Surur t1_j2dh6tz wrote on December 31, 2022 at 1:06 PM

> Is the assumption that AI and production will be managed by the state instead?

This actually makes a lot more sense financially. Instead of money, the government can supply the basics of living (food, water, heat and homes, healthcare), a small stipend, and everyone who wants more will need to find some opportunity (if available).

I don't see how people could live in relative luxury on UBI, as the tax burden would be too high.

On the other hand automation and AI may allow even people on UBI to enjoy a great quality of life - imagine each person having a personal robot at their beck and call for example.

Economy_Variation365 t1_j2dkrd9 wrote on December 31, 2022 at 1:41 PM

You wrote two exactly contradictory things, one right after the other. You don't see how luxurious living on UBI would be possible. Yet people on UBI could have a high standard of living, thanks to AI and robotics.

This second point is what we need to keep in mind: advanced robotics will lower the costs of goods and services, making it feasible for everyone to enjoy a decent lifestyle.

Surur t1_j2dn16j wrote on December 31, 2022 at 2:02 PM

> advanced robotics will lower the costs of goods and services, making it feasible for everyone to enjoy a decent lifestyle.

It's what we hope for. But in terms of initial implementation, it would only be acceptable (to workers, as u/AndromedaAnimated notes here) if it's clearly inferior to working.

I guess we saw a bit of UBI during the pandemic when people were paid to stay at home, but unfortunately I worked in an essential service so I had to go to work every day. I guess the main benefit was that the roads were very clear lol.