Correct

So it would almost certainly end up higher

It would force people to move out of densely populated cities, and move to cheaper states 🤔

Also, are we assuming people will have full control over their prices?

No.

If you need more than UBI you would go on welfare instead.

Cause Id imagine prices rising to accomodate UBI would happen

Why would you have UBI and welfare?

It happens with minimum wage

And student loans

Everyone gets UBI.

Then what's the point of UBI if you compliment it with welfare?

The point of UBI is that you can cut back lol

It's not a compliment to welfare.

The point of NIT was that you could remove the bureaucracy and distribute more money.

i'm gonna quiet down here and still follow the discussion,

To make it easier for Dennafen to answer the remaining 3-4 people

This is now just freeshit

Actually, I need to eat, @Dr.Wol you can take my spot.

coolbeans, but he's still outnumbered like 3:1 😛

Yeah.. Sorry bout that Denna

I see where you are getting at though

Okay, to be clear we'd still have welfare, and disability, UBI would be an alternative to those programs for anyone who applied.

But I still had those concerns. Im more private vs public sort, so it will be hard to shake that belief anyway

but those are all 3 welfare tho

If you can't work/find a job, the welfare state pays you to stay alive until you can
unless you're disabled and just can't, then they just pay

UBI in your idea would just be a more expanded welfare for those unfit to find new jobs

As I was saying before if you have $1,200 a month in disability, and you've found work you can do part time, you will likely not re-enter the work force, because you'd lose your disability. However you could still get 1,000 a month as a UBI benefit regardless of your working status.

That just adds cost and bureaucracy

Since you now need people to keep track of who is on UBI and who is on welfare

They already do that, it's called welfare.

You're adding more to it

Not really, the government is good a cutting checks.

And keeping track of who is on what system and for how long?

You mean like who's paying taxes and who's not? Or who you made your last phone call to?

Yeah the government can handle this.

They don't handle it for free. And I mean who is receiving what money from the government

The point of UBI is to replace welfare

They already have the bureaucracy to do it in fact.

No.

It's not a replacement for welfare.

The bureaucracy is less efficient than you claim

The bureaucracy for cutting checks in the federal government is fantastic.

People who work with semi-welfare (so they work but get government financial support)

Literally pay extra taxes,
To get their own tax money back in subsidiaries - administration costs

also that USED to be the case Denn

Yeah when was the last time you didn't get your tax rebate back?

right now, bureaucracy's solution to fixing money issues,

Is just tax people more, and add subsidiaries to the masses so they still vote for you

That has nothing to do with UBI.

Wot

no, but its a comment about the "efficiency" of the bureaucracy

cant get a vote from someone who you don't pay anymore

So the trick is keeping as much people on the system, but that requires money from elsewhere (more taxes)

Bureaucracies aren't efficient, okay, thanks, Is the sky still blue?

its evening here, its red for me due to the sun

So why would you not use UBI to reduce bureaucracy

Since there's no application or tracking required

Because removing people from welfare that need welfare isn't good.

The point is that their basic needs are already paid for

There are people that need substationally more help than 1,000 check.

So you dont need a redundant payment scheme

You already admitted that's an arbitrary figure you set as a baseline

You can use the same scheme and bureaucracy to pay them.

UBI initially wouldn't been all your basic needs met.

probably.

Okay but if you're talking about phasing that in you would also phase out welfare

how does that help people who can't find work anymore due to automation?

They need basic needs met, or they'll die 😮

It'd more likely just be extra money to help people become more mobile.

A solution can't come whole cloth.

You introduce UBI now, you have the method of distribution, and it would increase over time.

as needed.

if thats the case,

You just added more welfare, and more taxes, and no fix

But eventually you would phase out welfare, would you not?

Once it hits basic needs level

Maybe, I don't think work is totally going to vanish.

manual labor jobs will

Probably.

Could you elaborate?

No they won't.

Most white collar work as well.

not all, but many will

Automation tends to be a bit too inflexible.

There are industries scaling back automation at the moment.

Currently is inflexible.

No, it's physically inflexible.

3d Printed houses for example Pratel

Rig a big machine that can drive around and just be activated, powered up, and build your house

You build your tooling and it's millions of dollars to re-tool.

3d printing radically changes the argument.

Now you have to play people for complexity.

Yes, it's CURRENTY inflexible.

Which is even harder.

The manufacturing is more flexible but the engineering is much harder.

I agree, AI is not inflexible.

AI right now is very much not what people think it is. It's very inflexible.

well thats the point Pratel

You replace 100's of builders, for a machine

And you keep the engineers working

You don't even do that.

You still need someone to survey and install.

Again, you're thinking big dumb robots, AI is not a big dumb robot. It's a robot that can learn for thousands of other robots.

Uh. I'm in AI.

It also has hard, dumb limits

AI is trained on very specific tasks at the moment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU

This make the argument much better than I can.

About robots.

Can you summarize it?