Alaska's Universal Basic Income, Supported By Liberals and Conservatives Under Attack

PoliTalker

Diversity Makes Greatness
"How to Hand Out Free Money
When the robots take our jobs, we’ll need another form of income. Alaska can show us the way."

Mother Jones

"For nearly four decades, the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) program, designed to share revenue from the state’s oil wealth, has made flat annual payouts to anyone who has lived there for at least one calendar year, barring those with certain criminal convictions. While the program’s architects didn’t use the term, it’s the closest thing today to a universal basic income program that has durably existed anywhere in the world.

The concept of universal basic income—in which governments pay residents a set sum regularly, no strings attached—has gained momentum in recent years. A growing chorus of Silicon Valley executives has called the policy inevitable, as automation threatens to displace one-third of American workers by 2030, raising the specter of unemployed masses rioting in the streets. Others have revived the idea as an efficient solution to poverty and inequality. Y Combin*ator, the tech startup accelerator, will soon test basic income with 3,000 people in two states, following a smaller study in Oakland, California. The city of Stockton, California, will launch a guaranteed income pilot in 2019, and lawmakers in Hawaii and Chicago are considering following suit. Trials have also launched in Barcelona, Canada, Finland, Kenya, Uganda, and Switzerland. In the United States, the concept is inching its way into the mainstream; Hillary Clinton’s campaign memoir disclosed she seriously considered floating a universal basic income program called “Alaska for America” during her 2016 run."

PoliTalker anti-troll thread thief disclaimer: If this thread is stolen, plagiarized, will the thief have the nerve to use the entire OP, word for word? Including this disclaimer? If you want my take on it, you'll have to post to this original PoliTalker thread. I refuse to be an enabler for online bullies, so I won't post to a stolen thread. I won't even read it. If you don't see me, PoliTalker, posting in this thread check the author. This might be a hijacked thread, not the original.

Eventually, most jobs as we know them will be performed by robots. Artificial Intelligence is changing the way we work. This level of automation will dwarf anything seen in the past. And it will not generate more jobs than it eliminates. We are on the precipice of having a society where there are far more willing workers than jobs.

As if we don't have that already. We can fool ourselves by claiming jobs are abundant and unemployment is low, but it is rarely wise to fool ourselves. Yes, jobs are abundant and unemployment is low, technically, but the unemployment figures count anybody working one hour per week as not unemployed. Nobody can live on one hour's pay unless they are CEO of a major corporation, so for millions of Americans, work and paychecks are not enough to live on. There is not enough work for everybody, and much of the work that is there doesn't pay enough to live on.

And the situation is poised to become far worse.

The need for government assistance is about to be amplified.

Should we continue to pay lots of government workers to be part of a huge bureaucracy to decide who gets benefits and who doesn't?

What if there was another way? That's a lot of money to run government agencies and pay people to enforce elaborate rules to decide who is needy and who isn't. It's a lot of overhead. It costs the taxpayers a lot of money just to try to figure out who gets what.

What if we simply handed out the money instead?

If we had a UBI, much of the government safety net could be dismantled.

Who is going to pay for it all?

The ultra rich. That's who.

The ultra rich are far richer than most. Most people don't even have any idea how rich the super-rich are. But let me tell you. They are rich. Rich enough to cover this.

And they are about to get a lot richer. Extreme wealth inequality is not going to stop. AI is going to launch it into the stratosphere. The only people who will be able to afford the fancy AI machines that will, not only do most jobs but also service and repair the new AI machines as well as design and build improves AI machines, will be the super-wealthy. Workers will not be able to own their own 'worker machine' that goes and does their job for them. No. It will not work that way. The super-wealthy will own those machines and they won't need workers any more. The 'job creator' nonsense will be blown out of the water. The AI race will be a race to eliminate jobs.

Your job could be going away.

And you might not be able to get another one.

The very need for whatever you are trained for will be going away.

And so will your paychecks.

And revenue.

We are going to have to raise taxes on the super-wealthy, and we are going to have to tax them enough to pay for the UBI.

There's no other way to do it.

Unless you have a better idea.
 
The Alaskan largess is under attack by democrats who want to ban fossil fuels. Without oil, Alaska is the land of pirates.
 
Hello Kacper,

The Alaskan largess is under attack by democrats who want to ban fossil fuels. Without oil, Alaska is the land of pirates.

It is not just Democrats who want to ban fossil fuels. It is people who understand we cannot extract and burn everything that's in the ground without destroying our atmosphere and habitat.

If we look beyond the primary source of funding for this, on an existential level, the State taxed the RICH and handed out MONEY TO EVERYBODY.

And it WORKED.

So once you get past all the loaded partisan arguments, Alaska has proven that the concept works quite well.

Now that we know it does, we should institute it for the entire nation.

Because we are going to need to sooner or later.

This is one instance where we could do something BEFORE the damage of avoiding it wreaks havoc.

Side note.

Do you protect and defend the super-rich?

If so, why?

They don't need your help.

We are going to have to gang up on them and share the wealth.
 
