If it was scientifically proven that there is reincarnation would you support a utopian society where everyone gets a...

What makes you think we're poor?

Because this is Veeky Forums, and more importantly, statistics.

So is it better for people to be homeless, than for financial assistance to be a thing? If a middle class person gets seriously injured and couldn't possibly afford the medical bills because they can't afford insurance, it's better for them to die and their family to be sent into complete financial ruin than for social healthcare to be a thing?

Curious of what you think.

>Because this is Veeky Forums, and more importantly, statistics.

>Statistics
Most people are retards, what do ya know.

if you follow statistics then being at a healthy bodyweight let alone with a passable standard of strength and muscle you're like a god amongst men. Few months of learning on Khanacademy would put you in like 95th percentile of American adults in math or whatever.

Same goes with just about anything else. It's stupidly easy to not be poor, especially in a first world country. Anyone can do it with a slight bit of effort.

>The rest of your post
I think you're jumping to extremes here.

There SHOULD be social safetynets to a degree in society, but basic income, food and healthcare like OP said would be a fucking disaster.

>Most people are retards, what do ya know.
No doubt.

>if you follow statistics then being at a healthy bodyweight let alone with a passable standard of strength and muscle you're like a god amongst men. Few months of learning on Khanacademy would put you in like 95th percentile of American adults in math or whatever.
Yep.

>It's stupidly easy to not be poor
This is where I'll disagree. And the reason is exactly as you said
>most people are retards

Not only is it not easy to not be poor, it's getting harder every single day. In a few years (I mean, literally 3-5 years) it will become extremely *difficult* to not be poor.

But to top that off, even more importantly, is that it's completely unrealistic to expect the average person to be able to just "pull themselves up by their bootstraps". When automated driving becomes commonplace (which will happen, at the outside, within 5 years), you're going to have literally millions of people out of work. Not just "unemployed"; their jobs will literally no longer exist. White collar automation is more speculative; could happen in 3 years, might take 30, but that too will happen. The majority of accountants, lawyers, and doctors will not just be unemployed, they will be unemployable.

Real unemployment, including labor non-participation (which is just relabeled unemployment), is nearly 33% right now. This is the highest it's been since we started keeping records in 1975, and in all likelihood since the great depression. And that number is not going to change.

Worker efficiency continues to improve; what takes 5 people now will only take 4 in a few years. Outsourcing will continue to grow; why pay $50k per American when you can pay $10k for a Chinese or Indian worker? And automation marches ever onward; why employ 100 truckers for 100 trucks when you can have 3 drivers, a technician, and a manager for a fleet of 100 semis?

All of these are one-way, inevitable processes. We need to figure shit out, now, not later.

>This is where I'll disagree. And the reason is exactly as you said
>>most people are retards

Well yeah it's hard for a population because obviously society is based on there being a certain amount of retards (If we were all 135IQ, perfectly rational humans then what sort of markets would emerge? Makes you think.)

But i'm talking for individuals. There is so many options. We live in the most prosperous nation on earth, of all time. In the best time period of all time.

>When automated driving becomes commonplace (which will happen, at the outside, within 5 years), you're going to have literally millions of people out of work. Not just "unemployed"; their jobs will literally no longer exist. White collar automation is more speculative; could happen in 3 years, might take 30, but that too will happen. The majority of accountants, lawyers, and doctors will not just be unemployed, they will be unemployable.

I believe you're getting a little ahead of yourself.

I remember hearing about flying cars and robots doing all our jobs while we relax in the year 2000.

>Real unemployment, including labor non-participation (which is just relabeled unemployment), is nearly 33% right now. This is the highest it's been since we started keeping records in 1975, and in all likelihood since the great depression. And that number is not going to change.

Does that count people in education? I highly, highly highly doubt that 1/3rd of the working, out of school, non-retired population is unemployed. That would be like worse than Spain.

Yeah yeah maybe in 300 years. Point is that "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" is COMPLETELY reasonable at this point in time, for anyone.

There is so many options. Military, trades, FAFSA loans -> community college -> 4 year school with good major, starting a meme business, etc. It's really not difficult.

It was called serfdom in the middle ages.

Also don't we have record numbers of people studying in College and an aging population who are mostly retired or getting to be retired?

I think you need to read a little bit beyond just the numbers of the "labor non participation rate" and consider why that might be.

You seem to be conflating things hardly related.

