You still can’t look beyond the first order effect of anything, you’ve made no argument and it’s clear you have no understanding of economics. I don’t understand physics, law, biology, chemistry, engineering, etc. so I don’t make an ass of myself giving opinions on those things. Why do you insist on embarassing yourself?
1 Like
You have used terms like displacement but failed to explain what that means. All you are saying, and I will summarize this so it’s easy to understand:
People losing jobs means companies can make more stuff, at a lower cost, and possibly, assuming they can sell all of that crap, make even more money.
I think we already knew that. It used to be the economic argument for slavery.
The automation of jobs means there are more jobs to program, build, and service said automation machines as well as supply parts to them.
What does this word salad mean?
Probably not. I’m sure they went to college and graduated and never once thought of operating a hot dog cart. Is operating a hot dog part important for them?
This is 100% bullshit. You enjoy a shit ton of benefits that came from unions. And pay is higher in an industry if a union is present than not.
You’re very set in stone on saying exactly what you think is true with no wiggle room. That’s just my opinion though I’ve never operated a hot dog cart
The whole point is that the jobs that automation replace require different skills than the jobs you are talking about here.
As somebody who works in the tech sector and deals with software engineers/developers on a regular basis, you cannot pretend you can teach coal miners or truck drivers to code. There might be coder jobs available from the displacement you’re talking about, but the skills for those jobs are drastically different.
But as a wise person once said, I must not be older than 7 to consider this idea so what do I know.
1 Like
None of them have managed capital or a business, merged business, divested businesses, spun off businesses, restructured business, priced capital, raised capital, etc. So what credibility do any of them have?
Pay is higher due to preventing non union workers, that is called creating structural unemployment. Thank you for proving my point.
And that’s why people learn different skills and change careers.
If you don’t understand it, best to not try to discuss economics.
You really have thought this through, I’m impressed.
2 Likes
Did you lament the loss of railcar freight with the invention of the cargo plane? How about the automobile replacing horse and buggy? That’s what your argument amounts to.
Nope. I’ve already discussed this above in the thread, specifically the pace of change, but that’s enough engaging with a troll for me today. Enjoy.
1 Like
“Everyone who disagrees with me is a troll.” You never managed capital or ran a business, right?
Lol, swing and a miss. A person who starts their argument saying that everybody who doesn’t think like them is an idiot and can’t be older than 7 is DEFINITELY a troll.
1 Like
UBI being economically idiotic is not an opinion, it’s a fact. You’re not increasing anyone’s purchasing power, it accomplishes nothing except to push up prices. If you’d like to provide an economic argument as to how that does NOT occur, feel free.
This article pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter. Can’t be done without massive tax increases or printing more money, both of which will effectively lower value of the dollar.
2 Likes
Not nearly as much as you apparently.
Do you have an doctorate in economics? If not what credibility do you have?
You’re a troll not because people disagree but you’re on a discussion board and you’re not trying to have a discussion. Everyone who doesn’t agree with you is wrong for reasons you’ve made up. And you attack the idea that anyone could come to a different conclusion than you.
1 Like
Finally, someone gets it.
I have a BA in economics and MBA in finance. I run a long short FIG equity portfolio for a top 10 hedge fund. I’m way more qualified than those idiots.
I provided a comprehensive explanation of my reasoning. Economics is a science, none of you in favor of UBI can explain how the purchasing power per monetary unit doesn’t fall if that policy is implemented. If it does fall (it will, it’s a fact not opinion) nobody receiving UBI is better off.
I am not agreeing with how you phrased many of your arguments above (especially with regards to “job displacement”). I believe in general the risk greatly outweighs the benefit of an UBI.
Paying people to do nothing encourages them to continue doing nothing.
I believe a lot proponents of UBI don’t understand the nature of fiat currency, and that is why the policy looks attractive, but quickly falls flat.
2 Likes