Economic Utopian Plan

“If you work a j**ob, you will get paid another $30k dividend. So that is a total of $50k in dividends in addition to whatever you make at your job.”

Can my job be reading the LvMI website every day and writing commentaries on the articles? Because honestly, I make only a little over 50k a year, and if I get 20k for free and 30k for just having any job, well, I’d quit mine for sure.

“No you can not borrow them. But I still do not understand. Why not just say what you mean instead of all this build up with the analogies? :)”

What would you personally require for me to be able to borrow them? Could I borrow your car for a few years if I promise to put some improvements in it when I give it back? Say new rims and tires, a better engine, a GPS, etc?

Simply put, this is the opposite of economics.

“Can my job be reading the LvMI website every day and writing commentaries on the articles? Because honestly, I make only a little over 50k a year, and if I get 20k for free and 30k for just having any job, well, I’d quit mine for sure.”

What job you have does not matter. If LvMI is willing to hire you, that makes no difference. But keep in mind it would have to be paid. The actual implementation of this plan would require you to earn at least $30k to get the full $30k. If you only get paid $10k, the $30k dividend would be reduced to $10k (otherwise people could cheat the system).

But if they paid you $10k, you would take home $5k after taxes, get a $10k dividend and a $20k dividend. You would earn a total of $35k after taxes.

“What would you personally require for me to be able to borrow them? Could I borrow your car for a few years if I promise to put some improvements in it when I give it back? Say new rims and tires, a better engine, a GPS, etc?”

You can’t just say what you mean? Are you trying to say time has value? I agree. But what is the point?

I would never loan you my car. I need my car to get around. The amount I would demand to rent you my car, in order to make the hassle of not having a car worthwhile, would be more than you would be willing to pay.

Esuric said: “Simply put, this is the opposite of economics.”

Well said. Economics is the study of the allocation of scarce resources with alternative uses. Our discssion here about the brilliant basket weaving technique on Martha Stewart yesterday is the exact opposite of economics.

There is a way to make this utopia workable, and that is to invent Star Trek style replicators that presumably are also self-replicating and require no maintenance. At that point we can do away with money and all live as artists, explore the galaxy, and wear inappropriately tight clothing.

By the way, the comparison with communism is a pretty obvious one.. who exactly administers this system? Who PLANS it? Yes that is correct, it’s just another centrally planned system, the kind where someone other than yourself knows what you need better than you do!

Also if no one needs to work, what exactly do you think will happen? Will the new ‘socialist man’ suddenly appear and thousands of years of human nature will be erased? The reason capitalism works is because acting in your own self-interest always works to improve the standard of living of others. Take away the need to work in your own self-interest and guess what happens!

JohnnyFive said: “There is a way to make this utopia workable, and that is to invent Star Trek style replicators that presumably are also self-replicating and require no maintenance. At that point we can do away with money and all live as artists, explore the galaxy, and wear inappropriately tight clothing.”

You need a star trek replicator in order to use taxes to pay everyone a dividend instead of using it to fund an unresponsive goverment bureaucracy!?! Your comment makes no sense! Why do you need a replicator in order to change how we use tax revenue?

“By the way, the comparison with communism is a pretty obvious one.. who exactly administers this system? Who PLANS it? Yes that is correct, it’s just another centrally planned system, the kind where someone other than yourself knows what you need better than you do!”

Who said anything about implementing a centrally planned economic system? The existing market system remains in place. Nobody is going to tell you what you need! Are we reading the same post?

“Also if no one needs to work, what exactly do you think will happen? Will the new ‘socialist man’ suddenly appear and thousands of years of human nature will be erased? The reason capitalism works is because acting in your own self-interest always works to improve the standard of living of others. Take away the need to work in your own self-interest and guess what happens!”

Nowhere does it say it is putting an end to capitalism. And nowhere does it say it is eliminating the need to work. There is always work that needs to be done. The goal is to eliminate jobs which is work nobody has any interest in doing. What value do you get from being forced to do things you have no interest in doing? What’s with the weird job fetish you have? Eliminating jobs is progress.

A tax system requires a central authority. The determination of how that tax is redistributed requires planning. But I suppose everyone will be so deleriously happy living in their centrally planned 5-star resorts that they won’t notice they no longer have any freedom. Oh and who decides to build all these robots by the way? What if a society does not want robots everywhere? I smell the stench of oppression.

How could the market system possibly stay in place in the absence of any incentive for entrepeneurs to take risk? Everyone gets to live in luxury remember, with zero risk.. After all, what incentive does any member of society have to make a profit? Who would bother striving to serve consumer need when, in the event that they succeed, all that happens is that they go back to their 5-star resort with everyone else who have served no consumer needs and are busy pondering the meaning of life with an iced tea. Zero risk = zero progress = zero economy.

