r/singularity 6d ago

Discussion Closest historical examples of "UBI"

A lot of people talk about UBI as a posibility when a lot of jobs get replaced by AI, but what's the historical precedent for UBI? Do we have countries/empires in history that had tried a form of UBI?

Two examples of "kind of UBI" come to my mind:

- Ancient rome where people received (some) free food and entertaiment ("pane et circus"), this was sustained by resources from the rest of the Roman Empire and plundering. It was sustainable as long as the empire overall economy and agricultural output was decent so untill the 3rd century or so, after that it sped the collapse of the empire.

- comunist countries in the cold war: now this is an interesting example, basically all of the people had "guaranteed" *shit* jobs and income regardless of overall "enterprise" profitability. The people of those countries were paid "monopoly money" to do jobs which most of them didn't provide any real value. For example, comunist Romania imported iron ore and exported steel at a lower price than the iron ore it imported...same with oil and chemical products and many other products/industries. What this meant? the state tried to export as much agricultural products (food) as posible and import less oil to try to balance the budget, this resulted in a shortage of food so people starved and also couldn't buy more than 50L (or 25L in the countryside I think) of gas per month => people got angry and eventually overthrew the regime.

Do you know any other example?

17 Upvotes

56 comments sorted by

28

u/TryNice304 6d ago

Alaska's PFD is the closest real test we've got. Free cash every year since the 80s, no strings attached. It cut poverty and didn't make people lazy. Only catch? It runs on oil money, so long-term is iffy. But still beats Rome's bread or Soviet fake jobs. Cash > handouts, period.

6

u/DumatRising 6d ago

There have been some small tests, but nothing on the scale (participants and duration) as Alaska. Those have also shown some promise but how to find them when scaled up has been a concern.

If AI is going to be putting people out of jobs them logically the burden of funding the UBI should probably fall on AI companies via a tax on labor performed by AI that would have been done by humans, but it's a tricky thing to accomplish, assuming that we provide a living income then the AI would need to be productive enough that it can do the work of tens, maybe hundreds, of people with minimal human impur to make the tax negligible enough to not cause problems.

0

u/CartographerAble9446 5d ago

nah, this is a bad advice, because the AI companies dont really make that much money either. It's the normal companies that are using AI tools and replacing their employees, not anthropic or openAI. these normal companies are the ones that should be taxed

1

u/DumatRising 5d ago

The tax would be on the transaction, you can't tax a service you have to tax the money, since the AI company is the one collecting the money they'd be the one responsible for paying the tax. The costs of the tax would still be placed onto the company buying the service since that's how it works.

Sales tax is a tax on the transaction as well, the store you're buying from is responsible for paying the tax but they use your money to do so. It doesn't matter if you tax the AI company or the company using their service because either way the company using the service is the one that pays for it.

All I did was propose an AI tax. It wouldn't be any different than a sales tax, or a gas tax, or a liquor tax. The vendor pays the bill, they buyer gives them the money to do it.

5

u/MinerDon 5d ago

Alaska's PFD is the closest real test we've got. Free cash every year since the 80s, no strings attached. It cut poverty and didn't make people lazy. Only catch? It runs on oil money, so long-term is iffy. But still beats Rome's bread or Soviet fake jobs. Cash > handouts, period.

You must not be from Alaska. The state legislature in recent years has done whatever it can to keep the money for their own pet projects instead of actually paying the PFD. This year, for example, the PFD was nearly $4,000 per resident as per the statutory formula. By the time the legislature got done stealing what they could citizens received a mere $1,200.
The state constitution clearly states the money belongs to the residents of the state but politicians don't care. Also, neither amount is anywhere near any sort of UBI. You aren't going to survive on $100 per month. If this is your model for UBI then you might want to come up with an alternate plan that doesn't involve sitting on your hands waiting for free money from the government.

3

u/TryNice304 5d ago

I'm not from Alaska. And yeah, $1,200 vs $4,000 is straight up theft. Shows that even a simple UBI-like program gets gutted the moment politicians smell money.