Hello Kacper,



It is not just Democrats who want to ban fossil fuels. It is people who understand we cannot extract and burn everything that's in the ground without destroying our atmosphere and habitat.

If we look beyond the primary source of funding for this, on an existential level, the State taxed the RICH and handed out MONEY TO EVERYBODY.

And it WORKED.

So once you get past all the loaded partisan arguments, Alaska has proven that the concept works quite well.

Now that we know it does, we should institute it for the entire nation.

Because we are going to need to sooner or later.

This is one instance where we could do something BEFORE the damage of avoiding it wreaks havoc.

Side note.

Do you protect and defend the super-rich?

If so, why?

They don't need your help.

We are going to have to gang up on them and share the wealth.

Alaska has not shown that basic income works because it doesn't have a sustainable source of revenue outside of oil to support the program.

I don't protect and defend the super rich. You do. You just don't see it. "Basic Income Guarantee" means "Corporate profits guarantee". It alters the natural dynamics of the market that otherwise check excess. You are not defending the little guy. You are defending replacing the little guy with a robot and still guaranteeing there is money for the products made by the robot.
 
Hello Kacper,

Alaska has not shown that basic income works because it doesn't have a sustainable source of revenue outside of oil to support the program.

The UBI does work. Alaska has shown that because it has not destroyed the Alaskan economy. All the fears and worries about such a concept causing people to die from laziness have been proven moot. It doesn't matter what the source is. In this case, the source has been from taxing oil extraction. It could be from taxing a different kind of wealth, and be just as effective.

I don't protect and defend the super rich.

The question was not directed at you.



That's interesting. But I suppose I can see how this could be said.

You just don't see it.
I just said I did.

"Basic Income Guarantee" means "Corporate profits guarantee".

No it doesn't.

It alters the natural dynamics of the market that otherwise check excess.

The natural dynamics of the market are self-destructive. They need to be constantly altered by proper regulation, without which, capitalism would self-implode.

You are not defending the little guy.

I am defending society and a sustainable economy.

You are defending replacing the little guy with a robot

No, I am realistically acknowleding that this is unavoidable.

and still guaranteeing there is money for the products made by the robot.

Unless we want to go back to hunter-gatherer / subsistence-farmer status, society will produce and consume products. All I have done has been to recognize this.
 
Hello Kacper,



The UBI does work. Alaska has shown that because it has not destroyed the Alaskan economy. All the fears and worries about such a concept causing people to die from laziness have been proven moot. It doesn't matter what the source is. In this case, the source has been from taxing oil extraction. It could be from taxing a different kind of wealth, and be just as effective.

The Alaskan checks are $2K per person. It isn't a basic income and you have yet to explain how they would fund that without oil revenue.
 
Hello Kacper,,

The Alaskan checks are $2K per person. It isn't a basic income

Well, some actually live on it, but it takes more grit than money to live where they do. It isn't enough for most to live on, but it is a regular payment from the State to everybody for doing nothing, and the money comes from taxing the wealthy. The basics of my argument are all there. You're simply debating proportions.

and you have yet to explain how they would fund that without oil revenue.

I explained that in the OP.

"Who is going to pay for it all?

The ultra rich. That's who.

...

We are going to have to raise taxes on the super-wealthy, and we are going to have to tax them enough to pay for the UBI."
 
Something akin to a Universal Basic Income will be the norm throughout the world...IN EVERY COUNTRY, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES...at some point relatively soon. My guess is it will happen well within the lifetimes of poeople now alive...in fact, well within the lifetimes of people now adults.

The notion of "earning one's living" is an anachronism that we are well rid of.

The notion of working is fine...but not to earn a living. Not today...not with what we have going for us.

Experiments will happen along these lines...some will be more successful than others...some will be total flops.

But it is the only way to go.
 
Hello Frank,

I didn't think it would take long for you to want to be part of this important discussion. Thanks for your interest.

Something akin to a Universal Basic Income will be the norm throughout the world...IN EVERY COUNTRY, INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES...at some point relatively soon. My guess is it will happen well within the lifetimes of poeople now alive...in fact, well within the lifetimes of people now adults.

The notion of "earning one's living" is an anachronism that we are well rid of.

The notion of working is fine...but not to earn a living. Not today...not with what we have going for us.

Experiments will happen along these lines...some will be more successful than others...some will be total flops.

But it is the only way to go.

Oh, it's coming alright.

No matter how far into past economies the right wants to cling.

From the OP link:

"Y Combin*ator, the tech startup accelerator, will soon test basic income with 3,000 people in two states, following a smaller study in Oakland, California. The city of Stockton, California, will launch a guaranteed income pilot in 2019, and lawmakers in Hawaii and Chicago are considering following suit. Trials have also launched in Barcelona, Canada, Finland, Kenya, Uganda, and Switzerland. In the United States, the concept is inching its way into the mainstream"
 
Automation has been called a threat to jobs for 70 years. Automation and robotics are huge industries. If you are paying attention, there are still lots of jobs. I remember the predictions of a paperless society.. How did that work out?
If it ever comes to fruition, something will have to be done to appease the masses, The wealthy want to be safe and travel freely.
 