>All of these are one-way, inevitable processes
No, I'm afraid not.
You come off like you're some sort of authority, but unless you're completely disingenuous, you'll have to admit that you're not.
These are just theories, and you really have no way of knowing that they'll become a reality, much less the time frame in which they'd occur, even if they do.
Any one of a dozen events could radically alter the likelihood of all of these, and there's historical precedence for most.

Record numbers of people graduating from college, flooding the workforce driving down wages in their respective fields? You can look up the statistics for college graduates who work in a field related to their degree, it's not pretty. And I'm not talking idiots who chose bullshit majors like woman's rights either

>But i'm talking for individuals. There is so many options.
What I'm saying is it's unreasonable to expect "most" people to be successful in today's environment. Yes, individuals can succeed; I am one of them. But I'm also smarter and more driven than most people, I have more financial security (from my family) than most people. It would be absolutely asinine for me to say "Well I did it, you big dumb dumb. Why can't you?"

>I believe you're getting a little ahead of yourself.
>I remember hearing about flying cars and robots doing all our jobs while we relax in the year 2000.
Yeah, white collar automation is a complete crapshoot. I have no idea (nor does anyone else) when that'll start to play a major role.

But automated driving is coming, very soon. A few months ago, one of the leaders in Ford's automated driving division said they're 4-5 years away from a consumer-ready product. Elon Musk thinks it'll be 2 or 3 years. A week ago Tesla released a video of a Model S navigating city streets to one of their factories. 20 minutes of driving (with a human in the car, of course) with no input from the person. Daimler showed off an autonomous 18 wheeler a year and a half ago. The technology is here. Automated driving is going to happen very, very soon. And that's going to have a major impact on the transportation industry.

>Does that count people in education? I highly, highly highly doubt that 1/3rd of the working, out of school, non-retired population is unemployed. That would be like worse than Spain.
Hahahaha oh boy you're in for a treat here.

Hold on, I'm gonna have to find all the data I have on this. 1/3 is out of the whole population. If you *only* look at working-age people? Oh man, just a sec. I have some pretty graphs to show you.

True but I don't think it changes much. Only difference from many years ago is that more people go to College.

And unemployment rates and salaries are pretty high for STEM/business majors. they're not bad at all.

If you major in STEM or some business specialization there is a very good chance you'll be pretty set for life.

>Hold on, I'm gonna have to find all the data I have on this. 1/3 is out of the whole population. If you *only* look at working-age people? Oh man, just a sec. I have some pretty graphs to show you.

We have an aging population and many more people today are in College than ever before .It's not surprising that labor participation is low.

You need to read beyond the numbers, as I said. Ponder why a number is the way it is.

>We have an aging population and many more people today are in College than ever before
employment dropped catastrophically in 2008 and never recovered.

presumably more people turned 65 that year than any other. Or maybe everyone suddenly decided to go to college?

>No, I'm afraid not.
I'm curious what you think the alternatives are. My word is definitely not final, I want to understand, not just stand on a soapbox and yell into an echo chamber.

So there are essentially 3 processes that reduce the demand for labor: efficiency increases/mechanization, outsourcing, and automation. These happen for the same reason anything happens in business; to increase profit.

>efficiency increases
I can't imagine how this can be anything other than a one-way process. Adding a CNC mill to a carpentry shop could reduce the time it takes to build a cabinet from a few hours to a few minutes. Once the mill is in place, once you have the one guy you need trained to operate it, what could happen to "undo" it? What situation would cause the business owner to say "I'm going to rehire the other 5 cabinet makers and get rid of the CNC mill; my productivity will stay where it is but my costs will quintuple, but I'm still going to do it."

>outsourcing
Technically, this can be undone with tariffs. To balance out the cheaper labor, you apply huge tariffs to overseas work. I don't think this will happen, however, because businesses rely on that cheap labor. Beats isn't going to be able to sell their headphones for $300 a pop if they cost $200 to make in America. Prices will go up if this happens, or companies will find other ways to reduce costs (such as automation, the best of all).

>automation
Now this I'm sure of. Let's say Ford has two choices: human assembly of cars, or automated assembly. The human factory requires 150 workers, 15 managers, a custodial crew. The automated factory requires 8 technicians. If they build the automated factory, nothing short of enormous social pressure from the public (which, by the way, won't happen) could possibly get them to switch back to human labor. Or McDonalds going to tablets for orders; why would you ever switch back to humans once you have the system in place?

New jobs can be created.

People can work on more important things when their menial jobs gets fulfilled by robots. It's not a bad thing.