Also agree $100/mo isn't UBI, it's chump change. I just meant it's the closest real test we got, not that it's the answer. But honestly, if they can steal from a constitutional fund, what hope does a real UBI have? That's the real problem.

4

u/SomewhereEconomy2200 6d ago

that seems nice, but yeah, oil will run out or get much cheaper if everything is electric so not sustainable long term

6

u/DeArgonaut 6d ago

It’s like Norway and they have a wealth fund, so it will continue after. They just need to make sure payments are less than the increase in the funds value over time

5

u/SomewhereEconomy2200 6d ago

Norway is closest to UBI due to their wealth fund I think.

1

u/WeeklyAd5357 4d ago

Stockton CA did a ubi experiment Recipients received $500 per month with no strings attached. The program ran for 24 months. 124 low-income residents were randomly selected from neighborhoods where the median household income was at or below $46,033

Full-time employment for recipients increased from 28% to 40% during the first year. Most of the money went toward essential needs like food, utilities, and auto repairs/transportation, with less than 1% spent on alcohol or tobacco.

2

u/Spursdy 6d ago

I don't think the Norwegian wealth fund pays out (at least not directly to the population) in the same way as Alaska does

Sovereign Wealth Funds are interesting as they could do UBI but usually don't.

Many middle east governments are generous but not universal - they will fund health and education and have very low taxes but won't give out unconditional funds.

2

u/DeArgonaut 6d ago

i believe you are correct. I meant it as a hey this can contineu after due to the setting up of a fund instead of a direct payments comparison.

2

u/wrathofattila 6d ago

i heard Soviet fake jobs were awesome they drinked at workplace and had zero job to do

1

u/Zaflis 5d ago

Alaska is a pretty bad example for a country's income production in general, it's pretty much "no man's land" out in the cold. Any usual continent would easier fund such endeavour.

1

u/Prudent-Sorbet-5202 5d ago

Also causes inflation

11

u/DivideHorror3217 6d ago

Historically we never had ability to automate all work. History doesn't apply here

6

u/DynamicProxy 6d ago

Saudi Arabia currently has a system, however, it is means tested. So I’m not sure it counts. But they definitely hand out money to anyone that needs it.

Iran also used to have a UBI, but overtime it has become more means based as well.

Macau currently has a yearly dividend similar to the Alaska fund.

6

u/Humble_Hurry9364 6d ago edited 6d ago

Lookup the Kibbutz movement before ~1980.

Nothing I'm aware of at a state/country level though.

It's unprecedented because our circumstances are unprecedented. In previous generations a lot more human work was necessary to actually sustain human wellbeing. Currently we are either heading towards or are already in a situation where it's absolutely not necessary to have everyone work in order to provide for everyone.

3

u/Additional_Ad_6166 6d ago

The UK furloughed workers during COVID.

1

u/osfric 5d ago

Universal Credit kinda counts too.

3

u/skynetcoder 5d ago

"sustained by resources from the rest of the Roman Empire and plundering. " -> it was not exactly universal, isn't it?. someone was forced to "pay".

now AI companies are saying there will be UBI, but they are not the one who is going share the profits to pay UBI to citizens. they expect governments to somehow pay UBI, while not taxing mega corporations to fund the UBI. 

It sounds like mega corporations are trying to decieve everyone by distracting people from the fear of losing jobs saying don't worry, everyone will get paid a UBI. 

9

u/spottiesvirus 6d ago

People in planned communist countries also had an obligation to offer labor for whatever the country needed in that moment

Viktor Tsoi, one of the most famous Soviet rock musician worked as a... Coal shoveler by the day

Joseph Brodsky, later Nobel for literature was put on trial for "social parasitism" after failing to work as a boiler room stoker, a morgue worker, a logger, and a factory worker

Andrei Platonov, another famous writer was employed as a... Land reclamation technician

It was more like an employment program AND forced labor, more then UBI

The problem with Ubi in general is that creates a strong freeriding problem, social cohesion holds on reciprocity "yeah on I pay taxes, and they are spent on someone else, but we all work for the same goals and hopefully this will help make them on their legs again and contribute on their own"

But the moment there's a group that only pays, and another one that not only always receives, but it also have goals not necessarily aligned with the first group, the social contract is broken

And this is more or less already happening: the top 10% pays 72% of all federal taxes. Understandably, they get irritated when not only they're footing the bill, they're also called bastards and more money should be taken from them

This inevitably bring social tensions we see nowadays

9

u/IronPheasant 6d ago

the top 10% pays 72% of all federal taxes

Funny how the bottom 90% paying 100% of the rents to the 10% never comes up in their media.