Automation has been called a threat to jobs for 70 years. Automation and robotics are huge industries. If you are paying attention, there are still lots of jobs. I remember the predictions of a paperless society.. How did that work out?
If it ever comes to fruition, something will have to be done to appease the masses, The wealthy want to be safe and travel freely.

Captain Smith: "Don't worry about icebergs, we are unsinkable. Full speed ahead."
 
Hello Nordberg,

Automation has been called a threat to jobs for 70 years. Automation and robotics are huge industries. If you are paying attention, there are still lots of jobs. I remember the predictions of a paperless society.. How did that work out?


Automation is not the new part.

Artificial Intelligence is.

We have not perfected it yet but it appears we are on the precipice of it.

Once it is achieved, it changes much.

The new machines will service themselves, repair themselves, program themselves. And far more. Not only will they not generate many new jobs as they eliminate millions, they will also have the ability to design better replacements for themselves, and build those replacements.

This is not the same old story of automation. This is a game changer. There have never been machines that learn and improve themselves. Machines were always designed with a specific purpose in mind. These new machines will be able to adapt and improve themselves. Once given a task, they will be able to decide if the way they are doing it is the most efficient, and if not, they will be able to modify themselves, improve, adapt, learn, figure things out better. They could even figure out new tasks to be done which were not originally preconceived.

It will begin with the elimination of truckers and delivery drivers. Warehouse pickers, landscapers, construction people, etc. That's just the beginning of the iceberg. The tip. This is not just 'Automation 2.0.' This is 'Automation X,' where X is an expandable number, an ever-expanding number.

If it ever comes to fruition, something will have to be done to appease the masses, The wealthy want to be safe and travel freely.

Yes. Something will have to be done. That something is a UBI. And there is only one place the funding for that can come from.

Capitalism and technological advancement have been very efficient at eliminating work. Already there is not really enough good paying work for everybody. That's why we have so many people on government assistance. When AI is conquered, and most paychecks are eliminated, the UBI will be the only thing that can possibly keep the economy from imploding.

It's OK if you want to deny this. It doesn't matter if everyone understands the implications yet. All too soon it will be all too apparent. There isn't much buzz around this right now. It can be ignored for a while. But it's not going away. You are going to be hearing more and more about this. Mark my words.
 
Last edited:
You do know that Sarah Palin killed 4 Exxon projects before she quit as governor of Alaska.

So? Does not change that 1) The Alaskan checks are not a basic income and 2) Alaska is completely dependent on oil for those checks. Alaska has a very high cost of living. a couple grand a year isn't going to put a dent in that.
 
So? Does not change that 1) The Alaskan checks are not a basic income and 2) Alaska is completely dependent on oil for those checks. Alaska has a very high cost of living. a couple grand a year isn't going to put a dent in that.

You're right.. Palin killed the Exxon projects and increased the checks that year by $2,000... and she considers herself to be a conservative Republican.
 
You're right.. Palin killed the Exxon projects and increased the checks that year by $2,000... and she considers herself to be a conservative Republican.

It was a one time payment of an extra $1,200.00 and the dividend formula resulted in a higher than usual base payment. It would have been a lot more the last couple years but the governor keeps obstructing the higher pay outs.

As for whether or not Palin is or was a true scotsman, doesn't matter to me. I don't carry GOP water.
 
It was a one time payment of an extra $1,200.00 and the dividend formula resulted in a higher than usual base payment. It would have been a lot more the last couple years but the governor keeps obstructing the higher pay outs.

As for whether or not Palin is or was a true scotsman, doesn't matter to me. I don't carry GOP water.

You're right .. it was $1200. What do the facts have to do with carrying water for the GOP?
 
You're right .. it was $1200. What do the facts have to do with carrying water for the GOP?

You were the one that injected whether or not she is a real conservative into the conversation. Either way. Alaska is not a cheap place to live unless you are an off-grid hunting, gathering granola eater. Their gas prices are running about 90 cents to a dollar higher than mine per gallon So whatever their government giveth back, mine never tooketh away.
 
Hello Kacper,

So? Does not change that 1) The Alaskan checks are not a basic income and 2) Alaska is completely dependent on oil for those checks. Alaska has a very high cost of living. a couple grand a year isn't going to put a dent in that.

Did you know that some Alaskans are so poor that their only income is the Permanent Fund Dividend, PFD?

Some people live in such remote areas that money is not their biggest challenge in survival.

For them, the PFD IS their only income, it is quite basic, and it is what they live on.
 
You were the one that injected whether or not she is a real conservative into the conversation. Either way. Alaska is not a cheap place to live unless you are an off-grid hunting, gathering granola eater. Their gas prices are running about 90 cents to a dollar higher than mine per gallon So whatever their government giveth back, mine never tooketh away.

Everything is more expensive in remote areas. It is not the government taking away anything. It is the government providing a small universal basic income to everybody with no questions asked. Alaska has no sales tax, no income tax.
 
Back
Top