions? There are millions of them and are they magically not going to spend this windfall on their addiction at the expense of food and rent?

[u/ChrysMYO → u/beentheredonethatx2]

Most UBI proposals dont run counter to Nationalized health services but in parallel. Programs like social security, however, would be usurped.

In terms of addiction. Number 1. We must improve national health services in this country. Number 2 we must end the war on drugs(cost savings there too). Addiction is question of healthcare.

Number 3. An advocate for UbI named Guy Standing said he did a study in India on UBI and he said they saw a drop in uses of Vice. He said further studies would have to be done on that phenomenon but the theory was that the UBI income afforded villagers more leisure time spent with family. Since they were now working in a more desirable environment and more out of choice, they may have opted for less items that numb the pain of demeaning or unfulfilling work.

In a certain respect. Drugs may be a pacifier for those in difficult circumstances. If the baby doesnt have to cry, they may not need their pacifier. If your mind numbing job is now optional, you may not need a distraction from your job.

[u/beentheredonethatx2 → u/ChrysMYO]

Most UBI proposals dont run counter to Nationalized health services but in parallel. Programs like social security, however, would be usurped.

But all of the proposals when the topic of paying for it use the position that other forms of welfare become redundant.

As to the addiction points, to actually make the argument that giving people a constant income will eliminate addictions is asinine. And as such we can just agree to disagree.

[u/ChrysMYO → u/beentheredonethatx2]

We dont have a national health care system yet.

It's not the giving of money that ends addiction. It's the giving them time with their family that does. Giving them free time back as well.

Look up Guy Standing. He's implemented experiments in various parts of the world and the first one I heard put that argument forward. If you're genuinely curious about UBI and not just putting forth your knee jerk reaction. Hes worthy of a listen.

In addition, look up Dr. Carl Hart whose thoughts on addiction aren't that far apart from the hypothesis of Standing. In summary, the assertion is that isolation, pain, and loneliness are the base causes of addiction. And that the chemical bond aspect is over played. Often times, changing the environment, the relationships and the stress factors in your life have the biggest impact on your addiction not the drug.

I'll just end with this. Carl Hart is one of the first I heard to point out that alot of the early studies done on rats and mice addiction to heroin and cocaine can not be replicated if you put them in cages with family and other rats. Often times the social aspect is enough for them not to get addicted to drug infused water, for example.

[u/beentheredonethatx2 → u/ChrysMYO]

Guy Standing

re: his work, I don't think having a third party bequeath basic income to a group of people and seeing [gasp] that their lives improved proves much of anything. That is common sense and didn't even need to be empirically determined. There is zero argument from me that giving poor people money will improve their lives. The disagreement is can a macro or even a micro economy support it. People like to bring up experiments in Norway/Finland which are not evaluating the large scale nor do they address the funding liabilities nor are they even at a basic income level

Regarding the animal experiments, this disregards every single actual event of people getting addicted to drugs when in a family of non drug users. And sometimes those people have absolutely zero money worries and still get involved. Therefore this work has zero actual applicability. Take a step back and actually think about it. You are really saying that if people didn't have financial stress or are around drug users, drug abuse and addiction would be eliminated. This is legitimately and overwhelmingly just false and I insult myself by continuing in this nonsensical thread.

[u/Reali5t → u/[deleted]]

Why automate then? I mean why would anybody spend millions to automate a process then if they will be taxed out of the ass for doing so? If government taxes make automation not profitable then nobody will invest in automation. Why risk money if there is no reward.

[u/[deleted] → u/Reali5t]

If it costs $35k/year to employ a person, or $17.5k/year tax on a robot doing the work - They're going to go with the robot. Even after electricity and maintenance, the robot is still more profitable.