[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/siberia/ - Off-topic

"No chin, no right to speak."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Check out our new store at shop.leftypol.org!


File: 1784832147258-9.jpg (86.81 KB, 797x1024, child_support.jpg)

 

So like, if AI really takes all our jobs, and like, we have to subsists on gubmint gibs in the form of UBI, wouldn't that just render impotent currency as a concept? Cause, like, it's like when you go to GameStop, right? You give them a physical disc you want to trade and rather than give you actual currency, they really REALLY want you to accept their funny-money aka "store credit". If you get "store credit" then that money, or the value it represents, is captured by the corporation. It never really left, because it can't be used anywhere else.

Wouldn't UBI just do the same thing if a substantial amount of people, who have no other means of earning a wage, become reliant upon it just to live? Whatever you want to say about capitalism, at least it is true that the economy isn't so rigged and controlled that the flow of money itself isn't restricted to one single point of origin (i.e. there are many sectors of industry and they all impact one another more or less, and that is what we know as "the economy").

So, like, if the state tightly regulates the distribution of money, couldn't they just opt to one day give you their version of funny-money, just like GameStop? Why wouldn't such a thing happen?

UBI as a concept has plenty of issues and no communist should advocate it but
>So, like, if the state tightly regulates the distribution of money, couldn't they just opt to one day give you their version of funny-money
you know government makes the money already, right?

>>808050
yes, the government makes the money already. the production of money is regulated by the government, but the flow of money is largely regulated by "the economy" aka industry aka the marketplace. the breadmaker bought his yeast from a supplier, who in turn bought his laboratory and specialized utensils with which he produces the yeast from a supplier, and he who supplies such implements purchased tools to design and produce them from elsewhere, etc. etc. etc.

at every level of commerce, money is exchanging hands, and this is how "the economy" continues to flourish under capitalism. all of this is facilitated by a labor force, the proletariat, no? well, what happens when that element is entirely removed? under capitalism, the proletariat's value is in his labor, what work he does to contribute to the production of goods or services, and the value that is generated from such transactions is extracted by the capitalist. if AI replaces all human labor, then it could be said that capitalists would have gained not only a monopoly on the means of production, but also a monopoly on the force of labor, and thus the human worker is entirely left out in the cold in this paradigm, which is to say that his value, and subsequent bargaining chip, have been neutered, wrested from him.

it seems like in such a world, "the economy" would function as a tightly-controlled breadline, as all resources produced by capitalists would be owned by capital interests and the government, and a new caste system would displace these former-proles-turned-techno-serfs, who would be unable to even interface with society, as they would only be given just enough to subsist upon, and likely in squalor and destitution, in some sectioned off complex that exists physically and metaphorically on the fringes of society.

if the "AI revolution" doesn't result in the previous, it may occur to one that the capitalist's utilization of AI to control labor wouldn't necessarily eradicate human jobs, but would rather create the conditions for an oligarchical authoritarian regime that would squeeze every ounce of value out of the people who were privileged enough to secure work. because AI would act as a release valve for the pressure that corporations experience as a result of labor shortages, as any labor shortage would be satisfied by a legion of sophisticated-ready-and-willing AI agents who could outperform even the brightest and most efficient human counterpart, humans who were given the opportunity to work would be under intense scrutiny to be perfect - to always be on time, to always give 110% effort, to never think or question authority, and to never do anything that could compromise their paymasters and in turn their position. this is in contrast to the human workforce of today, who have the luxury of "quiet quitting" and/or other acts of objection, sabotage, and subterfuge.

in other words, the capitalists want to remove the prole's one bargaining chip; their ability to organize and demand better pay, treatment, and rights, by creating a new caste system of serfs who are then given the privilege of potentially bettering their living conditions and social station by engaging in work, which is facilitated by the constant looming threat of total replacement by a highly sophisticated AI workforce that can be deployed at any time.

so, isn't UBI as a concept, in the presence of a potential technological revolution that could entirely eliminate human labor, just a stepping-stone to gubmint EBT sponsored serfdom, aka a total subjugation of the working class?

>>808077
The biggest problem with that hypothetical is what happens during the decades long transition of automating all human labor, does unemployment level of 40% are still manageable ? How do you not end up with a massive-sized homeless population that could end up organizing ?

>>808080
I don't know, but it seems to me that even under the current paradigm, capitalists don't have a problem with ignoring the plight of the prole. as an aside, the state could easily deploy counterrevolutionary intelligence and flagrant use of force against any sort of organization that threatens their control of power, and perhaps even use the aforementioned AI solutions to aid in that endeavor as a tool of enforcement.

all I'm saying is that it seems like UBI can easily be used to justify this sort of state-backed serfdom.

i apologise for being too lazy to set it out in full, but in this scenario you're not fully factoring in the implications of how the price of things changes in response to such technological shifts, since all costs are relative to one another and human desires are essentially infinite.

e.g. even if AI destroys all current existing jobs, you'll see weird and unexpected new jobs spring up. as the price of literally everything we currently do drops through the floor thanks to AI-magic, the relative demand for other things will increase. e.g. at the moment there isn't really a market for paying people to hang out with you, because my willingness to pay for this has to compete with real jobs, but if AI obliterates all the real jobs then (a) i've suddenly got far less competition as an "employer" and (b) the cost of living will be lower, possibly allowing me to pay less and still have it be a good deal for both parties.
there are already examples of some stuff AI cannot ever replace. you can have an AI generate music all you like, it is not a 1:1 replacement for an orchestra, particularly as a status symbol.

>>808077
your general fear here seems to be that humans would still work jobs similar to those of today under a scenario like this, while the reality is that the imperfections of human work would become their selling point. sure, you could have an AI 3D print you a perfect table in seconds for 30 cents, but would that confer as much social status as paying a thousand times more (~$300) for one made by hand? people already pay a lot for artisan goods where they could get mass manufactured ones of higher quality for lower price, and this tendency would only increase if AI hiked production and cut costs further. (because if you're paid $300 to make a table but can buy a mass-produced table for $0.3, you're doing pretty good!)

of course, it's possible that in such a world instead of a UBI you have a negative income tax, or some kind of means tested benefit that stabilises income during bad times (effectively "unemployment welfare", but in this hypothetical the idea of employment can be taken or left.), but i'm more trying to sketch out the unpredictable but potentially self-stabilising nature of such a scenario.

>>808086
>>808077
If AI replaces all human labor, humans will just become maintenance workers for AI

The more complex the machines are, the more that they will need manual inspection

Also, maybe a technocratic society can only work with a reduced quantity of humans.


Unique IPs: 6

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq / search ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM / ufo / 420 ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]