Comment by bonoboTP
5 days ago
Any regulation that forbids automation is basically welfare in disguise plus some unnecessary toil. Whoever you're petitioning to ban the technology that can do your job, you could petition also for direct money transfers, at least then you can spend your time how you want. If they won't pay direct money, but they'd pay if they see you suffer and toil, even though it's not necessary, then what does that tell you about them?
How do you decide on the amount of money to be given? Should someone with a big mortgage be forced to sell their home?
It's much much easier to ban and push the issue forward 10-20 years until you die.
Also, if everyone is given UBI, how do you where to scale production? How do you decide who lives where? The whole idea of what you propose is so detached from realistic incentives that you have to understand that it's more incentivized to ban the tech
Well, how do you decide which jobs get protected from automation? Is it just an intellectual capability issue? Only replace the low IQ workers, that's fine, but if it threatens 120+ IQ, then ban such applications?
No-one decides anything, it's a free-for-all, if you want to protest or ban anything you can advocate for it. White collar workers have closer ties into juridical/political processes than blue collar workers and can hence kick the can forward easier.