I'm not against basic income, but it remind me the problem of Sherpa
transporters when they blocked all Nepal because of Donkey's competition.
the problem was not the donkeys, but that they could not buy a donkey, or
would not be allowed to buy a donkey, won't be allowed to gage their house
for a donkey, wopuld not even imagien they could exploit a donkey instead
of being exploited.
the answer to robot revolution is to become an exploiter of robots, not a
desperate man sad not to be exploited anymore.
An easy solution to replacement of labor by capital, a great improvement
that allwo us to be happier because of our parents work, is to allow
worker shareholding, entrepreneurship, allowing deconcentration by
Concentration is the problem, not capital replacing labor.
Capital in peaceful low growth time have a natural tendency to concentrate,
especially if you protect people from risk and punish mistakes (mummies
economy), and it finish with the strongest taking a growing share of a
diminishing cake, until the desperate poors slaughter the richers.
Another solution was war, destroying mass of capital, established position,
old regulations, tycoons and corporations, allowing new technology and new
organization to be required to rebuild the country, launching a positive
flywheel or innovation with richest keeping their old wealth and happily
stagnating, and poorest getting richer because they have no choice than to
try the new technology, the new works, the new organizations...
In fact a good technology revolution can reshuffle the game like a war, if
the elite are too incompetent to embrace it, and too slow to block it.
Sadly the second point is failing today, as our elite, thanks to democracy
and quasi-religious lobbies, is blocking all technology change but the less
Even AirBnb and uberPop are blocked in paris, beside cold fusion, Emdrive,
GMO, notill farming, AI, Blockchain finance, even immunization and
scientific medecine... at least this is in Western countries...
in china, the memory of real starvation and millions of death probably make
people more daring to escape from poverty. This is the chinese escaping
from starvation who made the planet reduce extreme poverty by an order of
magnitude in a few decades.
Maybe finally that is what i say, that the chinese poors will replace the
western rich who don't understand modern technology...
2017-09-05 15:23 GMT+02:00 Lennart Thornros <lenn...@thornros.com>:
> I think this is a solution. All the rambling about that jobs disappear to
> China, to robots etc. does very little to solve the problem.
> I guess the Republican Party believe this is violates their basic
> philosophy. In reality it is just right on their philosophy. It takes care
> the problem we face when being human (i.e. giving healthcare to uninsured)
> conflicts the rules, it gives freedom to persuade your personal goals.
> I think that it should be combined with limitations in inheritance. There
> are few logical reasons for a distribution based on an agriculture
> society. I think it is hard to find a good solution to inheritance because
> of long time indoctrination. Nothing says that a will or an old law provide
> a fair solution. If society provides the basic human rights, then there is
> little need to take care of the offspring after you are dead. Thus dead
> people's assets could be argued to belong to the community. The problem is
> that to let the political entities take over will make the assets
> detoriate. See communism, everybody owns it but it is nobody's
> responsibility. In my opinion a good solution with today's measurements of
> how to handle the inheritance, can make the way for this idea with basic
> income. It is also solving the problem with 'how to fund the reform' and
> the debate about the one percent.
> On Sep 4, 2017 20:53, "Axil Axil" <janap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fear of robots taking jobs spurs a bold idea: guaranteed pay