again, how will I get rich in this system?

It's hard to reference history when finding the right path forward in a world with NO TRUCK DRIVERS. What are these idiots going to do for an income? This technological advancement is not the same as before.

The agricultural and industrial revolutions beg to differ. The AI revolution, though different in nature, will unequivocally improve productivity and provide for all of us - yes, including displaced truck drivers - lives of markedly higher quality. The Model-T ruined life for carriage drivers, and the ATM ruined life for bank tellers. Somehow, we survived.

It is not wise to put a premium on the economic opinions of philosophers and lawyers-turned-aspiring-politicians.

I don't think Sam Harris and the politician have all the answers here, but something like this makes sense, and much more sense than the current system.

It does not, precisely because the rationale that motivates the various flavors of the UBI - THE END OF WORK IS NEAR - holds no water. There will be more work to be had in a world with AI ubiquity, not less.

Let's use coal as an example since it's in the news. Do you think it's going to be easy to retrain all those people once this "clean coal" thing finally dies out? Most of the jobs won't even be in the same state so they'll have to move if they want to keep working. It's not tenable in the current system and I haven't heard too many ideas (even this UBI) that makes sense for everyone. I'm sure there is an idea out there to be had but the political climate right now means no one is working together and there won't be a good idea for a good long while.

But I'm a pessimist at the best of times so what do I know.

The number and quality of jobs lost will be substantially greater than ever in history. I agree it's a good thing, as long as we have means of survival and our focus on time spent ethically is appropriate.

He seems light on details. And he can pretend it's not socialism all he wants. It definitely is, especially his social currency idea. You have to address those problems. "Hey we'll just raise taxes! Easy fix!"

The thousand dollar figure doesn't make sense. It will still incentivize work because it won't pay for necessities? But there isn't any work. That's the point. So you're just paying people to starve more slowly. Many of these people can't find meaningful work, period.

So, big surprise, it will cost a lot more than he is willing to admit. And what happens when someone blows their money on something stupid (or just something they need) instead of healthcare/food stamps that they had previously? Guess we'll need more entitlements for that. Meanwhile whatever economy is left grinds to a halt.

This isn't going to work. We're all going to die.

Take the black pill.

It does not, precisely because the rationale that motivates the various flavors of the UBI - THE END OF WORK IS NEAR - holds no water. There will be more work to be had in a world with AI ubiquity, not less.

Eliminating the need for labor should be the most beautiful step in human evolution. A society should then be free to focus on things that offer meaning and pleasure and joy. But based on the fucked up power imbalance we’ve created, it probably just means much worse wealth inequality than we already have, and a far worse quality of life for everyone who isn’t among the mega-rich.

He thinks of it as a dividend as opposed to a government program. We are the shareholders of the company of America.

It should cost about 2 trillion dollars of our economy's 19 trillion, which would come from:

1. 500 billion from various income support, such as food stamps, welfare, SS disability. They overlap. You choose either/or.
2. Value Added Tax on large tech companies will generate 7-800 billion if implemented at 10%, half the European level.
3. Health care, incarceration, and homelessness will go down, saving hundreds of billions.

Also, I think he intends on UBI being fixed at 10% of the economy, so when the economy grows, so does our UBI.