UBI and AI Simplified

[@fosterseth]

awesome video, learned a lot. I work on automation software, it's unbelievable how much effort goes into automating the world around us, especially in IT. Automation and reduced human labor is the end goal for so many industries. The writing is on the wall that UBI will become necessary at some point.

[@r_h_e_a_n]

There's a lot of value in referencing books you've read on the topics you're speaking about. Keep doing that. I love getting new recommendations and it helps spark more food for thought.

[@ChangeNode]

Thanks! I'm totally that guy that's always "well, I read this book on..." and it's nice to have an outlet lol. :)

[@noneplayercharacter729]

very comprehensive overview of UBI !! Awesome vid, man!! Norway vs. Saudi Arabia's oil wealth is a good point

[@T-Bone5160]

agree: "Norway vs. Saudi Arabia's oil wealth is a good point". Solid.

[@TechIndustryAnalysis]

Thanks for taking the time to give your thoughts on UBI. Your research and background in tech provide a refreshing insight. If I understood what you said correctly, the fed sounds like they're in a catch 22. If the fed were to be responsible for adminstering UBI, wouldn't that just technically create more inflation? Perhaps, that's why you made a mention to replace UBI with other equivalent costs to the federal budget like healthcare.

[@ChangeNode]

UBI that's matched by revenue or some mechanism to remove money is not inflationary. Right now central banks create huge amounts of money via debt, as well as (in the US at least after 2008) via asset purchase programs. The amount of money sloshing around via debt is way, way more than UBI. National debt is super weird. Back in the 90s the US actually was paying off debt w/a debt surplus and it really screwed up a bunch of pension funds that had written into their charter maintaining a certain level of government bonds, but because the US wasn't issuing new bonds existing bonds were selling for way over their normal value. So, in effect, by paying off the national debt it was messing up retirement funds. Basically, my point is that if the fed tries to manage technologically induced deflation via cheap debt, it's going to really mess up the economy, as people without jobs don't/can't use debt. So at some point there will need to be a UBI to allow people w/o work to be able to eat/live and a matching tax of some kind to balance it out. I use the labor rate as the core metric for determining when this will become a crisis. It's not now, but it could be. The alternative (labor participation falloff w/no UBI) looks like a recipe for dystopia/revolution/etc. IMHO.

[@T-Bone5160]

@@ChangeNode Glad to read this/your comment. There is financial literacy on one hand and the way the system really works on the other, or so it seems to me. Our debt based economic system is not taught or understood by enough people. But everyone is trapped in the economic system. And once a person ages-out or skills-out of their production cycle they are doomed to poverty.

[@hudooguru2]

Great content again. Thank you.

[@ChangeNode]

Thanks! :)

[@HMAWilcox]

Thank you for saying these thoughts and exploring on what may be possible in the future. These conversations do need to start now. Then again, as a sci fi reader, this topic has been a major plot point explored in thousands of books telling us what not to do.

[@ChangeNode]

I know, right? Enough with the dystopia, we see that every day in the news. I did an interview a bit ago on this topic pca.st/episode/c5e6a721-cc4d-4c82-bbc8-90165d310ec2 is one of the episodes, part of a series

[@carolhartley4448]

Very interesting, but for older people on ssa, that wouldn't work, excpecially ones that get under, $1000 a month from ssa, but interesting for sure, i never heard of UBI until this video❤❤

[@danacartwright8597]

Having the federal reserve manage a UBI program makes a ton of sense. Bumping up UBI payments with printed money would have been a far more effective response to the 2008 crash than quantitative easing. Also a great point that using that mechanism more instead of interest rates would probably provide a lot more stability to the construction industry, which might in turn make our housing market less volatile. Personally, I don't find the argument that AI and robots are coming for our jobs all that persuasive. I see the technology as an excuse that capital uses to cut the share of profits that flow to labor. If the workers benefit from the increased efficiency (e.g. now instead of an assembly line worker, you're a robot repair mechanic making 2x the income), then that will drive new jobs in service to those higher end jobs, and overall it should wash. UBI is a great idea, but forming unions and demanding a fair share of the profits from the increased efficiencies seems like a lighter lift politically.

[@zxcvnmtgb]

Great work. Is there a RSS Feed or something similar for this podcast?

