It's a question of wealth distribution. Jobs have traditionally been a relatively fair way of doing this. I put in effort to produce something in the economy, my effort is acknowledged through some money, and I can trade that in for the fruits of some of your labor.
The question in the article is phrased as "what about when people can't find jobs?" However, when we get to that point, perhaps the question should in fact be "what about when people don't need to find jobs."
If automation and technology in general continues to increase like this, at some point we should be able to produce the equivalent of today's standard of living with very little human input. Hence, our current framework that incentivizes everyone to work becomes less necessary.
Should people be rewarded with a comfortable standard of living simply for being human, even if they don't do anything, in such a scenario? I tend to think yes.
Here's my proposal: We implement a Basic Income Guarantee as a fraction of GDP. It can be so small as to be negligible right now, but as human capacity to produce increases, everyone reaps the rewards.
When we're so technically proficient that the Basic Income Guarantee is enough to sustain yourself with a meager lifestyle, some may just not work and live on it. Lucky them, for living in such an era, but that's something of a reward that humans could have earned through increasing technology.
I wonder if it would be healthy for the individuals and the society. Maybe the problem is not how to keep people alive and well, but putting them to do productive work. So I find the proposed solution of creating phony jobs backwards.
The question in the article is phrased as "what about when people can't find jobs?" However, when we get to that point, perhaps the question should in fact be "what about when people don't need to find jobs."
If automation and technology in general continues to increase like this, at some point we should be able to produce the equivalent of today's standard of living with very little human input. Hence, our current framework that incentivizes everyone to work becomes less necessary.
Should people be rewarded with a comfortable standard of living simply for being human, even if they don't do anything, in such a scenario? I tend to think yes.
Here's my proposal: We implement a Basic Income Guarantee as a fraction of GDP. It can be so small as to be negligible right now, but as human capacity to produce increases, everyone reaps the rewards.
When we're so technically proficient that the Basic Income Guarantee is enough to sustain yourself with a meager lifestyle, some may just not work and live on it. Lucky them, for living in such an era, but that's something of a reward that humans could have earned through increasing technology.