Here we are. Most of the data is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, stay at home mothers from the census (census.gov/hhes/families/files/ASA2010_Kreider_Elliott.pdf), workforce population from Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LFWA64TTUSM647S#)

So. Here we have the US working age population in blue, "out of work" population (unemployed, labor non-participatory, and excluding stay-at-home mothers because they're ~5% of the population and people get pissy about that) in red, and the percentage of working age adults out of work in dashed green.

As you can see, it's at just over 47%. Yup. Nearly 1 in every 2 working age adults in the United States does not have a job. And this chart goes as far back as we have data on non-participation, 1975. It literally hasn't been this bad since we started keeping records.

What said is absolutely right. Employment was *destroyed* in 2008. And most of the "recovery" that has happened since then? Retail and service jobs, many of them part-time. And now with the price of minimum wage increasing and the cost of automation decreasing, reaching parity in many industries, we're going to see even those shitty, part-time, can't-afford-to-pay-your-mortgage jobs evaporate. Just look at McDonalds and their nationwide rollout of automated order taking (like, literally, announced within the last few weeks). That is just the precipice of an enormous change in labor we're about to see happen in the next decade.

Nothing like this has ever happened before. And we are not ready.

Oh, ha, important note on that data. The "working age population" only includes people up to age 64. So no, all those boomers retiring every year aren't included. This is *just* the working age population.

And it should be noted, yes the working age population does include people down to age 15. What that means is that this data is actually *under*representing the problem; if we limited it to people age 22-64 (college graduates to just before retirement), the working age population would be lower, and the "percentage out of work" would actually be higher.

In fact, I'm sure I could find census demographic data and just subtract the number of people age 15-21 from the working population.

So yeah, that looks bad, but it's actually worse.

Youth in asia, huh?

How come communism always has to turn lolevil?

Kek, I live in Washington State, USA. Fucking Seattle.

>communism
#triggered every time

Every human should be given

Education
Food
Housing
Travel anywhere in the world
Medical assistance

These should be basic things everyone is entitled to, as for money you would have to work in whatever way that suits you

Wtf why? All of this stuff requires that someone else act in order to provide. Slavery. Would you work at all if this stuff was provided to you for not working?

How to pay for all deez entitlements?

I think people should be entitled to everything too but how do we provide it?

Appeal to emotion is not an argument

Why is it said that unemployment in the US is 5%?

If in actuality it's so much worse does that mean countries with a stated unemployment of like 25% mean 80% of people actually aren't working?

Something seems not right

>I'm curious what you think the alternatives are
I think the problem is that your theories are only correct given nothing of a black swan nature occurs (you can think of some, yes?), or no active steps are taken to mitigate/halt the process unfolding.
That's unlikely.
In effect, you're saying that we will allow society to destroy itself simply because it can.
While some "tragedy of the commons" elements are present, the world has faced larger problems, and certainly will again.

You forgot a Ferrari model of their choice.

unemployment is people that haven't got a job but are looking for one.

much of the US workforce simply gave up on finding a job years ago. They stopped looking so they don't count towards unemployment numbers.

>much of the US workforce simply gave up on finding a job years ago

How do they live?

In this ideal utopia
we work together to make that beautiful world for everyone, so simple

presumably a lot of dual income households became single income.

Why stop there?

We also have robotic limbs and the ability to fly. I believe people have a fundamental right to breathe underwater and fly through the air.

Eh, you're right. Logically, the best thing to do would be to cull the bottom 95% of the population as soon as automation reaches a level where most consumer goods can be produced for free or essentially free. Don't just let them die, actively kill them.

However, we don't live in a logical society, and humans have pesky ideas like ethics and morality. Providing for people unable to provide for themselves (which is quickly moving away from "poor is a choice"), when it is an extremely minor inconvenience for those who *can* provide for themselves, is the right thing to do.

The other problem is that hungry, homeless mobs will very quickly become hard to control. Maybe not a problem for Eurocucks, but Americans have guns. A few thousand angry protestors is easy to squelch. 80 million pissed off unemployables, not so much.

>How to pay for all deez entitlements?
Taxes. In 2015, bonuses paid to wall street executives totaled 28 billion dollars. In that same year, the sum total of all minimum wage earnings was 14 billion. Most people, I'll bet you included (unless your net worth is measured in tens of millions) have no idea how much money the wealthy have. *No* idea. You can't even begin to fathom what life is like for someone earning 40 million dollars a year.

Do I like the idea of taxes? Not at all. It'd be great if everyone could keep every penny they ever made. But we're soon going to run into a hard fork in the road: provide for the tens of millions of people who are literally unemployable, or stop evil taxes and control the riots through force. I don't know of any other options, but I'd be delighted to know of even one.

basically as said

Importantly, the *definition* of unemployment has been changed dramatically in the last decade; you can keep the numbers low by changing the goalpost. That's exactly what they've been doing, and what they'll keep doing for as long as they can.

