In the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/03/technology/plan-to-fight-robot-invasion-at
-work-give-everyone-a-paycheck.html?hp
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/03/technology/plan-to-fight-robot-invasion-a
t-work-give-everyone-a-paycheck.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSo
urce=story-heading&module=mini-moth&region=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stor
ies-below>
&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=mini-moth&reg
ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below  

Farhad Manjoo stated that, "How will society function after humanity 

has been made redundant? Technologists and economists have been 

grappling with this fear for decades, but in the last few years, one 

idea has gained widespread interest - including from some of the 

very technologists who are now building the bot-ruled future. 

 

Their plan is known as "universal basic income," or U.B.I., and it goes 

like this: As the jobs dry up because of the spread of artificial
intelligence, 

why not just give everyone a paycheck?

 

Imagine the government sending each adult about $1,000 a month, 

about enough to cover housing, food, health care and other basic needs 

for many Americans. U.B.I. would be aimed at easing the dislocation caused

by technological progress, but it would also be bigger than that. "

 

The idea of universal basic income or U.B.I. is so much contrary 

to the working principle of capitalism that it has no chance to prevail

either as an unemployment compensation or as an economic policy gimmick. 

In fact, this idea seems to be an extended sequel to the "helicopter drops"

( http://willembuiter.com/helifinal.pdf ) of money recommended by the late 

Milton Friedman who said, "Let us suppose now that one day a helicopter 

flies over this community and drops an additional $1000 in bills from the
sky ... 

Let us suppose further that everyone is convinced that this is a unique
event 

which will never be repeated," (Friedman 1969, pp 4-5).  No, both have never


worked nor should.  

 

The necessary total solution to the automated-production problem is to give
up 

capitalism and embrace whole-heartedly socialism. 

 

Profit, rent, interest and tax all come from one and only one source, namely


(the unpaid) surplus labor without which capitalism cannot survive. The
problem 

boils down to the fact that without living labor power creating surplus
value 

embedded in commodity for capital to appropriate, i.e. surplus labor power, 

capital cannot recover the cost consumed by machines or means of production.


It's true that means of production possesses dead labor power as use value 

but it provides no surplus value and after depreciation, wear and tear, it
will 

deplete its value to minutiae.  Thus, capital will have to prevent a rapidly


automated-production society from developing for fearing its own demise as a


result of being overthrown by its former working class now unemployed 

en masse due to automation. 

 

The dilemma challenging the automated-production society cannot be
thoroughly 

resolved by distribution of money because first, the unemployed do not
contribute 

wealth to the society and an income-deficient society cannot survive thereof


let alone distribute money and, second, capital can hardly look after itself
and

it is, therefore, out of the question for capital to squander money away. 

 

Some good-natured commenters on welfare capitalism may have to think not
only 

for the unemployed, underemployed and working poor but also for the cornered

capitalists. "A cornered cat becomes as fierce as a lion" so to speak.
Before 

nationalizing their means of production, the society under the state's
controlling 

power need to make welfare available to capitalists. Class struggle is both
violent 

and coming of age. 

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to