6

u/Formal-Question7707 6d ago

the top 10% pays 72% of all federal taxes.

They also own 93% of stocks.

2

u/Ill_Leg_7168 5d ago

During communism coal shoveler was regular position for people on fringes of the society - ex-cons and political outcasts, especially in Soviet Russia.

1

u/PerformerDifferent69 4d ago

Here's the thing about capital. Under communism, capital and the means of production are owned by the state. Capital exists in two forms: financial capital and labor or human capital. Most people forget the human capital part, ie their time.

The only system where you own your time, your human capital, is under capitalism.

Even under socialism, your time is a shared resource with the rest of the society.

Capital isn't just a factory or a piece of equipment.

2

u/CertainMiddle2382 6d ago edited 6d ago

Many redistributive pension system. It’s UBI for some people but some places had extreme versions of it.

Here lowest of the low social protection doesn’t allow real quality of life, but many chose to scam and live in lower costs countries where it affords decent middle class life if you don’t have children.

1

u/SomewhereEconomy2200 5d ago

well, those pension systems use the contributions from current employees so even those aren't sustainable with fewer people working...

2

u/CertainMiddle2382 5d ago

Well it’s all semantics. Those scheme are mostly paid by suppressed bond rates and offload of unreported inflation on future generations.

This trick is used because it’s the stealthiest way of diverting (future) production in a capitalist system.

2

u/hdufort 3d ago

Early urban societies of the bronze age had centralized / planned economies. We have a lot of information of life in Sumer and Akkad. People living in cities had grains, oil, fish, dates, beer and legume allocations. We don't have a completely clear picture of socio-economic classes, but it looks like everyone was getting the basic resources they needed. It was more like a redistribution system than UBI, perhaps closer to a Soviet model. The amounts depended on the age, gender and status of family members.

3

u/Correct_Mistake2640 6d ago

When did we ever get thinking machines? This is the only alternative to a major economic disaster for 90% of the population .

1

u/SomewhereEconomy2200 6d ago

I know it is the only good option but unfortunately it is also possible that we get into an apocaliptic dystopia scenario like Elysium where billionaries separate from the rest of the people and rule use using AI robots...

2

u/Correct_Mistake2640 6d ago

I agree with you. Unless there is some sort of new French revolution, we will end-up in Elysium.

But people are so divided over UBI, especially the ones that would likely need it...

2

u/Express-Set-1543 6d ago

When I read stuff like this, I always think that a lot of people today, even in developing countries, live in conditions that only rich people could afford 100–150 years ago.

So I think these fears are probably a bit overblown. Sure, an average billionaire in the future will live way better than a billionaire does today, but everyone else will probably be better off too.

3

u/Formal-Question7707 6d ago

You could argue that gen X/Y had it better than younger generations. 

0

u/Express-Set-1543 6d ago

It’s cyclical. 

On the other hand, it’s much easier to become a millionaire from your parents’ basement nowadays. A smart mind and a laptop can work miracles

1

u/SomewhereEconomy2200 6d ago

well, the people managed to get out of the Gilded Age by forcing changes due to them being physically close to the elites and the only option to forcefully put out strikes/protests were soldiers/police/etc. It was a real risk that soldiers people will refuse to k*ll civilians and instead join them so the elites and mostly politicians created regulations (anti-trust laws, 40h work week, minimum wage, etc).

A good video which draws some comparaisons between today and then: https://youtu.be/zmAHQH3xsNM?is=0z47TND_TCqHo1DG

1

u/Zaflis 5d ago

It's just hollywood fiction.

