I don't know if this is germane to our discussion, but I was reminded of a "Wizard of Id" cartoon I saw ages ago. Remember the character "Spook"? He was a prisoner serving a life sentence in solitary. One day the jailor came to him and asked him: "Would you like a little bit of temporary freedom?" Spook replies he'd do anything for even a few minutes of freedom. The jailor says, "the king would like his hunting dogs exercised." In the last frame, the Spook and the jailor are standing on the drawbridge at the gate of the castle. The jailor says: "OK, I'm going to give you a twenty-second head start."
quote: some people have been more inclined than others to work hard and amass wealth.. They became the ruling classes and transmitted their values to their offspring.
These comments seem to indicate that hard work results in wealth, yet I know, as do most people, that many millions of people work hard and never get wealthy. We also have examples of people that do not or did not work that hard that are wealthy- primarily because it was handed down to them.
In my view we do need a guaranteed universal income or a jobs guarantee. Or a combination. A UBI certainly would cause a number of people to simply not work, but the, maybe that minimal income is all they need for their lives. Others would be more aggressive, using the UBI as a base and continue working to make more money more in line with their desired lifestyle. Or a UBI could encourage people to quit jobs and start business knowing they won't starve if the business doesn't work out.
Similarly my argument about universal health care. Obamacare went part of the way, but a true de-link of employment and health care coverage also frees people to pursue other endeavors such as starting a business.
A jobs guarantee has even greater macro economic impact. Currentlly the Federal Reserve is tasked with two mandates: Full employment (evaluated at 4% unemployment) and low inflation (evaluated at 2%). But under our current system these are competing metrics. As inflation climbs, the Fed increases interest rates which usually result in job losses thus increasing the unemployment percentage. And as more people are employed and spending that increased consumer spending drives up prices and inflation.
But remove employment from the Fed mandate and give it to Congress to ensure all citizens have job guaranteed or the income that might come with it. This stabilizes the work force spending, eliminating the increased spending under full employment as well as the drastic drop in spending when people are out of work. Consumer spending thus stays fairly stable and will allow the Fed to simply manage the money supply.
Our current system has a built in Boom Bust cycle of disruption. A UBI/JobsGuarantee removes that cycle
Let's use history. I am a fan of hard work, ingenuity and capitalism. But history tells us Horatio Alger's "Rags to Riches" story, that those qualities are all that's needed to be successful in America, is an incomplete tale at best. Movement among the poor, "rags," to the rich, is not only atypical, but rare. That opportunity was constitutionally denied to women and people of color until the 19th and 20th centuries respectively. Then think about the litany of items most American's collectively think of today as positive progress: The Emancipation Act, Women's Right to Vote, the Square Deal, New Deal and Fair Deal, the Civil Rights Act and, yes, Obamacare, and a different, more nuanced picture starts to emerge. Add the rise of the middle class and the introduction of a progressive income tax and we're getting closer to reality -- the playing field has always been bumpy. There has always been a ruling class and an underclass, Masters and slaves, Robber Barons and wage workers, and now today's billionaires and an enormous wealth inequity. I believe we should continue to work toward "the American Dream." AI is just another and the latest opportunity and obstacle. Rather then "Work to Live?", maybe the better question is The Future Deal? If AI truly presents a chance to level set industry, work and prosperity, will we at last create that elusive level playing field for all or is this just the latest way to concentrate "riches" for a privileged few? The current dismantling of the federal government infrastructure sadly bodes well for the later.
I agree. While agricultural surplus was necessary to social organization and security, leisure time was necessary to what we think of as western civilization. Who knows what poetics or physics might spring from minds totally unbound by the needs of production? But angst over AI is justified lest it be used by a few to subjugate the rest.
I don't know if this is germane to our discussion, but I was reminded of a "Wizard of Id" cartoon I saw ages ago. Remember the character "Spook"? He was a prisoner serving a life sentence in solitary. One day the jailor came to him and asked him: "Would you like a little bit of temporary freedom?" Spook replies he'd do anything for even a few minutes of freedom. The jailor says, "the king would like his hunting dogs exercised." In the last frame, the Spook and the jailor are standing on the drawbridge at the gate of the castle. The jailor says: "OK, I'm going to give you a twenty-second head start."
quote: some people have been more inclined than others to work hard and amass wealth.. They became the ruling classes and transmitted their values to their offspring.
These comments seem to indicate that hard work results in wealth, yet I know, as do most people, that many millions of people work hard and never get wealthy. We also have examples of people that do not or did not work that hard that are wealthy- primarily because it was handed down to them.
In my view we do need a guaranteed universal income or a jobs guarantee. Or a combination. A UBI certainly would cause a number of people to simply not work, but the, maybe that minimal income is all they need for their lives. Others would be more aggressive, using the UBI as a base and continue working to make more money more in line with their desired lifestyle. Or a UBI could encourage people to quit jobs and start business knowing they won't starve if the business doesn't work out.
Similarly my argument about universal health care. Obamacare went part of the way, but a true de-link of employment and health care coverage also frees people to pursue other endeavors such as starting a business.
A jobs guarantee has even greater macro economic impact. Currentlly the Federal Reserve is tasked with two mandates: Full employment (evaluated at 4% unemployment) and low inflation (evaluated at 2%). But under our current system these are competing metrics. As inflation climbs, the Fed increases interest rates which usually result in job losses thus increasing the unemployment percentage. And as more people are employed and spending that increased consumer spending drives up prices and inflation.
But remove employment from the Fed mandate and give it to Congress to ensure all citizens have job guaranteed or the income that might come with it. This stabilizes the work force spending, eliminating the increased spending under full employment as well as the drastic drop in spending when people are out of work. Consumer spending thus stays fairly stable and will allow the Fed to simply manage the money supply.
Our current system has a built in Boom Bust cycle of disruption. A UBI/JobsGuarantee removes that cycle
Let's use history. I am a fan of hard work, ingenuity and capitalism. But history tells us Horatio Alger's "Rags to Riches" story, that those qualities are all that's needed to be successful in America, is an incomplete tale at best. Movement among the poor, "rags," to the rich, is not only atypical, but rare. That opportunity was constitutionally denied to women and people of color until the 19th and 20th centuries respectively. Then think about the litany of items most American's collectively think of today as positive progress: The Emancipation Act, Women's Right to Vote, the Square Deal, New Deal and Fair Deal, the Civil Rights Act and, yes, Obamacare, and a different, more nuanced picture starts to emerge. Add the rise of the middle class and the introduction of a progressive income tax and we're getting closer to reality -- the playing field has always been bumpy. There has always been a ruling class and an underclass, Masters and slaves, Robber Barons and wage workers, and now today's billionaires and an enormous wealth inequity. I believe we should continue to work toward "the American Dream." AI is just another and the latest opportunity and obstacle. Rather then "Work to Live?", maybe the better question is The Future Deal? If AI truly presents a chance to level set industry, work and prosperity, will we at last create that elusive level playing field for all or is this just the latest way to concentrate "riches" for a privileged few? The current dismantling of the federal government infrastructure sadly bodes well for the later.
I agree. While agricultural surplus was necessary to social organization and security, leisure time was necessary to what we think of as western civilization. Who knows what poetics or physics might spring from minds totally unbound by the needs of production? But angst over AI is justified lest it be used by a few to subjugate the rest.