Automation in the imminent future will not be like automation of the past...

Automation in the imminent future will not be like automation of the past. Robots will be intelligent and adaptable they will have vision exceeding that of a human and will have algorithms able to learn and detect problems. They wont need to be painstakingly programmed for every minute detail for each part they interact with. And it wont just be manufacturing, tasks like driving semi trucks, lawyers, doctors, supermarket shelf stokers, fast food, construction, mining ect ect ect will all be automated in the near future.

What is the leftypol stance on an eventual universal minimum income coupled with things like universal healthcare and the elimination of all other forms of welfare and even the minimum wage?

Other urls found in this thread:

Why not Communism instead?

Why do you need capitalism if everything is automated? what is the point?
In fact automatization is only a problem with capitalism because people need money to buy shit.

The "free" market has been more effective at increasing the wealth of a nation than any command based market.

It is rather good at driving innovation and encouraging capital to be invested in the most beneficial ways.

There are long running co-ops and employee owned companies in existence and nothing should be in place to impede their success.

The ability to start your own enterprise must always be preserved and I see no problem with rewarding those who are successful. We do need better mechanisms to bring punitive actions against firms who generate negative externalities or who operate in a manner counter to the public good. And I am strongly opposed to the idea of limiting the liability on owners and founders of companies that fail. There is a corruption in the heart of capitalism where firms will chase the high of quarterly profits without much consideration for long term successes, more needs to be done to discourage this, perhaps a tax on withdrawing investment from a company that is correlated to length of time the money has been invested.

I strongly oppose giving corporate institutions "rights" and permitting them to use corporate (shareholders) funds to lobby government or influence politics. Such things should only be permitted by interested parties using their own personal funds.

I believe a capitalist society can be framed in a way that it will ensure a reasonably comfortable life for all its members without the demeaning and self perpetuating welfare system we currently have in place.

Why would we allow the rich to own all the factories just because their parents owned them before them, and their parents before that.

What is most profitable is not always what is most beneficial.

USSR and china would like a word with you, as well as various other countries which are too numerous to list.

Unless you think they would also be rich for no other reason than the magic of the free market. Capitalism doesn't stop at your border, the wealth of most of the first world is very reliant on the resources and labour of other countries. Countries like the netherlands build their entire golden age on slavery and extraction of money from colonies and have no real native industry or resources. It continues to support itself on trade and things like banking and multinationals.

so… social democracy? or mutualism?

They only really started growing the wealth of there nations when they adopted capitalistic economies.

The ussr was a command economy the entire way through till it fell and china was most definately growing and improving its industry before adding "chinese charistaristics" aka capitalism to its economy.

Also damn does he switch views a lot in that video.

IE everything that goes right is capitalism and everything that goes wrong is evil communism

If you can do it better then start your own factory. Fairness and equality are false gods whom if worshiped to the extreme will lead to your inevitable destruction. If you wanted to ban inheritance that is one thing and an argument can be made in it's favor but if your goal is to ban private ownership of capital that is quite a different matter and I will oppose you vigorously.

I agree and firms who exploit negative externalities and operate in a way that is counter to the public good should receive punitive taxes or have regulations enacted forbidding them from doing such things.

I'm not saying a command economy cant provide a minimal level of functionality, I still believe that a 'free' market is better in virtually all quantifiable metrics.

With what money on what land? Assuming I'm already a factory owner, what possible incentive could I ever have to sell any land or factories I own? They are literally a license to print money.

The market's concept of "better" is not a person's. If you haven't ever been annoyed by what you feel is a superior product being beaten by marketing and cutting corners, you must not have much of a life.

We are not liberals.

Psst: the free market came to Russia and it still sucks. Not even tankies will deny how badly the USSR ended up later on.

Because I dont have money you fucking moron. In addition to that, the capitalists will have a massive competitive advantage over me, making it impossible to sell my goods. And they can easily undercut me and eat the temporary loss. Or form cartels as they regularly do. Or make laws favour big corporations as they already do. Or use advertisement that I don't have.

Or, you know, maybe their product is fine, but I dont want them to be rich cunts in control of almost every aspect of my life without me having a voice in it. You are nothing more than a capitalist defender pretending to care about the worker, desperately clinging on to your position. The rich will get around inheritance laws. They just ire their kids for massive amounts of money and sell shares to them for fuck all.

