[OT] Wealth redefined
- Posted by petelomax Oct 04, 2017
- 1537 views
A slightly odd thought stuck me today.
One thing that has occupied my mind recently is automation replacing the workforce, the most in-yer-face example of which is driverless vehicles, but beyond that it is not hard to imagine pretty much all manual/retail jobs going, along with at least a significant chuck of health, child and social care. Of course more intellectually challenging jobs (eg nuclear fission research) will probably persist, but it is not unreasonable to expect significant change in the next decade, and maybe 90% of the population permanently workless within 100 years.
Of course there is the question "what will people do?" but more importantly we cannot plan to let them starve, or the inevitable civil revolt and robot armies roaming about killing our children and grandchildren. Before dismissing that as scaremongering, tell me what else will happen when you put millions of people out of work with no means of support, especially if fewer and fewer can contribute anything at all to social funds?
In a civilised society, there should be a guaranteed basic income. Currently, only a very small percentage of the population does not receive a wage, pension, or other benefits, so if we were to legislate a pittance for them, say £5/week, right now, it ought not cost very much, but it would be an important toe in the door.
I would also like to redefine "poor": living in a typical small house with sufficient food/heat/clothes etc. Bear in mind that the cost of essentials should theoretically fall in line with automation.
Ultimately, the rich will have to support the poor. Not something they are likely to do very willingly, but maybe we can redefine the meaning of "rich". It means being better off than your neighbor. It also means nothing if societly collapses beneath you. What if we somehow redefined it as the number of people you can "pay to be poor"? If you can support 100 people, then you are pretty well off; if you can support 10,000 you are officially rich, and 10,000,000 would be the equivalent of today's multi-billionaires.
An odd idea, for sure, but it may have merit, not that I have any idea how to apply/spread it.
Pete
