Canadian Politics Today

How do you redistribute? Communism tried that and it didn't work very well.

It doesn't matter that "it didn't work very well" in the Communist states.  What matters is that the open and free states that were pure capitalist endevaours modified their policies to provide for more social coverage. 

I feel like you're seeing some of these points for the first time, and as such you either should just accept that I'm telling you mainstream orthodoxy or you should go to somebody who is qualified if you want to dispute what I'm relaying here.

Human labour will necessarily be less important over time, and it's up to us to recognize that and adapt our societies.  There's really no turning back the clock, but it's up to use whether we want to use antiquated attitudes towards labour, or to rightly view what is coming as a huge opportunity for people to pursue more meaningful work as long as their basic needs are supported.

But obviously our consumption-based economy can't go on without consumers.  And consumers without money aren't consumers.  And that's where the whole thing is going to fall down.

 -k

This is a very good point.  However, it relies on the notion that change happens fairly quickly and that's not how it'll happen.  It won't be within a gap of 5-10 years where all of a sudden there is no work and no consumers. 

It will happen a lot slower and in the process there is going to mass groups of people without jobs. 

Sure, at first thought, billionaires building apocalypse bunkers may seem paranoid, but I think there is good reason for them to be:

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/01/30/doomsday-prep-for-the-super-rich

How to bring such a thing about without massive pain is the question.  I think that online currencies are the best hope for deprecating the masses of so-called money that have been hoarded and removed from our economy.

I agree it would be getting from here to there that is the problem, especially when it comes to those who hold massive amounts of wealth and power in the current system.   Perhaps medical science could figure out which gene(s) control greed/sociopathy and neutralize them while ensuring that compassion and empathy are a significant driver for all humans. 

I agree it would be getting from here to there that is the problem, especially when it comes to those who hold massive amounts of wealth and power in the current system.   

Easy to give an expiry date for money that is taken out of circulation, not just bills.

"Stop hoarding your billions or we will retro-tax it"

Of course, that's pretty communist.

It doesn't matter that "it didn't work very well" in the Communist states.  What matters is that the open and free states that were pure capitalist endevaours modified their policies to provide for more social coverage. 

I feel like you're seeing some of these points for the first time, and as such you either should just accept that I'm telling you mainstream orthodoxy or you should go to somebody who is qualified if you want to dispute what I'm relaying here.

Human labour will necessarily be less important over time, and it's up to us to recognize that and adapt our societies.  There's really no turning back the clock, but it's up to use whether we want to use antiquated attitudes towards labour, or to rightly view what is coming as a huge opportunity for people to pursue more meaningful work as long as their basic needs are supported.

How is a society open and free if you just take what someone has done and give it to someone else? There has to be an incentive for individuals to innovate and produce. You seem to think all this technology that will set you free will just appear by a magic. When you take incentive away from individuals they just say, screw it. That's why communism didn't work.

How is a society open and free if you just take what someone has done and give it to someone else? There has to be an incentive for individuals to innovate and produce. You seem to think all this technology that will set you free will just appear by a magic. When you take incentive away from individuals they just say, screw it. That's why communism didn't work.

People who do what they love don't need "monetary" incentive.   My ex is a carpenter and he told me once that it made him feel proud every time he drove by a house that he'd helped build.   There is no doubt in my mind that he would have done the same kind of work even without pay.

My current partner isn't able to work a full-time job, but he volunteers in a position which involves dogs.  He says that this gives him a sense of fulfillment and accomplishment that he used to get from paid work.   My partner doesn't have to do this, because his living expenses are taken care of, but he chooses to do it and he takes pride in it, in doing a good job, in learning how to do a better job and in being able to help make the world a little bit better for dogs and the people who love dogs.

Money is only the sole incentive for people who don't like what they are doing.   Provide those people their livelihood, and they'll find something they love to do instead.  They'll be better at it, they'll do it with more passion and commitment and I think this will create a richer world in terms of human well-being, innovation, progress and even in terms of how well we live in a material sense. 

It sounds like you're trying to follow the 'taxation=force' meme.  If so, start a new thread as it's not related to this.

I haven't said anything of the kind.  Again, I am relating very basic orthodoxy and facts about how the economy works with regards to automation. 

I don't get what you're trying to say here ?  Cut welfare ?  Something like that ?

Of course taxation will be related to this.

The economy working with regards to automation has more people pursuing fewer decent jobs.

What does welfare have to do with this?

I didn't say it wasn't, but your pivot on "how are we an open society if we have taxation" is a non-sequitur, ie. has nothing to do with the thread of the discussion.

Welfare, ie. social safety net, will be adjusted to deal with the new reality as it was in the 20th century.

I didn't say taxation, I said how do you have an open and free society if you take what people have produced and just give it to someone else. I know what welfare is. Explain how this redistribution is going to work and still give people an incentive to improve themselves, create and produce.