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

Normally it would, but if welfare is replaced by this, as some hard core capitalists want, then it might actually be better. The only bad thing is that blowing it all off on shit means that if something bad happens no one is going to bail you out... 

It's funny until you realise the Industrial Revolution delivered 1700 years of growth in the space of 30 for the UK and the amount of prolonged suffering and death the Luddites caused is unforgivable (then and now).

Whoever said religion is the only thing that makes good people do evil things and smart people do the dumbest things forgot about Socialism.

Well you are right, shouldn't have used "funny".

Socialists and the like refuse to accept that capitalism "by itself" have brought quality of life that basically makes the very poor of today living a standard better than kings of the past.

And all the cries "for the poor" on minimum standards is even crazier. Basically they raise the minimum standard every time, until middle class at the time is considered very poor. Because there are people with a house, 2 cars, food, amenities but that is supposedely bellow the living standard because that person have to work 8h/day.

Without the "greedy and exploitivy" bosses these guys would be on farms working 12 to 14h/day to have only enough to eat.

And who pays of the debt? Oh yes the taxpayer, and doing it via debt is even worse as you drain from the savings of the economy somebody else could use to get a loan from so that they can expand their business, and it would also make the debt more expensive.

Not really, their is a stabilisation in 70's/80's/90's after it always went up. the financial collapse was 10 years ago and we still are so much lower.

All I am saying is not coming from socialist sources in contrary, in 2009 democrats/replubicans alike were saying that the participation rate will go up and automation will do nothing harmfull wise but they were wrong.  Also I never posted that we needed an universal basic income but we need to discuss about what we can do in an what if scenario.

I only see the facts.  We are not in a recession for multiple years 5-7 years? and normally the participation rate would go up but it didn't so what's going to happen in the next recession? 

No offence but I'll take the Invisible Hand over a socialist's crystal ball and tarot cards.

You need to stop being robophobic. Sure some may cause harm due to their programming but the vast majority are hard working and massively contribute to the well being of our society, they just want a better life for themselves and their family human beings.

#Notallautomatons

Confusing, I already stated that automation benefits the people in the end but it isn't creating more jobs and that is what I mean with harmfull. A small example was a coal mine in Kentucky that employed 1500 people but wanted to go with automation/software and investing hardly in new machines. The company was nice and let most of them follow the course/train them for the job but at the end only needed a few hundred people.  What should the +1000 others do? Mostly people who worked 20*30 years in this industry? Nobody really have an answer for them.  Except for 'If you want to work you always find work' or 'Stop being lazy' or even worse 'they are just fecking deplorables'. Those + 1000 people would vote against an universal basic income and so would I at the moment but that's why I would love a workforce trying to find a solution. 

Well, in that case there are no third-world countries paying me to shit on the first-world countries

There is too much wrong here to nitpick, but let's keep things simple. "Poverty" means you can't afford healthy food, rent, transportation, and a place to sleep for you and your family.

I work well above minimum wage, as does my wife, and we spend over 1/3rd of our income on rent -- our apartment is not "kingly" by any fashion, does not include a washer and dryer, and is located within 40 feet of an interstate highway. We have no children and we drive used vehicles which were purchased off of family members for dirt cheap. Even so, add in our other bills and we spend over 2/3rds of out income before we even get to buying gas and groceries for the week. 

Imagining us trying to raise a child on our income, let alone minimum wage, let alone if either of us were a single parent... There simply would not be enough money coming in to come close to paying the bills, let alone have money for extravagances like movies and video games. 

The point isn't that we live better than peasants in the Dark Ages. 

The point is that people doing the same job made more (adjusted for inflation) in the 50s than we do now. The "socialism" you decry is simply a rebalancing of a market that is controlled by the world's wealthiest through lobbying. People now work longer hours for less pay than in our recent past, often working more than one job to make ends meet.

The minimum wage, which was explicitly created as a living wage, does not sustain a family of two on 40 hours anymore. Adjusted for inflation, the 1968 minimum wage would now be roughly $12.64/hr.