[@ChangeNode]

At this point I'm only publishing these via KZbin. There's a podcast version of it you can get through the KZbin Music app, so you can still listen via mobile. I'd have to find a podcast host & then set that up etc. Right now I get KZbin credit for views and as a just-starting-out channel I can use every view I get. :)

[@user-eh9jo9ep5r]

People just need unconditionally support in view UBI. When humans have choose their work, they didn't had any double work, they knew they need to study and after they will do what they want after receiving education. When you deal about education u need just learn, when you work you need just work. Government not put on you double responsibility for do what you not suppose to do, it is actually not discussed at all, and it is fair. Because if you give support it is not exchange in time money on cheap work in return in time, it is unconditional support. Better to open courses for those who are interested in new education and in new profession. This will be fair. Support it is support, education it is education, work it is work. If you will be follow by politics and by some strange supportive rules, you will be never you, and never will achieve what you wanted.

[@chesapeake566]

UBI, including in this video, always falls apart when you get to the "How are we going to pay for it?" part. They always assume those affected by higher taxes won't change their behavior, but history shows us that never happens, as France found out when they tried to gouge their rich and they all left the country. The top 1% already pay half the taxes.

[@ChangeNode]

I kind of cover it in the video, but FWIW you can apply the "how are you going to pay for it" argument to just about anything - military, social programs, etc. It's about striking that balance of agreement which makes politics so messy. 🤷‍♂️

[@chesapeake566]

@@ChangeNode First off, the gov't has always lied about the cost of major new programs. For instance, Medicare cost twelve times more than they told us it would. But with UBI we have a better idea of the cost just by multiplying payees times payment. At Yang's suggested $1,000/mo we're talking ~$2 trillion/yr. But you and I both know that with AI putting tens of millions out of work and with the inflation we've experienced, $1,000 is not nearly enough. So let's say UBI equals minimum wage for fast food workers in California. So $3,400/mo, which is more than the current total budget of the U.S. Until someone shows me specifically how we find another $7 trillion/yr I don't see how UBI works.

[@user-eh9jo9ep5r]

Humans not doing things if they not like, means it is create short and long term stress and seekness, and if they like what they doing, like paint, or create art, or doing their profession but in the way they like it, it will be absolutely different and health and income could be and will be better.

[@anathardayaldar]

Politicians will be in favor of anything that will give them more power. They will fight anything that might weaken their power. As to the actual pros and cons of the issue, they'll say whatever it takes to achieve the above.

[@LegalAutomation]

Politicians will be huge proponents of UBI. They love taxing you and then making sure you follow their rules before they give you your own money back.

[@realharo]

Why would deflation matter in a world where nobody has a job? Normally it's bad because when people don't spend, businesses don't make money and people get laid off. But if people are already not working - why does it matter?

[@ChangeNode]

Kind of jumping ahead a bit from the realm of today to post-singularity. Deflation matters as long as one is trying to manage resources. If you have a total post-singularity economy with no jobs, no need to manage resources, etc then you don't need to worry about any of it. FWIW even Star Trek isn't truly post-economic, they still have big things like starships, starbases, etc, that are beyond the reach of ordinary folks. You might get a kick out of this book amzn.to/47LMUhl

[@garad123456]

Hi - it'd be nice if you'd say what the acronym (UBI) stands for, right at the start. You dont even say it at the point where you explain what it is. It's universal basic income

[@ChangeNode]

I think I defined it pretty early on, right after the intro, but yeah, you're right, I may have skipped it. :\ I'm around folks who are using the term all the time nowadays, slipped through the cracks.

[@NikoKun]

Personally, I prefer the term "Unconditional Basic Income", to help prevent such a policy from being corrupted.

[@fincy645]

@@NikoKun But there are conditions? At least, being a citizen, and being a certain age, no? I don't think six year olds need UBI

[@NikoKun]

@@fincy645 I'm sure there'd be specifics to work out, in that regard.. But kids gotta eat too, and a family with kids has to spend a lot more on basic necessities, than people without kids. The "unconditional" aspect applies more to conditions being placed on individuals already receiving it, which would stop them from receiving it if they don't meet them. Alternatively, instead of UBI, we could call it an AI Dividend for all. That would essentially be a return on our data-investment which gets collected from everyone, to train AI to soon out compete most of us.

[@parthsna]

Instead of UBI there should be negative income tax bands. Also, means testing to ensure nobody with a net worth of more than saying $1 million should qualify

[@ChangeNode]

My two cents is that they are very close in terms of outcome, but that the UBI version is easier for people to understand. I mean, a *huge* percentage of people don't even understand how existing marginal tax rates work, so negative income tax seems more complicated. Plus I think most people have a more positive association with, say, the Social Security admin than the IRS. WRT clawing it back for high earners, that's a mod to the tax system that's pretty straightforward, at least insofar as anything involving taxes is straight-forward.

