Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article
-
Still wondering where the money comes from.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
3.) On a philosophical note, does the government not control you once they give you a GBI?
No, far less. Because today, government money is discretionary. But with GBI, it is not, it is guaranteed. So it is specifically removing the government from a lot of potential meddling.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
2.) where does the money come from? The government gets it money from taxing. People's income, sale's tax, etc. If someone works are they excluded from GBI? Is your GBI taxed? Are they taxed higher than those of GBI in order to pay for GBI.
No magic here. Where does the money come from today? GBI theory says that LESS money is needed, not more. You never tax government pay, makes no sense.
So there is no need for as much money as there is today. You reduce the total government financial needs. Then you take discretionary income (that above GBI) potentially, tax property, tax sales, tax business. Basically, other than simplifying tax laws just to be practical, taxes don't really need to change.
That's the magic of GBI, there is really no need for the money to "come from somewhere". We already have a surplus.
-
Part of the goal of GBI is to grow, not shrink the economy, while lowering the overhead.
Think of any company becoming more lean and efficient. Spend less, earn more.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
By taxing corporations that make billions and maybe pay a few million in taxes, by taxing the positions that can't go away (at an appropriate amount).
From the same taxing methods used today, but no you can't tax GBI because then you're defeating the point of it. I already asked this, and was answered on it. really it was more a NYS complaint
-
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
I am sorry that I want details, before I get on a bandwagon to totally change my ideas and how things have worked in my country since my country was founded.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
I am sorry that I want details, before I get on a bandwagon to totally change my ideas and how things have worked in my country since well my country was founded.
Worked well in this country? Bullshit.
-
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
I am sorry that I want details, before I get on a bandwagon to totally change my ideas and how things have worked in my country since well my country was founded.
Worked well in this country? Bullshit.
He didn't say that. He was pausing for effect.
Since... well since the country was founded.
-
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
I am sorry that I want details, before I get on a bandwagon to totally change my ideas and how things have worked in my country since well my country was founded.
Worked well in this country? Bullshit.
that was a typo.
-
They might have worded poorly since it was founded, so it COULD be worded as...
They've worked poorly since, well... since the country was founded.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@jaredbusch said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Still wondering where the money comes from.
/sigh
FFS, the same place it does now.
No one has ever stated that no one would work. That would be species stagnation.
I am sorry that I want details, before I get on a bandwagon to totally change my ideas and how things have worked in my country since well my country was founded.
Worked well in this country? Bullshit.
that was a typo.
Ok.
-
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
That's a tough one, but potential someday. Grammarly isn't cutting it today for that, though.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
Jobs like that that need the human nuance to complete them could be done by people that enjoy that kind of work.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
That's a tough one, but potential someday. Grammarly isn't cutting it today for that, though.
Sure, but it's an example of a field that is already being faded out. As Grammarly is being improved the world as a whole would need less bodies.
Just a few bodies to provide input to produce a better piece of software.
-
Jobs in the same realm, like Authors are actually going away too. Writing pieces on news etc or even making things up. This, I feel should be left to a person to author.
Accountability for what's stated etc etc..
-
@dafyre said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
Jobs like that that need the human nuance to complete them could be done by people that enjoy that kind of work.
Yes, that's a big deal. People would naturally gravitate to work that they like, rather than just work that's available.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@scottalanmiller said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@dustinb3403 said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
Jobs such as editorial services, could disappear and never be needed again. So long as your software was proficient enough with the language to understand the nuances.
That's a tough one, but potential someday. Grammarly isn't cutting it today for that, though.
Sure, but it's an example of a field that is already being faded out. As Grammarly is being improved the world as a whole would need less bodies.
Just a few bodies to provide input to produce a better piece of software.
Over time, definitely.
-
@penguinwrangler said in Discussing Basic Income from Forbes Article:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
Taxes are similar. Tax reporting could be standardized and made automatic. Tell the government your details, pay your taxes. Same for everyone. But that would destroy an industry. So they don't, they make taxes convoluted so that people essentially have to either buy software or pay accountants to do work that shouldn't exist. It's all busy work just to create jobs.
Sure there are industries that will fade away, happens all the time. To think that the economy won't come up with jobs that don't even exist right now to fill the void is a little ludicrous. I mean Information Technology didn't exist when my parents were in school.
This is wrong; starting in a few years when automation takes over everything. I dont think you understand the scale of the next round of automation in the workplace. 19/20 jobs driving, gone. That is millions of jobs just in the US. Fast food workers, gone in ten years. You arent replacing hundreds of millions of trucking and McDs and other manufacturing jobs with 'robot repairman' jobs. Especially since the robots will likely be throwaway cheap disposable like ipads and cell phones.
Like you say, many of these types of people dont want to learn anything, ever, like your dad(your words). Youd rather have those people starving in the streets with no income and no home?
