If I told you that we are headed towards a future where you won’t need to go to a traditional job, would the thought scare you or make you happy?
Well, even if you hate your job, you would be scared by such a future, right? I mean jobs are the source of most people’s income in a society and no jobs would mean that you wouldn’t be able to sustain your life.
You might ask then, why I am posing this question. That’s because, we are indeed, slowly but surely, headed to such a future. Technological innovations are already beginning to replace humans in so many areas and this is just the start.
Artificial Intelligence, robotics and other automation technologies will make about 47% of today’s jobs obsolete in the next 25 years, according to Oxford University. The next decades will totally disrupt jobs as we know them leaving hundreds of millions of people in uncertainty.
But, every problem has a solution and the increasing automation might bring forward a radical solution that could redefine how we humans participate and contribute in a society.
A Basic Income For All?
The current solution that is being heavily debated on is something called a Universal Basic Income. Basically, under a UBI, people of a country would get a fixed sum of money at regular intervals for basic subsistence, regardless of income of a person.
Such a system would ensure that even if people don’t have jobs, they are able to at least fulfill their basic needs. In a world where half of the jobs are threatened, this would be a wonderful solution. It almost sounds like utopian, doesn’t it?
In fact, many countries are running pilot projects to test the practicality of such a system and the results should start coming by next year. As we wait for real world data, there is an ongoing debate about the feasibility of a UBI.
Proponents of the system including Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg, all believe that in a futuristic society with robots taking over jobs, there would be a need to distribute income to keep the economy going and UBI could help in that regards.
What Would You Do If You Didn’t Have To Work?
The skeptics of UBI say that if we just gave people the money they needed to live, it could collapse the whole system because most would just do nothing and it would be an immense burden on the governments.
Perhaps, a UBI system can be more refined in a way that, people would need to contribute in at least a pre-determined number of ways to be eligible for a basic income. Also, people who make a healthy living could be excluded from the program.
In my own opinion, in whatever way a UBI can be implemented best, could do wonders for humanity. It would be a huge shift away from today’s world which would lead to a snowball effect to create an entirely new world.
As for people getting lazy, that could happen to some extent, but I was a marketing student and if you have read Maslow’s need hierarchy theory, you know that that a human being’s needs go far beyond just satisfying the basic physiological needs.
In fact, once those needs are taken care of, it is more likely that people would pursue careers that they simply couldn’t do before. In a world shared with machines, we could still find meaning in creative work and creative solutions where, I like to believe, we would still have our uniqueness.
What would you do if you didn’t have to work?
No worries !
When computer invented , most of people were have the same tention .
They were worry because one computer was replacing instead of 100 men .As technology developing more new jobs are introducing to society .
Most important things to be worry ,
You should be worry only about capitalism system ; makes rich people richer and poor people poorer that is really important issue need to find solution for that .
Looking at the present scenario we are capitalizing under the garb of socialism. Whats your take?
You are right brother , now I’m thinking about it
Infact isn't it that automation is also a result of capitalism.
There's a fundamental difference between past industrial revolutions and what we are seeing now. Things like the printing press, internal combustion engine, computers etc, allowed humans to do new types of work. That is, these machines created work that they themselves couldn't do. That isn't the case now. Machines can increasingly do everything we could possibly do, but do it faster, more accurately and incredibly more efficiently. What work do you think a robot that can manoeuvre far better than us, is way stronger than us, and can process repetitive tasks better than us is going to create for us to do? The common answer is, well, we'll need someone to program these robots. Hello, computer programming is 95% algorithmic and logical. Things that computers are WAY better than us at. And it's only a matter of time until AI can out compete us in creativity and eventually our excellent sub-conscious heuristic decision making systems. And even if this wasn't the case, what, are 7 billion people going to become computer programmers??
Work for humans is fast becoming OVER. We need to face this reality and start doing something about the devastating effect this is going to have on capitalism (which will collapse in a screaming heap without a consumer class).
Perfectly said. This time it's different. We are essentially creating our own competitors that are way more advanced than us.
That was true once but in an age where machines can learn any ability a person can, that doesn't apply anymore. Yes, new jobs will be created but the machines can easily learn the skillsets of those jobs as well! The difference this time is that we are creating our own competition.
Lets say for a second that I would not have to work. What would I do...Not sure, usually when I am not at work I hang out at home and play with my kids. I would probably make things in my garage, as I have all kinds of ideas, but no time. Time is what is taking away from me what I want, not that I have to work....even though that is a given.
I believe it's part of our human nature to want to work but it can come from anything. Of course, we should all do something we're passionate about. The best way to not work is to do something we love so it doesn't feel like work.
I think we will all be able to do that (do what we love) in the future if the basic needs are taken care of.
If I didn't have to work I'd just travel around the world and socialize on steemit... lol
PS:- I think UBI could work.....
hehe, but you would still need to earn money to travel. :D
LOL...That's actually true... But I'm a freelancer I work on my laptop from anywhere
What do people do right now when they aren't working? Try to get laid.