[@malcolmvernon6808]

lets get some u bi going

[@curiouslycory]

Our world has been in a position to do this since at least some time just after the industrial revolution but we continue to convince ourselves and others that it's not fair, or wouldn't work if we did this. We should at VERY least embrace a reduction in the average work week. Everyone can work, but less and less over time. Make sure there continues to be enough work for everyone by spreading it in continuingly more thin way. Working less has been shown to improve individual productivity so we can start reducing the work week at least until we start seeing productivity drop with zero "bad". A huge number of morally gray to objectively evil decisions made every day are created up by the fact that people need to put food on the table and roof over their heads. How many bad bosses or corrupt companies can only exist because people NEED a job? How many people do things they would never otherwise do because they're afraid they'll end up homeless? This includes things like selling drugs, theft, robbery, etc. Making sure everyone have their most basic needs covered means most of these things disappear. No one is working for the tyrant boss or corrupt manager if you can quit without fear of going hungry. It would be amazing to see what people actually do with their lives when they're not beholden to doing other people's work just to survive. Collaboration instead of servitude. Partners instead of servants and masters.

[@ChangeNode]

Yeah, I think the core of it comes down to social definitions of "fair" along with how external shocks shake things up. I think a lot about how things like the plague in Europe caused a lot of social change & increased worker rights. That's part of why I focused on labor rate participation in the video - my guess is that if salaries just wind up dropping slowly over time there won't be as much impetus for change, but if, say, 10%+ of the workforce just simply dropped to unemployment in 1-3 years it would lead to popular support for more structural change.

[@spombg]

It's interesting how you describe UBI as an extension of capitalism when, to my understanding, UBI seems one of the most socialist policies to implement. I'm a socialist, so this all sounds great to me, but it's very interesting to see how UBI can be embraced from both sides of the needle if it just has the right branding.

[@ChangeNode]

Capitalism and socialism are both pretty messy terms. From a high level, capitalism is more about who controls production (vs, say, monarchy/nobility or the state). So, UBI still leaves the control of the means of production more or less untouched, it's just another social program to take the edge off, like unemployment assistance or other programs. Adam Smith talks a lot about the role of government to provide a well regulated market, etc. Socialism is a very murky term used to describe everything from the most basic social support programs to full-blown state control of the economy. So, UBI basically extends capitalism as it's a way to take the edge off without a fundamental rewrite of the control of production.

[@muzehack]

A transaction tax on stock trades would raise a ton of money and really not affect the average retail investor.

[@mitchellbunnell7448]

We need the machines to do all the BS bureaucrat/admin jobs and we need way more people growing food, naturally, for their family’s and community. We will all be fine if we focus on living and living locally. Get out of cities and start forming small communities

[@dm95422]

Basic Income...always talked about....NEVER, EVER implemented ! 😂😂😂

[@ChangeNode]

Lots of tests but yeah not at scale. 🤔🤷‍♂️

[@LegalAutomation]

Dont tax me. Dont give me UBI. I'll make my own money, thanks.

[@NikoKun]

Even if you end up being fine, most people won't be.. How will you "make your own money", when there won't be many customers with money to spend, because AI took their jobs? If you wanna keep making money, in the future we undeniably face in just a few years, you should support UBI, so you'll still have customers or clients who can afford to pay you. You won't be the one taxes need to be raised on, the robots and AI, and wealthy who own them, will be.. In order to repay people for their data, that trained AI to replace their jobs.

[@nerdobject5351]

I’m still a firm believer that when a door closes a window opens. The more AI and Automation that shows up it will create jobs for people that need to maintain these things. What’s more critical is that workers prepare for the shift. No one complains that a blacksmith can’t find work in 2024. But maybe 100 years ago they would have. The same thing is going to happen and I think the need for more people to be exposed to high level fundamental comp sci and programmer is existential. Software is likely going to be made through a series of configuration, prompts, UIs and some code. But none of that useful if you don’t know the fundamentals of what to to ask and what to build. While It’s not popular nor kind to just say “Learn to Code”. But quite frankly you really can reduce it that level of simplicity. I think everyone it next generation and lifetime will need to understand this stuff in some capacity.

[@ChangeNode]

I think one of the challenges is the combination of living standards and retraining time/costs. eg I don't think most people would mind going back to college if, say, they could afford to do it and not wreck their living standard in the process. But if we wind up telling a huge percentage of the population that a) they have no job b) they will have to radically retrain into a completely new field c) it's going to cost 2-4 years of schooling and d) absolutely no guarantee that there will be a job waiting for them... that's rough. Really rough.

