[rfwhyte]

What a shock, the guy who works for Trump and at a bunch of right wing think tanks thinks UBI is a bad idea.

I'm sure there's no political bias or cherry picking of data to support a predetermined conclusion going on here whatsoever.

[trod1234]

UBI has had critics with sound reasoning longer than Trump has been in office.

The long-term economic consequences are dire, as equally dire if not more dire than doing nothing in a money-printing environment.

Mises covers the 6 primary failures (and more for certain variants) in his early works (1950s-1960s), all of which have remain sound and without rational refutation. They are generally considered impossible to solve problems, where the control needed to solve them reduces the longer the cycle continues, leaving members helpless later on. (Socialism, Liberty Fund)

You generally don't choose a system to depend on for your life needs that will fail not just as an ordinary failure, but where the failures are of a special domain with properties of mathematical chaos (where you can't differentiate or recognize the failure between ups and downs of a whipsaw).

[foobarchu]

> The long-term economic consequences are dire, as equally dire if not more dire than doing nothing in a money-printing environment.

I would legitimately love to hear of an alternative option to UBI in the AI dominated future every executive is convinced we're headed towards, in which the vast majority of jobs have been automated away.

[aleph_minus_one]

> I would legitimately love to hear of an alternative option to UBI in the AI dominated future every executive is convinced we're headed towards, in which the vast majority of jobs have been automated away.

Why do these executives tell this all the time?

1. Because it's their wet dream.

2. To make workers more obedient because they are made to believe that they will soon become redundant [honest personal opinion on this: if I was made to believe that, I'd rather think "So I have nothing to loose, then." and actually become much more arrogating in my demands :-) ]

With this in mind, the alternative is simple: don't listen to what these executives want you to brainwash with. :-)

This of course does not mean that you should not form an opinion for yourself: quite the opposite, but do consider what those in power want you to believe as having a dangerous agenda that they want you to brainwash with. In other words: consider such statements from those in power like this executable file that you downloaded from some highly suspicious website. :-)

[kjkjadksj]

They are probably hoping most of us conveniently die without threatening the power structure or are siloed to areas where we can only bother ourselves. I wouldn’t be surprised if we are marching towards a new apartheid.

[trod1234]

They are doing more than hope.

The Central bankers only see credits, and liabilities. They've done all they can on the credit side with money-printing over the past decade and a half, so for the past several years policy has been based in lowering life expectancy.

The broader liabilities associated with an individual disappear when those people die. Its callous to think this way, but this is how they think, and they do so and act indirectly because the average Joe won't notice, gradually nice and slow, just like a frog boiling.

[trod1234]

Money-printing has been used many times historically, and in each case the structure of a positive feedback system inherent in centralized structures caused failures, and this goes back many times throughout the historic record.

The core issues are for production of food, we depend on order. The cascade failures are based in mathematical chaos, which we cannot tame, and which also given such properties prevent immediate recognition in time to act to change outcomes.

There is no alternative under a money-printing system. The dynamics are well known, and each time the people involved think they know better, and bring ruin to the people who vested them with that trust/power.

AI makes everything worse because it not only imposes additional cost on all parties involved in economic transactions, but also at the same time drains any demand in certain low-rung job areas of the sequential career pipeline which must continue as we age; lest everything collapse.

The vast majority of jobs being automated means starvation for those that cannot work. Even with welfare, the draw on the state forces inflation and prices higher and at whipsaw intervals than policy can be set to react.

60% of the workforce jobs are white-collar jobs, they will be replaced including the CEOs. Manufacturing and Blue-Collar work are for the most part severely limited because its far cheaper to bring in immigrant/slave labor through foreign currency manipulation (as China has done for decades).

You want an answer, but there isn't a tractable one because these problems are hard problems. Like the Riemann Hypothesis or a much harder case of the 3-body (n-body) problem in astrophysics.

There exist impossible to solve problems, and in such cases the only solution is to not play that game because the conclusions are known ahead of time, not specifically but in the overwhelming number of times those situations have repeated historically.

The only real solution is to build up your own isolated community and grid as a foundation, to bootstrap the long dark ahead. All empires fall, and when they do under malthusian constraint in an ever more adverse environment, it can be devastating (and existential).

There's maybe at most 10 years (2 years ago) before you see everything going off a cliff, and the kicker is you may only have 1-2 years to stop the momentum, after which even if you stop full tilt you won't be able to avert catastrophe.