[jrowen]

> UBI is a distraction. Of course it would help, but it's not a solution. Nobody is going to accept "here's how you filthy masses can be miserable instead of very miserable" as an acceptable compromise.

I don't understand this. It's the endgame. Compromise for what? Working an invented job they don't actually want to work? What is your idea of a solution that combats misery better than a free paycheck?

People are confused into voting against their own interests all the time. Socialism is a bogeyman but Social Security is great (if UBI is too odious just call it lowering the social security age).

I'm to be seen as "you filthy masses" guy when you seem to be advocating some form of mass violence? You could actually, just, exercise democracy to redistribute the wealth. I daresay that would be smarter.

[happytoexplain]

I'm not smart enough to follow some of this, but I can respond to other parts:

1. "Compromise" means that UBI is in-between how it is now ("Everybody is very miserable") and the American Dream ("if you're hard-working and lucky, you get a middle-class lifestyle").

2. I don't have a solution. I'm speaking pragmatically, not as a solution-giver.

3. I love Socialism and smartly-managed wealth distribution. I am not arguing against UBI (I even said "it would help"). I'm arguing against UBI as an answer to AI.