[@nerdobject5351]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@ChangeNodeI take your point. To clarify I don’t think this is all going to happen overnight. I think over the next couple of decades we’re going to see a lot downward pressure on white collar jobs. People will slowly find themselves out of date skill wise after a layoff and depending on where your at in your career you’ll adapt to the change in your field or do something different. A good example might be office clerk from 20 years ago. Someone who stored and alphabetized paper files that might see in medical office. That slowly disappeared and no one asked question. What did they do? What are they doing? I’m guessing they changed industries or learned how to use a computer. If I think about a scenario your talking about where we find a great deal automation in our daily lives and there’s not enough jobs for everyone to service or maintain ai and robots and not enough jobs where they can make a living wage UBI might become part of the equation. But I’m complete optimist here. I think everyone will find a place before that needs to happen. The churn will be slow enough and new jobs will open up.

[@ChangeNode]

That's thing, if it takes 20-40 years it's kind of an Industrial Revolution or outsourcing scenario and it'll play out over decades. At the other end is, for example, figure.ai announces the $50k robot next year and many companies start announcing massive layoffs as soon as the robots come online as fast as they can buy them. I genuinely have no idea what's going to happen WRT the timeline, and that's both awesome and crazy. It's strange, as I'm a huge optimist for what things will be like in 20 years, and much more concerned about the next 1-5 years.

[@nerdobject5351]

@@ChangeNode Crazy time for sure. I'm here to watch you discuss it all! I enjoy the content and Ill continue to participate in civil discussion :)

[@NikoKun]

If this were any other technological advance, you'd probably be right. In most situations, a new technology that makes old tasks easier, would free people up to do better tasks. But the nature of AI, changes that whole equation. We aren't just automating strength or speed, or even organization. Now we're automating human cognition itself, along with human level interaction and conversation, the decision making aspect of why humans were still needed. We're automating intelligence, so think about that, what possible new jobs could that create, which it couldn't also do itself? The real truth is, AI frees us to go back to doing more human things that we enjoy, but how we'll distribute basic resources to people, must change!

[@T-Bone5160]

Ohhh….way too much crazy talk. Just at the beginning then the middle and again at the end. Yeah, the whole thing.

[@ChangeNode]

Lol, yeah, well, I'm just trying to walk folks through the numbers and what/when it might happen (ie not for a long time most likely). UBI is a reflexive talking point for a lot of tech folks esp WRT AI, so I wanted to get a video out on it. 🤷‍♂️

[@T-Bone5160]

@@ChangeNode Good video, ideas worth talking about for sure. AGI will be the easy part. Living with the changes will be the challenge. I am conservative by nature and not very creative either. I see the value of the "creatives" and "classic liberal" openness to try new things/policies to move society forward. The Leftist have too much control and influence currently. If AGI is half of what it is hyped to be we need new approaches to "everything" and that will be very messy. Thank you for your efforts to move the conversation forward.

[@brettburnside1457]

Why don't we only give UBI to those who work? If you're truly lazy, then you lose out.

[@ChangeNode]

Two main drivers for UBI discussion a) as an alternative to structured plans that come with more government interference (this is the Nixon admin approach) b) widespread technological unemployment eg due to AI/robotics tech Just giving money to those who work doesn't really address either of those points. As a thought experiment I would suggest thinking through what will/could/should happen if, say, the total number of jobs is cut in half for, say, a decade. If the answer is "let those people die" then... well... 😬

[@NikoKun]

Because it's "Unconditional Basic Income", and the whole point is that it goes to everyone. Having to check who works and who doesn't, is called means testing, and it's expensive to administer. Part of the benefit of UBI is that it saves a lot of money in comparison to our broken welfare system. Plus, we're soon entering a time where not everyone who wants to work, will be able to find a job. In fact, there's a good chance over 50 percent of the population will be in that situation! In that case, a UBI would work like an AI Dividend for All, to repay people for their data that got collected over the last few decades, to train AI to out compete them. We need to ensure everyone can benefit from AI, and survive in our society. We cannot let people starve, just because AI out competes them.

[@stefansile6790]

Yea, not a big fan of having political content put in alongside the tech job market.

[@applejuice5635]

UBI is an economic topic, not politics.

[@ChangeNode]

UBI is just a program/option. It kept coming up over and over in comments as the solution for technological unemployment, so I figured it would be worth covering w/data. Jobs, unemployment, and economics all wind up being more-or-less political adjacent. Hopefully the approach works... did you watch the video?

[@rafae5902]

yeah, i agree and he was doing so well with his other videos...

[@RommelsAsparagus]

You can't really talk about AGI without at least some commentary about "what happens to the humans when the value of labor approaches zero?"