That's what's going to happen. people gonna be making babies.
hehe, but then the cost of living will increase with all those babies ;)
When we moved to where we live now I had the opportunity to stop working. I felt lost and it felt as if I lost my identity. I found a job 3 weeks later- but to answer your question straight, I think the world will fall apart because people would stop caring to do the necessary things like cleaning drinking water etc....why would anyone do that if they get money for free? Even if the process is automated, what if the automation process breaks? Who would fix it? We might end up with a million writers trying to pursue their dream and no one would do the necessary jobs like farming etc anymore...I think it would be a mess.
I think all the necessary jobs will be done by machines, and if they break, they would be fixed by other machines. Really, it's not science fiction anymore, we are heading there.
But, I totally get your point. If everyone started doing creative stuff, would it even be meaningful?
Frankly, I think this is a real cause for concern.
There are several ways of preventing a situation where there are too many unemployed or underemployed humans, but I think the most effective would be population control. Population control, kind of like what China has done. China is one of the fastest growing countries technologically speaking and yet is the most populated country in the world. They have somehow managed to control their population over the years, built and sustain a strong economy while trying to maintain optimal employment of their human resources.
If there is to be a world where robots would be used in place of humans for jobs, then the world could learn a few things from what China has done.
China did not “somehow” control their population. They made laws limiting the citizens to one child. Being a Government they did not see their own folly (the law of unintended consequences). The couples who would now have to rely on only one child to provide for them in old age, tended to abort female children. China now suffers from a lack of marriage age women.
While I have been a student of Science Fiction futures for years, I am not sure robots or AI can do everything. There will always be a need for humans in the work force.
Yes, that's why it is estimated that half of the jobs are at risk. The other half should be safe.
Human nature will dictate the future, some people will be aware of the changes in civilization and some people will not. There will always be good and evil and humans will always find someone to support them in their beliefs... right or wrong. History will repeat itself, it always does.
Hitler: "Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it."
I would want to be on a beach with an umbrella drink and exploring my writing creativity. Relationships are important to me so I would be thrilled to have company while traveling to my favorite countries, starting with Italy. (Traveling seems to be a biggie for those of us who haven't had the opportunity, due to financial and time barriers.)
Yeah, once the basic needs are taken care of, a person can do what interests them the most. The only thing is that, to do everything a person wants to, they would need more money beyond what a UBI would pay them, and for that they would need some form of additional income.
Not a fan of UBI, but as robotics come in and the natural curve of human intelligence puts us below what most robots can do, we're going to be faced with an event where most people have no marketable skill. Instead they will need to survive on their creativity. Most people don't have a marketable creativity, so we're going to be left with things like social security and foodstamps. Both of which have the effect of UBI except that it is not stable and long term.
What happens after that is anybodies guess. it depends on the political and economic climate as well as available technology.
It is interesting that you are not a fan of UBI. I suspect it is because of some compelling arguments that you have heard from sources who either have a vested interest in it not being adopted but also with a narrow (frequently mistaken understanding of economics).
If you are living in North America, you currently have a Universal Basic Income. The biggest problem is that it is negative. If you have property you have to pay a land tax (or if you rent ... part of the cost is transferred from the landlord to you). If you are homeless, ironically you have a UBI of zero dollars. In Canada there is a basic income at both ends of the age scale - baby bonus and old age pension. It isn't very much but it does help young families and older people to cover the basics.
I shared this video in an earlier post to display what UBI means to people on the lower end of the scale.
One of the things that people wonder is where the money is going to come from in order to pay for it. They always talk about is an increase in taxes. This leads to a totally other discussion about how taxes are a mechanism to keep money out of the hands of people. Historically income tax in Canada was first enacted in order to pay off the debt accrued for WWI. While it wasn't described temporary it was to be reviewed and phased out after the war. One hundred years ago the population of Canada was roughly 1/4 of what it is today. At the time they were able pay for things largely from customs and excise. When they introduced income tax, they had an office with 40 employees to handle the taxes of the 8 million inhabitants. Today it employs 40,000 people. (As I said a totally other discussion to go into).
Instead of taxing people, the simple expedient is to increase the M0 money supply. In most countries, doubling or trebling the M0 money supply (print more cash) could be seen as a tax on the rich and people worry about rampant inflation. Once again people don't understand what would actually happen. I ran the numbers through on Finland and they could pay for the $660 per month by trebling their M0 money supply. This would have no effect on inflation. It is only a small fraction of the total money supply but more importantly is to understand how inflation works. Hyperinflation occurs when governments prints money to pay off their own debt. The hyperinflation in Germany for instance happened because to the debt incurred by war reparations.
Here is an example of a government
doubling its money supply in a year. Between 2008 and 2009 the US government roughly doubled its M0 money supply and is almost 5 times in ten years (not to mention the increase in the other areas of money supply). This did not spark hyperinflation. This did not spark inflation. Unless a government introduces stupid fiscal policies (Zimbabwe) inflation is actually sparked by zero unemployment. If everyone is working, companies have to compete with each other in order to get employees - so they have to raise salaries. If wages go up, companies have to increase their prices to cover the increase in expenses.