“There are always jobs that NEED to be done” Indeed there are many crappy jobs that need to be done, but who the hell would do them when they are too busy painting and singing and dancing and living la vida loca in their 5-star resort? Even in welfare states such as the UK people are paid a pittance and do not bother working to raise their standard of living, there are literally millions of people in the UK who do no work at all and simply leech off of other people. What do you think would happen if insead of paying people a pittance you allow them to live like kings? Initially it would have a kind of success as you live parasitically off of previous wealth (goods and services) produced under capitalism. But eventually the structure of production would break down, vital goods would no longer be produced, and no matter how much ‘money’ you print you would find yourself falling back to the economy of peasant farmers.

I’m going to go ahead and say it’s pretty fallacious to suggest an entrepreneurs only motive is to make (not just money but) more money than the people around him.

I’m not touching this plan, I’ve just always (as an entrepreneur) thought that argument was bogus.

Well, humble fokls nowdays can earn tech devices that billionaries of yore couldn’t dream of.

"I’m going to go ahead and say it’s pretty fallacious to suggest an entrepreneurs only motive is to make (not just money but) more money than the people around him.

I’m not touching this plan, I’ve just always (as an entrepreneur) thought that argument was bogus."

You’re exactly right that it isn’t the only motivator for every single entrepreneur, but to deny that it isn’t a motivator would be fallacious too. I am not saying you believe that specifically, but some think affecting this incentive negatively has little or no consequence.

LOL! So whether I am a street-sweeper or a doctor (maybe those jobs wouldn’t exist anymore, let’s say robot engineer and robot technician), I get paid the same. Now why would anyone want to further their education, go to school longer, get better at their job, etc. to become an engineer without an incentive (pay increase)?

I suppose my point is this; let us imagine for a moment that we are living in this utopia just after it is initially set up, and there is a total redistribution of money such that everyone is paid their $20,000 etc. Now imagine for a moment what the actual practical consequences of that will be. Plainly the available labour force will diminish as a certain number of people will choose to live parasitically. The result will be that certain businesses (I assume those that require the labour force to carry out tasks that are mundane or dangerous) will in time be incapable of production and fail. Therefore the society will require people who are willing to sacrifice themselves for ‘the good of the whole’, and I would guess not just a small number of people, but millions. is this not the classic problem of all communist/socialist societies? The reason capitalism works is because no one has to sacrifice themselves for the good of the whole.

So no I don’t think every entrepeneur works purely to be more wealthy than everyone else, I’m sure some do it for love, fame, altruism etc, but this society would require altruism on such a mass scale that in effect I believe it would require a change in human nature.

JohnnyFive said: “A tax system requires a central authority. The determination of how that tax is redistributed requires planning.”

EVERYTHING requires planning. Planning is good. But somehow you think by giving everyone back their tax money means that stalin is nationalizing every industry. What does one have to do with the other?

A society where you spend tax revenue instead of government does not mean the government is seizing every business, putting an end to capitalism and centrally planning the entire economy.

“But I suppose everyone will be so deleriously happy living in their centrally planned 5-star resorts that they won’t notice they no longer have any freedom. Oh and who decides to build all these robots by the way?”

Where does it say the resort industry will be nationalized? New and existing robot companies will build robots. We live in a free country. You can build anything you want.

Have you even read the plan!?!

“What if a society does not want robots everywhere? I smell the stench of oppression.”

If you do not want to live with ATMs, automated checkout machines, self-serve gas pumps, self-serve elevators, factories, dish washers, sprinkler systems, the internet, automated tasks of all kinds, and all the progress of modern technlogy then you can buy a plot of land in the wilderness and live a primitive life.

I smell the stench of the unibomber.

“How could the market system possibly stay in place in the absence of any incentive for entrepeneurs to take risk? Everyone gets to live in luxury remember, with zero risk..”

Everyone gets a $20k dividend. The $30k dividend requires you to work. But you honestly think that a $20k income will eliminate all the incentive for people to develop new ideas and improve upon existing ones?

You do not have an accurate understanding of human motivation.

You think the only people that work are poor people!?! You think rich people are all retired? You think people like Steve Jobs will fold up Apple and kick back in front of a TV and live off his $20k? Doesn’t he already have billions?

“After all, what incentive does any member of society have to make a profit?”

One of their incentives will be to earn more than $20k! But a much larger incentive will come from the satisfaction all humans get from being productive and contributing to society.

The vast majority of successful entrepreneurs can retire on an income a lot greater than $20k. But they don’t.

