[JibJabLab]

My issue with it is that we aren't even at a point where UBI is viable. Yes, we have lots of automation but we still have many times more jobs still not automated. The experiment isn't going to show accurate results.

But I agree with you - there will still be work available in an automated society.

[akvadrako]

UBI doesn't need automation at all; the big question is if society is more productive with it or with traditional welfare. That's why experiments are needed.

[pbhjpbhj]

The same amount of work with the same relative amounts of pay?

Doesn't that require far greater wealth distribution. Currently people mostly work for companies which make their capitalist owners rich. If the companies ditch workers and use robots then in order for the workers to also be employed the money from those owners needs to be spent on other things - the unemployed workers don't have money other than what they're spending with the pre-existing companies for food/clothing/housing and such.

Those currently earning off others labour will increase their take of profits; by what mechanism will that additional proportion of the wealth be made available for new industries. What industries will move the wealth from the Uber rich and distribute it, they're going to need to be large employers of many low-skilled workers.

I don't see how this can happen without a revolution such as UBI or a cultural shift to a communistic system, say, that can democratise the profits from robotisation.

Yes, the industrial revolution freed workers to take up new roles, but the lower population and higher availability of easily acquired resources fed in to that. The world is different now, I don't see the same happening again, the maths of that doesn't add up.