People think that giving people money will spark inflation because the classic description of inflation is when too many dollars chase after too few goods. This is particularly true if one talks about scarce goods. However I believe that we are in an age with no scarcity (in North America). There is always a new game or toy on the market that people want to buy.
Yes, one thing is for sure. There is going to be a lot of change. Maybe this will end up restructuring the society as we know it. Only time will tell.
This future will allow for people with creative minds to share more of their work with the world. What could go wrong with that? :)
One problem may be of congestion. Too many people doing the creative stuff.
Work is like a religion. The gods here are salary, perks and satisfaction. It makes one to maintain the balance of life and let's one create an identity(skill). Work has its various positive impacts on both emotional and physical dynamics of a person.
yeah, work is really important in any person's life. That's why there is so much talk about the "future of work"
2 chicks at the same time
lol
Good curation Saura!
Reminds me of the viral video "humans need not apply". Any one else seen this before?
Inresponse to this a very nice come back made supporting the uptopian vision.
Thanks!
Yeah, that might very well happen. "humans need not apply"
Very interesting point, except that in my case in particular it will be a while before automation replaces my position. I am the one that actually builds and programs the automation, then have to maintain and repair it as it malfunctions / wears out.
The other aspect is to design the prototype requires considerable foresight into what tasks you want the equipment to perform, there is a significant difference between transportation and textiles for example.
I can see where AI will be beneficial, and will help with the design process, but suspect it will be far down the road before automation can accomplish this on its own.
One down side that I foresee with UBI is that when people no longer have to work for what they have, they will have little or no respect for it. If you look at subsidized housing, the buildings are usually in terrible condition, because the inhabitants simply don't care.
I learned from a lot of trying that doing what I'd be doing if I didn't have to work is what I ought to be doing anyway. You can get a good job doing something you love if you're clever and life's way too short to commit any of it to some compromise scheme. I think decentralized networks as a schema for loans and finance are going to be what Universal Basic Income is when it materializes but that's just a theory so far. Anyway.
Cheers.
Yes, cryptocurrencies can be leveraged well to distribute some form of UBI. Would really solve a lot of problems.
i don't understand when people say human work will always be needed but i understand why they hope for it. Even if it's not near future, even if you and me won't see it, one day we will be in a world where humans will be replaced for something else. Great post!
Yeah, we will be replaced for sure. And I think people hope for it to want to stay relevant because in today's world, your work defines who you are, essentially. Like if someone asks you who you are, you usually say what you do for work, like doctor, lawyer, etc.
Thank you! They've stayed safe during the storms,
?
Drugs? I believe the correct answer is drugs.
haha I hope not.
What would you do if you didn’t have to work?
I retired two or three years ago.
What is this work you speak of?
Lucky you :P
@sauravrungta a good post but only putting insights into economics of work is belittling a larger concept. Work does take care of financial need but indulgence into work comes from myriad of factors. Work is a parameter of growth and scalability. A validation of ones effort. People's earnings are a validation of their effort and intellect. Automation and UBI both hampers that. When we know that we can scale then we work hardier. Your point that one will pursue a career of choice, well a career is all about scalability and one's ability to grow. People will not scale if their is no validation. See any field most successful people are those who scaled. So be it automation or UBI they will not change the importance of work.
UBI comes with its on limitations as in a country like india it would just increase social disparity. Your take on this?
Yes, UBI will only solve the economic aspect of things. It will be act as a support so that people don't die of lack of basic needs. I am not sure what will solve the validation part of the equation.
How would it increase social disparity?
Well friend as you know social disparity in India is well established already. The concept of UBI is that everyone be it rich or poor or middle class are entitled to it. In such a scenario it only increases disparity because if one is already rich and gets a basic income means he would spend it on some luxury while the poor will stick to basic need. The class gap will just widen. Other factors like past savings, ancestral wealth will help middle and rich class even if there is lack of jobs. If UBI is established as a limited concept then it is no more universal and a limited concept will always have exclusion errors like the present PDS etc.
Yes, it might be true that UBI started out as something that is given to everyone equally. But it was just an idea. During more recent times, experts and nations have started to look at it more practically and now the general idea about it is that, UBI will have to be implemented with certain parameters, like giving it to only people in need and up to a certain income level only. Plus recipients would have to contribute to community tasks in order to not be just a burden to the society. (I have mentioned these things in the post)
Exactly my point they have shifted from concept of UBI to BI. And a concept of BI will have exclusion errors like several other existing social welfare schemes. How is it different from current schemes.
You inspired me to write an article on marxism in the realm of AI. Please go through it, i wrote it today. Give your views.
My reply whenever I hear this 'argument' being trotted out is that it tells us more about the person making the argument than what the rest of us would do if we had a UBI. You've got to have a pretty shallow understanding of humanity to think that people would just lounge around all day.
That's why I mentioned Maslow's need hierarchy theory ;)
Great unique post as always. Loved it by friend. Its too scary indeed to think that people would be replaced by machines.
Regards Nainaz
#thealliance