In response to:
What happens to your economic theory when the value of human labor is $0? [article suggesting we need basic income]
The idea that the value of human labor will go to $0 is a bit hyperbolic. Sure, maybe drivers, bank tellers, and some other jobs are on the way out. But history is full of this progression. 150 years ago most jobs were on the farm. And then tractors and railroads and industry happened. Did all the jobs disappear? Well, farming jobs did, but other jobs replaced them. What makes this time so different?
I don’t claim to be able to imagine all the new types of jobs we’ll have in 50 years, but I can submit a few to you that I’m willing to bet will still be around:
- writer, journalist, reporter
- actor, artist, dancer, musician
- sports player, announcer
- lawyer, accountant
- doctor, nurse
- programmer, engineer (though these may look a lot different in 50 years)
- entrepreneur, businessperson
- plumber, carpenter, electrician, etc
And some may take issue with this one, but I’m pretty sure some basic service jobs will still be around, such as cleaning, cooking, serving food, etc. There may be some instances (i.e. fast food) where waiters are no more, but I think people like the social aspect of having a waiter and will therefore continue to pay for it.
As for basic income, it’s a better idea than our current entitlement system, but until we find a way to make them voluntary (such as a social insurance program that you can opt-out of), such systems are immoral.