But glad we are on the same page, I will fight you until I fucking die and I will not have a single feeling of guilt when you fall due to your delusions of godhood.


My dad started a business in our basement. Many companies have started in peoples garages.

I agree not all things can be started this way. If you can prove your expertise in the field you could convince people to invest in your company or convince a bank or venture capitalist to provide the capital.

Land ownership is one thing I have strong views on. There are more vacant homes in america than there are homeless. In many areas land prices are exorbitant and investors squat on the land expecting its value to increase with time at a rate higher than the often miniscule taxes they pay on it. In my county we have an online interactive map that shows each plot of land, its owner, the price of its last sale, the counties assumed value and the taxes it pays; some large tracts of land only pay $20 a year. Just insane while a modest home has to pay $2,000 a year. Vacant structures and land should be taxed punitively to encourage the best use of those resources.

If they are better than you why do you deserve to take there place?

Artificial barriers to entry and unfair anticompetitive business practices are serious problems that should be addressed. In the past we have had governments who would prosecute things like that. If we can get corporate influences out of politics we can have them again.

Advertisement is not all that its cracked up to be. Kickstarter, indigogo, wefunder and other crowd funding mechanisms are an excellent way to get capital necessary to jump start a business venture.

They aren't better than me, the products of the company they happen to own are cheaper because of the scale and bulk contracts with suppliers, which a new company simply does not have.

Then riddle me this, why do we have corporate influences in the government if we did not have them before? Seems like the system encourages corporate influence in the government because it rewards those who do it.

Nobody is going to fucking gofundme a million cow farm. Gofundme only works for shitty arty stuff like making obscure hotsauce or making paintings and games.

You either have no fucking clue how the world works, how much money is involved, how much competitive advantage large corporations have, OR you are just feigning ignorance in the hope anyone is retarded enough to fall for your muh bootstrap "if people are rich they are better than you and worked hard for every cent of it, capitalism can be fair and is based on merit" fairytale. Sorry to break your delusions buddy, but you're on a communist board, not in kindergarten.

Million dollars*

Shits expensive.

They are where I live. The avarage farm has a size of 40 hectares, with the cheapest farmground i can buy in my country being 45k a hectare. Thats 1.8 million on the ground alone.

It does, corporations bribe politicians weather through blatant shit like speaking fees or by funding re-election campaigns or by promising cushy jobs after leaving politics. That shit needs to be vigilantly fought on all levels.

Capitalism is not 'fair' nor should it be. There are winners and losers. Not all industries can be bootstrapped, natural barriers to entry exist. Upward mobility is hard, I get it. I advocate eliminating artificial barriers to entry and stop cushioning people from downward mobility when the bourgeois fucks up by banning limited liability classifications of firms and allowing founders, managers and large investments to be personally liable.

So join (or start) a co-op, there are plenty of co-op farms.

This is literally what you sound like to me.

I have to wonder what percentage of land in your country is being put to productive use.

Three words: efficiencies of scale.
AI-controlled automated factories will be a complete game-changer in that regard because they will be capable of far greater efficiency savings than any human-operated factory of similar size. With human operators the ability to scale things is restricted by the ability of a single human to understand the system. There will be no such limitation for an AI-controlled factory. Software and hardware can be upgraded simultaneously to take full advantage of arbitrary quantities of available energy and raw materials. An automated city-sized factory will always be able to beat your basement factory on every conceivable metric. It's like trying to compete with google by running a search engine out of your basement.

Why would anyone invest money in you if you have nothing to offer? The whole point is that expertise will be irrelevant when machines are as smart as humans. If anyone wants to hire an expert they'll be able to hire an expert AI for a fraction of your living expenses. AI consultancy is another industry which will benefit from efficiencies of scale.

I'm honestly looking forward to writing the software which will write the software which will make you unemployable. You'll come over to our side out of rational self-interest.

It's inherently a part of capitalism because the market isn't "free," not even (especially not even) your ideal. It picks and chooses industry winners and losers, and capitalism encourages outright bribes as well as "soft" bribes like cushy jobs for regulators and politicians because capitalism fundamentally values accumulation of capital. Relying on those who benefit the most from this way of things to change it completely is more foolish than any utopianism you could accuse Holla Forums of.