>Taxes. In 2015, bonuses paid to wall street executives totaled 28 billion dollars. In that same year, the sum total of all minimum wage earnings was 14 billion. Most people, I'll bet you included (unless your net worth is measured in tens of millions) have no idea how much money the wealthy have. *No* idea. You can't even begin to fathom what life is like for someone earning 40 million dollars a year.

Yes that sounds good.

But what if these people refuse to pay taxes? And now we have a bunch of promises to people dependent on money we can't get?

I think the issue with these wall street executives is that they're smart, and they like money. Combine both of those and it becomes kind of hard to take their money from them.

>given nothing of a black swan nature occurs
>active steps are taken to mitigate/halt the process
Believe me, I hope that you're right. I hope we find a solution, I hope it gets put in place.

>In effect, you're saying that we will allow society to destroy itself simply because it can.
I'm saying that if we continue down this path and don't divert, we're going to run into some extremely grotesque problems. And so far, I've seen very little evidence of any changes necessary to make this transition. Again, I hope something gets done. I hope mindsets changes, I hope laws are passed or amended, I hope people stop for a second and say "whoa hold the fuck up, we have to figure this shit out, NOW."

But like climate change, I'm worried that we're going to do too little, too late. I am a pessimist. Not gonna argue that, and I hope that I'm wrong. I hope in 20 years everyone looks back at people like me and says "damn that guy was a nut, everything turned out fine." But I don't think they will.

again, this dude is on point: Along with various welfare programs, moving in with parents/family, etc.

>But what if these people refuse to pay taxes? And now we have a bunch of promises to people dependent on money we can't get?
Then we have a big fucking problem.

>the issue with these wall street executives is that they're smart, and they like money
This is why I'm pessimistic. I think, very honestly, greed is going to win this battle. And that means we all lose. Well, maybe not the rich.

You guys are fucking retarded. For a Utopia where we automatically get all the essential needs to have a regular life, the concept of money needs to be reimagined.

Since right now we have human workers working in fields that provide basic services, we must treat with them in order for it to be fair. Once robots take over all of the basic necessities, you will have no need to trade for those things since it is not run by humans.

But before all of this, humans need to evolve with their minds and stop being retarded fucking monkeys

>But before all of this, humans need to evolve with their minds and stop being retarded fucking monkeys
Yup.

Anyway I need sleep. Good thread Veeky Forums. I appreciate the discussion.

Oh, I'm guessing we'll come up with something.
And it won't be "too late", just "late".
Perhaps they'll have to be a major incident of unrest for things to get set in motion. Or nature may throw us a curve and kill a lot of people, although that really will just prolong the current status quo.
I'd really worry more about the climate change shit, because that doesn't depend on people's rationality to correct itself. I suppose we could even limp along with a late solution there, but life would be radically different.
I'm a pessimist too (believe it or not), but although greed is a powerful motivator, self-preservation probably has it beat.

If reincarnation was real I would murder and steal without regret.

In fact, they can kill me as well. No problem.

I'm not worried about automation.

Companies hype vaporware all the time. Companies also fuck up sure things all the time with stupid prices or intentional crippling. And they still flock to Indians/H1Bs despite mountains of evidence that they're expensive fuckups.

Automation isn't going anywhere.

Explain why

I believe everyone should get basic food/shelter.

retards on Veeky Forums don't understand how much money (taxes) goes to government workers (leeches) to distribute SSI, SSDI, foodstamps, section 8

If you fired 90% of the employees in government, and instituted a voucher based system where private companies could agree to house people with less oversight it would be much cheaper to give everyone food/shelter

example: there should be no section 8 in San Francisco, move all of them to Humboldt or Sacramento

>where everyone gets a basic income, food and shelter.
>reincarnation
Literally what the fuck did you mean? I thought you meant that we no longer need to reproduce at 100x times the rate. At least something more intelligent.

16VhPNvjEtxDwxaSE4NuKKJZRSrLW84Tx7

Anyone wanna have some real revealing thoughts which would scare the living shit out of /adv/ and make me the prince of /pol/?

You don't fuck with Sacramento bro

no

>52 replies
>No mention of John Rawls' veil of ignorance

Veeky Forums is even more retarded than I thought.

Wow that is pretty much it,
I thought if you people know creating a utopian life, will serve your next life.
But the attitude seems to be 'fuck my next life, he can fuck off'