Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

BI income should be available to people that really need, because in most countries there are no resources to give it to everybody. Even if there were, I challenge who believes in BI to tell me if the State could not put that money in research, education or just decrease taxes and get a better outcome for its people (and humanity).

We have a lot of deadly diseases and a growing need to utilize more and more efficiently our scarce resource (food, energy, etc.), we need research, we need development, we need innovation. I really struggle to see that coming any faster, or at all, in a world were resources are spent to let a big portion of the population stay at home.

And please, let's not mix what goes on today, the unemployment rates, with historic economic circles. We are seeing this unemployment since when? 2008? 5 years are not enough to draw drastic conclusion on an economy and its workforce. By the way, 10% unemployment rate says nothing, look at the active population, which usually ranges above 40%, counting kids and pensioners. Which is quite a high number if you ask me, it's not true we don't need workers anymore, you know...



As the workforce will be replaced more and more by robots and machine learning / A.I., people will be left jobless. BI will have to be adopted.


They probably said that also in the 19th century and look at us today, have we seen a drastic reduction of the active work population in 2 centuries? No.

This kind of thinking assumes that there are people fundamentally flawed that can't support in any way our society. This is just unacceptable. Also, work force is also a scarce resource and as all scarce resources we need to optimize it, not to waste it.


>They probably said that also in the 19th century and look at us today, have we seen a drastic reduction of the active work population in 2 centuries? No.

But we have seen quite a massive increase of public sector. How many actually needed jobs do we have anymore?


And yet again, why do we have to assume we have a bunch of people good for nothing? There is historically no evidence whatsoever that any percentage of any population provided absolutely nothing to society.

Now we are also saying public sector is not actually needed. I am not sure how to answer to such wild assumptions.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: