A $1,000 per month cash handout would grow the U.S economy by $2.5 trillion, new study says

[DonFerrari]

Teeqoz said:

DonFerrari said:
It is quite funny that over 2 centuries after Industrial Revolution we would come back to ludo rebels.

Who here exactly has stated ludite-ish opinions? Saying that robots and AI will replace human jobs isn't fear, it's fact. That's not robophobia. I embrace robots doing more of the work for us. But the ramifications this has on an economy functioning in the same way as ours does currently would be out of this world. Hence why we need to look at solutions like this, because our current economic system can't handle a 80% unemployment rate.

Most of you guys saying robots and automatization will rob almost all jobs.

Economy will always change.

RolStoppable said:

DonFerrari said:

It matters for a lot of people, Maslow is still valid most of times, but I wouldn't say majority are willing the burden, because if they were most wouldn't be working entry level jobs for their whole lives.

In Brazil because of "Bolsa Família" (a form of UBI that was the almagamation of several others government help to the poor) outside of big centers there have been a period over 5 years that people wouldn't accept minimum pay jobs because they would loss the UBI and since the UBI would at least allow then not to starve they didn't want any formal jobs (and informal jobs can either get you a big fine as the employer or loss of UBI if employee when discovered) and employees in Brazil love to go to court against employer.

The amount of jobs above entry level is finite and not all people are gifted with the intelligence or the talent that is needed for higher level jobs. But the actual thing we need to consider here is not the different levels of jobs, but the difference between having a job and not having a job. Most people don't feel good about themselves if they don't contribute anything.

Your other paragraph also misses the point. There is indeed a lack of motivation to work when the difference in monetary value between not having a job and having a job is negligible. It's a sacrifice of a lot of time for little gain. But an actual UBI would not pose the problem of the decision between two forms of income; an actual UBI would mean that any job people perform would add money on top of what they already get by default.

Rol, every single source is finite, be either high paying or low paying jobs, raw material, etc. And sure there is a difference between having a job or not, what I'm saying is that it isn't "majority" of people would be totally unfine with UBI and not working, because if that were the truth then what purpose the UBI would have since the person would already have the job?

I understood that the UBI would sum to the income the person already have, but if the UBI already covers for that person need, a very big amount of people would just do that and not have any other form of income.