I program fanuc robots for a living, even as I make others jobs obsolete I can see the time close approaching where my current role itself is obsolete and am taking computer science classes in the evening in a vain attempt to remain relevant as programming itself will likely be automatable. I am familiar with computer intelligence including learning algorithms and neuro nets, the ability to parse text and deduce its meanings, computer vision, ability to see and recognize objects and how they might be interacted with these things are in there infancy. I am still skeptical that there will be this "singularity" where computers become self aware and more "intelligent" than humans.

And some times right size for efficiency is small. Bottled water is expensive to ship. Why not make a 20 ft shipping container factory with a water purification system, ejection molding machine, blow molding machine, label printer and palatalizing robot. Park one outside every Walmart distribution center. Raw plastic pellets go in one end along with water, paper and a bit of glue for the labels and out comes pallets of bottled water.

It'll definitely happen at some point. We understand enough about the human brain to know that it is definitely possible to replicate its functionality. The only question is how long it will take to figure all the details out and fix all the bugs.

The mega-factory making those mini-factories will be far more efficient and cost-effective than your attempts to build them by hand. They will be delivered to every supermarket before you get your first prototype built.

What you're advocating for OP is basically just Social Democracy. However as we've seen with socdem and Keynsianism, any regulations, social programs, safety nets, collective bargaining, environmental protections, etc that make capitalism bearable are constantly under attack from the capitalist elite. Furthermore the capitalists exist as a parasite on society by definition, one that seeks to extract as much from society and give back as little as possible. Do you really think that we should base our society around a class of people who's reason for being is to be a fucking vampire on the producing classes? Who have a vested interest in screwing over as many people as possible? Especially when we have full automation and create a post-scarcity society. Why bother with capitalism at this point?

I swear you fucking faggots needs to stop this retarded meme

mini9mum income doesn't solve anything, minimum income implies you still need to take part in the market, which means no fully automation, as people still need money to produce said commodities

we need free commodities, commodities produced separatedly from the market, which production is fully automated and without a necessity of labour

that is the only way to abolish work, minimum income just increases taxes

you could of course get to minimum income by creating a public fund that has ownership in all of industry and distribute the dividends of that fund as a minimum income, thus achieving it without taxes

Private property and finance capital are artificial barriers to entry. This is just one of the millions of reasons your free market is a farce.

Not to mention that market forces operate totally out of the control of the individual and yet dictate almost your every move in a market economy. It's like being caught in the middle of a stampeding crowd.

It all depends on the rate of automation replacing labor.
I think capital has started replacing more jobs than it's creating, if it does this very fast then we could see UBI being adopted. If the process is slower than we're thinking than ecological collapse or resource shortages happen could make UBI unfeasable. Then humanity is fucked.
I am skeptical if a UBI would work, maybe with capital controls and a state that actually taxed corporations and prevented them from operating overseas to avoid taxes.
Not to mention the historical tendency for the average rate of profit in the economy to decrease, especially industries employing expensive capital where that capital is adopted amongst the whole industry. This could make UBI impossible as well.
I just advocate for democratic control over the means of production, preferably with services and most goods being organized at the city level and major things like steel manufacturing or energy controlled by the nation state

well thank god you at least have an informed and rational approach to looking at capitalism and you aren't some kind of fucking delusional ancap

All of it. Most densely populated non-microstate in the world.

Maybe Singapore is not the best place to start a traditional farm?

Maybe you should realise that when places are densely populated and owned by a few people you dont have any other choice than to slave away for the people who own everything, you priviliged hillbilly.


I've always thought this is a rather vague phrase

state run production with varying degrees of democracy in the workplace itself
or city run or community run. Whatever scale, I'm in favor of it.

I would aim for as much decentralisation and self-sufficiency as is possible. Obviously things like spaceflight and shipping will need to be coordinated internationally - perhaps through syndicates



Most people never wanted to play the game. Considering the issues of automation you have to address this.

Do you have an actual argument other than fuck you, got mine?

I agree, i would prefer most services to be managed at the municipal level with direct democracy.
Things like nuclear reactors, giant factory farms, rail and airlines, steel production etc, I can't imagine having management on a local level. Centralization is just more efficient for a lot of things.

Yes its easy, if things become automated and you'r meager skills are no longer needed then we instigate strong population controls to reduce the size of the proletariat.

Once everything is automated why not simply make it public property?