[mynameishere]

You can't just call something a nightmare. You have to point out to these blindly privileged rich knuckleheads that the garbage man won't be taking out the garbage if UBI comes to pass.

No shit. He won't. Not unless you pay him 300,000/year and that's a whole other kind of economic catastrophe.

[mrob]

It's no economic catastrophe. If the market price for garbage collection by people not threatened with starvation is 300000/collector/year then there is a very strong incentive to automate it.

[jimnotgym]

It also rather depends on the level of UBI. If I can just live frugally on my UBI, but by getting a 20 hour-a-week job collecting rubbish I can afford to eat out and take foreign holidays then I would have a strong incentive to carry on doing it. I might demand that my boss treats me better in general though, which could lead to a labour market where the environment and conditions are as important as the pay

[adynatos]

if the market price for garbage collection rises that high, every other job that seems 'better' will have to rise the pay too, else people will all go into garbage business. who will clean my seat at the peep shows then? and if every job costs that much, the product of it will have to cost accordingly. in the world of UBI, either a loaf of bread will cost 300000 of cold hard cash, or there will be no one to build the first generation of your precious robots. hence the nightmare. anyway, back in the 1960's some idiots already forewarned that factory automation was fast approaching and it would make everyone lose jobs. google automation hysteria. what they proposed was eerily similar to UBI. this new iteration is just history repeating itself. guess they didn't predict society just changing to find new jobs.