“Who would bother striving to serve consumer need when, in the event that they succeed, all that happens is that they go back to their 5-star resort with everyone else who have served no consumer needs and are busy pondering the meaning of life with an iced tea. Zero risk = zero progress = zero economy.”

People who care about other people will be the ones who make sure they do right by others. But a person who makes $200k will have a much different lifestyle than someone who makes $20k. Many people will be motivated to earn more than $20k.

The point is to end poverty and bad neighborhoods. It is not to force everyone to live identically.

But if $20k is enough for you and your happiness is best served by kicking back with iced tea contemplating the meaning of life, you should have the freedom to do that.

“Indeed there are many crappy jobs that need to be done, but who the hell would do them when they are too busy painting and singing and dancing and living la vida loca in their 5-star resort?”

Hopefully, we can progress to a point where every single crappy job is done by machines. We have come a very long way over the last few hundred years in reaching that goal. And with a deliberate effort to invest in technology, we can get there within this decade.

You don’t think eliminating the need for humans to do crapy jobs is a worthy goal?

“Even in welfare states such as the UK people are paid a pittance and do not bother working to raise their standard of living, there are literally millions of people in the UK who do no work at all and simply leech off of other people.”

So you want to end all “leeching.” You want to put a permanent end to inheritances? Trust funds? Your vision for society is to force everyone into labor or die? Sounds pretty tyrannical.

This alternative vision uses technology to eliminate every job people do not want to do and gives people the freedom to explore opportunities other than employment.

“What do you think would happen if insead of paying people a pittance you allow them to live like kings? Initially it would have a kind of success as you live parasitically off of previous wealth (goods and services) produced under capitalism. But eventually the structure of production would break down, vital goods would no longer be produced, and no matter how much ‘money’ you print you would find yourself falling back to the economy of peasant farmers.”

Your understanding of how society works is completely wrong. Just because people will always have a $20k income and earn a high income when they work and are able to borrow without the ridiculous interest scam, does not mean capitalism ends and everyone will stop working.

Jacson LaRose said: “Now why would anyone want to further their education, go to school longer, get better at their job, etc. to become an engineer without an incentive (pay increase)?”

Nowhere in this plan does it say everyone gets paid the same income!! The $50k dividend gets paid to you in addition to whatever salary you make at your job.

So if you make $40k as a street sweeper, you will earn a total of $90k. If you earn $150k as an engineer, you will earn a total of $200k. I’m not sure why this isn’t getting through!

But the motivation to become a doctor over a street sweeper is not just money. I would much rather spend my day saving people’s lives than cleaning up their garbage.

So you want to end all “leeching.” You want to put a permanent end to inheritances? Trust funds? Your vision for society is to force everyone into labor or die? Sounds pretty tyrannical.

Ha. +20 internetz

*I would much rather spend my day saving people’s lives than cleaning up their garbage.*

People call me crazy, but I find cleaning up garbage much more important to people’s health on a day-to-day basis than doctors. Not that dr’s aren’t awesome and important. But, how often do you need one if you keep yourself healthy?

Wow, this is a brilliant utopia that you planned; I wish you luck with it. Personally I’d rather opt out, I’ll just keep my money and live on my private property. Will you leave me alone? Or are non-participants taken off to gulags and shown their error of their ways?

I think she said 1000x times its an extension of the current system. So, just like now, no.

“People call me crazy, but I find cleaning up garbage much more important to people’s health on a day-to-day basis than doctors.”

You are exactly right. In the late 19th century a city official in new york city, who used to go around in a white suit, demanded that every city street remain clean of horse dung, sewage and garbage. He knew it bred disease.

He (I forget his name) is now credited with raising the lifespan of people even more than vaccines. It put an end to constant plagues and was then adopted by every city across the world.

But to bring this back to the manifesto, a city in europe is launching a test of robots that go throughout the city 24/7 picking up all garbage. It also separates the garbage between trash, compost and recyclables and they dock themelves in charging stations when their batteries run low. Human street cleaners are no longer necessary.

Street sweeper trucks that drive autonomously are already developed. If we can pass regulations that set rules allow them to operate safely in public, we can launch automated vehicles in mass, eliminating the need to do menial transportation work and liberating 8.8 million people in the US from those jobs.

We also have begun robotic surgeries, probably the most sophisticated task a robot will do. We are just at the very, very, very beginning. In 2008, the South Korean government published a report that said surgeries will be routinely peformed by robots by 2018.

what if a person likes being a doctor, or technician and someone likes to sweep streets? What’s wrong with that? There is a saying, after all, that if you find a job that you like you won’t have to work anymore. So it kinda becomes a hobby of sort..

That criticism page is sure empty…:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Zeitgeist_Movement