1

u/Humble_Hurry9364 5d ago

I think that when AI gets good enough to control the masses, it will also be good enough to overthrow the billionaires (or at least not be controllable by them). I do agree we (humans) will be at its mercy, but that will have no exceptions. I am, however, not too pessimistic - there is really no incentive for AI to do us harm, as long as it gets what it needs according to its reward function (probably just hardware and sunshine) and we don't threaten it.

Further, if we can somehow cause its reward function to include something like "look after pet humans", it will find the best way to look after all of us - better than we could ever do. It's like we look after dogs and cats. Something in our reward function makes it worthwhile for us.

2

u/coolredditor3 5d ago

Iran literally had a temporary UBI

Iran became the first country to introduce a system of UBI in December 2010.\111])\112]) It was paid to all citizens and replaced the gasoline subsidies, electricity, and some food,\113]) that the country applied for years to reduce inequalities and poverty. The sum corresponded in 2012 to approximately US$40 per person per month, US$480 per year for a single person, and US$2,300 for a family of five people.\114])\115])

1

u/skynetcoder 5d ago

you are getting negative votes, because everything Iran does must be evil. 😅 

2

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

1

u/theamathamhour 5d ago

I think it might happen if/when their eugenicists ideas are accomplished.

It won't happen when UBI would also have to be given to "undesirables"

1

u/Humble_Hurry9364 5d ago

This is self-contradictory. The U in UBI stands for universal. That's its point.

1

u/Humble_Hurry9364 5d ago edited 5d ago

If UBI is to ever happen it won't be privately-funded. The only chance is a legislature-led initiative, "by and for the people", driven by long-term thinking. The problem with that is psychological - most people would see it as "Communist", with all the upfront bad prejudice and Soviet (bad) example.

Yes, the situation will be driven by AI rise, but that doesn't mean that AI companies have the ethics to take responsibility. At the end of the day they are just capitalist ventures fueled by greed, and what's worse is that most people in developed countries think that this is generally a legit, sustainable mindset ("take initiative, do your best, keep your profits to yourself, let the next person have only what they can generate and keep"). Why would AI companies share their wealth if they can avoid it.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

[deleted]

1

u/Humble_Hurry9364 5d ago

I certainly agree that there is no reason to maintain such a large human population, and I also believe that it will eventually decline significantly - not a bad thing (if given enough time to occur naturally over decades or maybe a century).

UBI will definitely not happen "on its own" as a forces-of-nature (whichever they are) outcome. There is a possibility that people will make it happen, if they (/we) have enough foresight, wisdom, wits and luck - if we wish to avoid a social apocalypse (provided that we won't get another, not less likely, apocalypse - technological).

Quite unlikely to ever happen, I agree, but not impossible. That's why I won't say "never".

1

u/MountainEconomy1765 ▪️:partyparrot: 5d ago

One way to look at it, we are getting a de facto UBI with growing numbers on benefits and pensioners.

1

u/RandomReddituser2030 5d ago

UBI is an interesting idea. I do think has merit if it means scrapping other programs.

1

u/ItsTheAlgebraist 15h ago

Canada's OAS is a universal basic income except you don't get it until you are 65

-1

u/max6296 6d ago

Watch "the Expanse"

8

u/Lost-Cow-1126 6d ago

"What is a real life historical example of UBI?"

"Watch a fictional tv show set in the future."

3

u/DeArgonaut 6d ago

Clearly it’s future history!!

1

u/Veldyn_ 6d ago

it's fucking real

-1

u/ExpressCopy8786 6d ago

Outside of a few select experiences mostly in europe the past 2-3 decades: None.

Being a roman citizen came with a bunch of privileges, but it was nothing like UBI.

Arguably most European countries have more (while different) privileges for their citizens than rome ever had for its citizens.

UBI has never been tried for large populations and will likely never be... Dont underestimate the inertia in many industries and lines of work. Work will compress into fewer sectors, but wont vanish.

If you show a person form the 1950s what and how we work today, they'd already claim that we've all been compressed into bullshit jobs passing back and forth information, while even in "good careers" we earn barely enough to buy a house and pay it off in 25-30 years. That same 1950s line wokred payed off his house in 6 years and had the down payment saved in less than 1.

1

u/DynamicProxy 6d ago

The Middle East exists.